|
DrNutt posted:LMAO partisan polling place fuckery is "a conspiracy theory." Like, Ossof may not have won either way, but there were enough stories coming out of 2016 that most people should acknowledge that the way we do elections is hosed in this country. Not to mention garbage like the voter roll purges in Republican states and even "legitimate" stuff like permanently revoking the right to vote for felons. This stuff all has a cumulative effect, and it's all aimed at making sure only "the right people" get to vote. there is no partisan polling place fuckery in this race. try actually putting in some effort and verifying those addresses for yourself before you start reconstructing reality to fit your beliefs you lazy poo poo. here i'll make it super easy for you so you dont even have to copy paste anything open this link in a new tab http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/pol...-vote/536035137 open this link in another new tab http://demographics.virginia.edu/DotMap/ select an address from the first link, right click it, and google it. if you compare the maps and see that location surrounded by blue dots, there is no indication of partisan polling place fuckery. notice how the majority of the addresses on that list fit this pattern if you have the stamina to do five minutes of research for yourself you whining child
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 15:16 |
|
|
Fulchrum posted:How many of those people still like it when you talk about paying for it? They don't care. Seriously. They don't give a poo poo about that part of it. Centrists like you assume most Americans will be turned off by that, but the reality is, no one cares but you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:40
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:Imagine thinking a swing of nearly 20 points in their favor heralds the end of the Dems. It wasn't a +20R district. Also, this election isn't the reason I think the Dems are on the way out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:42
|
|
|
Majorian posted:They don't care. Oh, I had no idea that you could just wave your magic wand and suddenly Americans just wouldn't care about changes to taxes like that. Silly me, here I was thinking about results, when I should have just realized we just had to tell voters they don't care about something, and they just won't. YOU don't care. YOU are not most voters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:43
|
|
|
Petr posted:It wasn't a +20R district. Also, this election isn't the reason I think the Dems are on the way out. South Carolina is the +20 one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:44
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:Imagine thinking a swing of nearly 20 points in their favor heralds the end of the Dems. It was R+8 so it's a 5pt swing. Whoopie. That won't flip the house.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:44
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Oh, I had no idea that you could just wave your magic wand and sudden;y Americans just wouldn't care about changes to taxes like that. Have you even read a single thing that Donald Trump ran and won on? The average American voter doesn't give a poo poo about the details. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:44
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Right. So the problem we need to fix is the fuckwits who engage in endless purity tests and keep saying poo poo like Dem's are corporate stooges who will never raise taxes. This is the current thinking of the DNC yes: selling out to donors isn't the problem, the voters who don't like this are.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:45
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:South Carolina is the +20 one. Oh, poo poo, I was misinformed or I misread. Yeah that's a lot worse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:45
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Have you even read a single thing that Donald Trump ran and won on? The average American voter doesn't give a poo poo about the details. Yes, I too remember when there was absolutely no backlash in any form after taxes were increased following the passage of Obamacare.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:46
|
|
|
Covok posted:2008 was an aberration because middle class whites didn't want to be seen as racist and Obama was very charismatic. That is no longer the case. Yes, truly, it will be impossible to find another charismatic candidate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:46
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Yes, I too remember when there was absolutely no backlash in any form after taxes were increased following the passage of Obamacare. You're so, so dumb if you think tax increases were what spurred the reaction against Obamacare. Also, you're so, so dumb if the lesson you took from the 2016 campaign was that candidates have to explain how they're going to make their promises come true to win over voters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:47
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Yes, I too remember when there was absolutely no backlash in any form after taxes were increased following the passage of Obamacare. Don't raise taxes on the middle class. Only rich people. Or don't at all, since deficits don't matter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:47
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:This is the current thinking of the DNC yes: selling out to donors isn't the problem, the voters who don't like this are. Well, one of those things is a neverending black hole that is born out of a smug feeling of purity not tied to reality in any way, so yes, it is the actual problem. Also, Goldman Sachs exec got more of a boost than Ossoff. You ever gonna acknowledge that, or is it another thing you're just gonna ignore?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
I was planning on running for school board in like 5-10yr as a republican. The -R purely because I'm not stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Yes, I too remember when there was absolutely no backlash in any form after taxes were increased following the passage of Obamacare. Maybe Dems can triangulate on taxes and healthcare and pass the AHCA
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:When have the Dem's not talked about how Americans deserve better Healthcare, and Republicans are loving them over and letting people die? Never. But when you talk about it and then you push lovely toothless neo-liberal policies that gently caress people over just a little less than the status quo and don't move the needle (given republicans share all the blame on this), you shouldn't be surprised when your message falls flat. Edit: let's not even mention the cadre of misfit toys from the left special interest side that makes a mockery of themselves and the DNC by bitching about there group not getting significant placement in all issues. Dirk Pitt fucked around with this message at 06:51 on Jun 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:Don't raise taxes on the middle class. Only rich people. Or don't at all, since deficits don't matter. I like that your solution to people changing their approval of healthcare based on how to pay the cost is "don't".
