|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
Avirosb posted:Obama is taking money from Wall Street now, and Bernie owns 3 houses now. Running on a third party is worthless, so he's gotta try to take over the Dems. Who gives a gently caress about his 3 houses? Now Obama taking speech money is dumb, but also unrelated to my point. PerniciousKnid posted:Crazy by small donation standards, or crazy like fund every race in the country standards? Crazy by any standard. If the DNC weren't incompetent (or corrupt) maybe the money could have been spent in a more optimal manner. E: VVV Yea, that's why it's disgusting.
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
WampaLord posted:The idea that we should hang on to Pelosi due to her fundraising ability is disgusting, to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:43
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Now Obama taking speech money is dumb, but also unrelated to my point. People poo poo on Obama for this but the guy did his time and comparatively speaking he wasn't that bad of a president. I'd charge exorbitant fees to the donor class just to make them feel good about themselves too. If he makes any headway against gerrymandering it'll have been worth it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Running on a third party is worthless, so he's gotta try to take over the Dems. Who gives a gently caress about his 3 houses? People who can't afford one? Maybe you should ask yourself why running on a third party is worthless or if having only two parties is such a great idea to begin with. 'Cause it sure doesn't seem like it the way things are going.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:51
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:People poo poo on Obama for this but the guy did his time and comparatively speaking he wasn't that bad of a president. I'd charge exorbitant fees to the donor class just to make them feel good about themselves too. He's already making millions from book sales and he has a pension, plus he just got done spending 0 money for 8 years while his Presidential salary presumably just sat in the stock market. Why does he need more loving money? Shouldn't Democrats be above that level of greed?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:52
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Crazy by any standard. If the DNC weren't incompetent (or corrupt) maybe the money could have been spent in a more optimal manner. The best I can find for his small donor pull is under $60mil. Is that enough to win the presidency and Congress? https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-fundraising-powered-by-small-donors-new-study-shows/2012/02/08/gIQANfKIzQ_story.html
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:52
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:The best I can find for his small donor pull is under $60mil. Is that enough to win the presidency and Congress? Surely 2016 taught us that more money doesn't equal automatic win, yes? Maybe, just maybe, selling out for campaign money is hurting the party when no one will vote for them because they sold out?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:53
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Maybe you should ask yourself why running on a third party is worthless or if having only two parties is such a great idea to begin with. I don't think it's up to him. WampaLord posted:He's already making millions from book sales and he has a pension, plus he just got done spending 0 money for 8 years while his Presidential salary presumably just sat in the stock market. WampaLord posted:Surely 2016 taught us that more money doesn't equal automatic win, yes?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:54
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:He's a private citizen, who gives a poo poo? He's the most famous Democrat in the world, he should be setting an example.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:55
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:He's the most famous Democrat in the world, he should be setting an example. Not his job, get over it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:He's a private citizen, who gives a poo poo? The democratic base there's a reason Hillary was so sheepish about her speeches PerniciousKnid posted:Not his job, get over it. yes, caring about nothing is a winning strategy
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:The best I can find for his small donor pull is under $60mil. Is that enough to win the presidency and Congress? Bernie raised $230M which is definitely enough to win the presidency since Trump did it raising $330M to Hillary's 563M
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:58
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Not his job, get over it. Inspiring message. Let's put it on some bumper stickers and see how it tests. Hillary 2020: Get Over It
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:58
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:He's already making millions from book sales and he has a pension, plus he just got done spending 0 money for 8 years while his Presidential salary presumably just sat in the stock market. quote:Maybe, just maybe, selling out for campaign money is hurting the party when no one will vote for them because they sold out?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:58
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Not his job, get over it. literally his job though? I mean he is still campaigning for other people!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:59
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:People who can't afford one? We don't keep the two party system around because we like it. It's kept around because the voting system prevents third parties from being viable. Can't change the voting system because the only people who can do that are the people who benefit from the current system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:59
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:You want to secure yourself financially in the troubling times the country is heading towards. lmao yeah, Obama is terrified for his financial security so he does wall st speeches how stupid can you be? pro tip, he's an unabashed capitalist that basically went "nah" after being handed the first opportunity in decades to reform the financial system he wants more cash because net worth is how he determines the value of a person
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:00
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:lmao yeah, Obama is terrified for his financial security so he does wall st speeches So stupid I forgot you can't be flippant on the internet without using italics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:01
|
|
|
The Secretary of the Treasury pays a taxable pension to the president. Former presidents receive a pension equal to the pay that the head of an executive department (Executive Level I) would be paid, as of 2015 $203,700 per year. The pension begins immediately after a president's departure from office.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:So stupid I forgot you can't be flippant on the internet without using italics. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