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
Raise all taxes to 100% then distribute everything equally to everyone
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
Mustached Demon posted:I was planning on running for school board in like 5-10yr as a republican. The -R purely because I'm not stupid. This is how you know Democrats are irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Well, one of those things is a neverending black hole that is born out of a smug feeling of purity not tied to reality in any way Indeed, "purity tests" like, "Hey, maybe don't run candidates with close ties to Wall Street, in an age in which Wall Street is horrendously unpopular." How unreasonable!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
Majorian posted:They don't care. The kernel of truth is that, regardless of if the American people care the media and pundit class certainly does when the spending is on poor people. Then the juicy story is "sure we all like housing the homeless, but how much is it costing local taxpayers??" Look at the way the media covered the debate over college education costs. Not one iota about the potential benefits to students' educations (individualist) or the benefits to society (communitarian) but instead only costs costs costs. At best you get coverage of the reduced costs to students. The challenge of advocating a new and better future is having to both win over the idea directly and enough of the media narrative to survive. Like you say, most people don't care. So if the local news says your plan is too expensive, they won't go double check on your website.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:Oh, poo poo, I was misinformed or I misread. Yeah that's a lot worse. Yeah, we're looking at a 5pt swing at most.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:I like that your solution to people changing their approval of healthcare based on how to pay the cost is "don't". Its basic politics to shut the gently caress up about taxes if you plan to raise them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
Majorian posted:"Progressives" aren't, but people who would like Medicare for All? That's a much bigger group. The Dems should try running on economically populist stuff sometime. Who knows, they might win. The problem is the democrats consider that a progressive policy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Well, one of those things is a neverending black hole that is born out of a smug feeling of purity not tied to reality in any way, so yes, it is the actual problem. Goldman Sachs guy lost too. If "we should run literally Goldman Sachs" is the lesson you take from SC-05 then lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Maybe Dems can triangulate on taxes and healthcare and pass the AHCA Meanwhile in the real world no Democrats in the House voted for the AHCA and Senate Dems are pulling out every rule they have in an effort to force a real debate and lay the plan's ugliness at the front and center. But you know, that doesn't fit your narrative of how awful those Wall Street Loving Dems are, unlike that Charming Populist Trump (who has appointed an rear end-load of Goldman-Sachs execs to high-level federal positions, or did you forget that already). Majorian posted:Indeed, "purity tests" like, "Hey, maybe don't run candidates with close ties to Wall Street, in an age in which Wall Street is horrendously unpopular." How unreasonable! Majorian posted:Have you even read a single thing that Donald Trump ran and won on? The average American voter doesn't give a poo poo about the details. "Details don't matter, until I say they do"
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
Dirk Pitt posted:Never. But when you talk about it and then you push lovely toothless neo-liberal policies that gently caress people over just a little less than the status quo and don't move the needle (given republicans share all the blame on this), you shouldn't be surprised when your message falls flat. And yet Republicans did all the loving spending the TEA party was supposedly so incensed and enraged over, yet voted for them lockstep. Wonder why that was if it was really truly about debt and taxes. Majorian posted:You're so, so dumb if you think tax increases were what spurred the reaction against Obamacare. No, the short term takeaway from 2016 is to treat voters like chimps and that gets you elected. The problem comes two years later. Or have we forgotten 2010?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:"Details don't matter, until I say they do" Not sure how not running on a pro-Wall Street platform counts as a "detail." Fulchrum posted:No, the short term takeaway from 2016 is to treat voters like chimps and that gets you elected. The problem comes two years later. Or have we forgotten 2010? I love that your solution to that is, "Don't win ANY election! Then you can't get voted out of power!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:53
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Goldman Sachs guy lost too. He got a 17.4% loving boost. Are you seriously that desperate to not read the facts that you're going to ignore that kind of a swing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:54
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:I like that your solution to people changing their approval of healthcare based on how to pay the cost is "don't". That was literally Trump's healthcare platform "the government will pay for everyone's health care and we're gonna cut taxes" and it didn't seem to hurt him too much. Oddly "we're gonna cut the deficit" wasn't a slam dunk for Hillary, even though she was supposed to get all the white suburbanites with that message.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:54
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Not sure how not running on a pro-Wall Street platform counts as a "detail." As much as I'd love Wall Street to be razed to the ground and stock exchanges to be outlawed, they aren't going to be. So in choosing to not vote for the "Wall Street" candidate, America allowed the President who is actually much friendlier to Wall Street to get elected because you said details didn't matter. Or are you just going to continue to pretend that Trump hasn't been relaxing financial regulations and appointing Wall Street execs to federal positions? EDIT: VitalSigns posted:That was literally Trump's healthcare platform "the government will pay for everyone's health care and we're gonna cut taxes" and it didn't seem to hurt him too much. Ah yes, which is why the AHCA is exactly that instead of the exact opposite. 
Angry_Ed fucked around with this message at 06:57 on Jun 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:55
|
|
|
Petr posted:This is how you know Democrats are irrelevant. That running for a school board position as a republican in Idaho isnt stupid?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:He got a 17.4% loving boost. Are you seriously that desperate to not read the facts that you're going to ignore that kind of a swing? It was a low turnout affair, he certainly didn't excite voters. If your strategy is "run Goldman Sachs and hope everyone forgets to show up" well we tried something like that in 2016 and it failed in key states.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:58
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:As much as I'd love Wall Street to be razed to the ground and stock exchanges to be outlawed, they aren't going to be. So in choosing to not vote for the "Wall Street" candidate, America allowed the President who is actually much friendlier to Wall Street to get elected because you said details didn't matter. Or are you just going to continue to pretend that Trump hasn't been relaxing financial regulations and appointing Wall Street execs to federal positions? It's almost as if...the Dems should actually run a convincingly anti-Wall Street candidate. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Not sure how not running on a pro-Wall Street platform counts as a "detail." If voters actually cared about punishing Wall Street they would revolt over the Trump Admin's draining of Goldman Sachs and Republicans' attacks on Obama era reforms. But they're not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 07:00
|
|
|
Five special elections in an odd-number year wasn't going to change things, folks. Not even if all five went to Democrats.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 07:01
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:If voters actually cared about punishing Wall Street they would revolt over the Trump Admin's draining of Goldman Sachs and Republicans' attacks on Obama era reforms. But they're not. No you see that's the Democrats fault for not running a sufficiently left candidate so the 100 million secret progressives would actually vote.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 07:01
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Ah yes, which is why the AHCA is exactly that instead of the exact opposite. Trump was lying obviously, however the claim was that "we'll pay for your healthcare and cut your taxes at the same time" is a losing strategy because voters are too serious and sensible and fiscally conservative to go for that. Angry_Ed posted:Meanwhile in the real world no Democrats in the House voted for the AHCA and Senate Dems are pulling out every rule they have in an effort to force a real debate and lay the plan's ugliness at the front and center. Fulchrum's claim was that the ACA was unpopular because it raised taxes on the rich. According to this reasoning, the AHCA should be more popular because it lowers taxes on the rich and the smart pragmatic thing to do is support it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 07:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 15:16 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:If voters actually cared about punishing Wall Street they would revolt over the Trump Admin's draining of Goldman Sachs and Republicans' attacks on Obama era reforms. But they're not. They don't know about those things though. It really is up to the Dems to hammer this point and make voters make Trump suffer for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 07:02
|
|