It's pretty telling that centrists get really mad when people suggest that Obama maybe shouldn't drag the Dem name further into the mud by taking Wall Street cash. What's a bit more baffling is the insistence that it totally doesn't matter because he isn't President anymore, mostly because the GOP still manages to get mileage out of yelling about Bill Clinton, but it makes sense once you get that the dedicated centrists don't actually want to win unless they can do it with their fantasy electorate consisting entirely of beep boop moral robots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
sirtommygunn posted:We don't keep the two party system around because we like it. It's kept around because the voting system prevents third parties from being viable. Maybe that could be something worth looking into. I dunno, it seems like kind of a big deal. Here's an idea: Instead of pouring fresh new blood into the Democratic party, how about someone create an entirely new party? Boy, wouldn't that be radical? Then people could crowd-fund it or something, like all the kids do nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Maybe that could be something worth looking into. Go have fun with the Greens and gently caress off, then. You have a laughably naive view of politics if you think third parties are the answer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
waffle posted:Bernie raised $230M which is definitely enough to win the presidency since Trump did it raising $330M to Hillary's 563M But only half of that was from small donations. Goa Tse-tung posted:literally his job though? I mean he is still campaigning for other people! Well, that's a better answer than "not policing private citizen = nothing matters". But it's still up to him to do what he wants. Getting tied up in knots over what the ex president is doing feels like a huge waste of energy to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:08
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Getting tied up in knots over what the ex president is doing feels like a huge waste of energy to me. you act like he left the presidency and just rode into the sunset and didn't attempt to direct the way the Democratic party goes does the name Tom Perez ring a bell?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:09
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Go have fun with the Greens and gently caress off, then. You have a laughably naive view of politics if you think third parties are the answer. Hey now, my country didn't end up with Donald Trump as president. Maybe America's problem is that your system is simply too complicated for most voters to fully understand?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:10
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Maybe America's problem is that your system is simply too complicated for most voters to fully understand? this is a bigger part of the problem than you realize but "make a new third party" is not the solution to that, or a solution to anything for that matter
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:10
|
|
|
As long as there are democrats more concerned about which gender specific pronouns are appropriate for California limousine liberals instead of directly addressing the concerns of Baltimore, Portland, and the entire Rustbelt, you'll get Republicans running poo poo forever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:10
|
|
|
Is is that bad for Obama to speak with rich people and try to get them on board with more liberal ideas and make some money (because they can afford it)? He didn't charge fees when he was speaking at schools from what I remember. Wouldn't there be cause to be mad if he made time out for Cantor Fitzgerald and didn't squeeze them for money that can go to a good cause?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:13
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:It's pretty telling that centrists get really mad when people suggest that Obama maybe shouldn't drag the Dem name further into the mud by taking Wall Street cash. What's a bit more baffling is the insistence that it totally doesn't matter because he isn't President anymore, mostly because the GOP still manages to get mileage out of yelling about Bill Clinton, but it makes sense once you get that the dedicated centrists don't actually want to win unless they can do it with their fantasy electorate consisting entirely of beep boop moral robots. Honestly, once the Democrats have a viable presidential candidate to worry about, nobody will care about Obama beyond "hey that guy was good and popular". Nobody's going to be running oppo on him in 2020. How much did Clinton's misdeeds hurt Obama? Avirosb posted:Maybe that could be something worth looking into. Hey, we never thought of that, thanks we'll get right on it. Sincerely, Every third party in America.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:13
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:Is is that bad for Obama to speak with rich people and try to get them on board with more liberal ideas and make some money (because they can afford it)?  loving oh my god, that's what you think he's doing? He's telling them all about how they're the backbone of America. They're paying for the speech equivalent of a blowjob.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:this is a bigger part of the problem than you realize but "make a new third party" is not the solution to that, or a solution to anything for that matter I mean if the Dems are going to keep losing all the goddamn time, it's the time to make a serious third party, not a joke one like the greens and force them to split their vote or come to that side. It's clear progressives aren't going to turn out for centrists anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:Is is that bad for Obama to speak with rich people and try to get them on board with more liberal ideas and make some money (because they can afford it)? He didn't charge fees when he was speaking at schools from what I remember. that's not why he's speaking to them quote:Wouldn't there be cause to be mad if he made time out for Cantor Fitzgerald and didn't squeeze them for money that can go to a good cause? lol the "he's actually fleecing them" defense
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:lol the "he's actually fleecing them" defense Yea, he's killing off Wall St one $400k speech at a time, lmao. E: VVV *Trevor Noah voice* "What a brother can't get paid?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:15
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:The Secretary of the Treasury pays a taxable pension to the president. Former presidents receive a pension equal to the pay that the head of an executive department (Executive Level I) would be paid, as of 2015 $203,700 per year. The pension begins immediately after a president's departure from office. Dude's literally a pauper.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Well, that's a better answer than "not policing private citizen = nothing matters". But it's still up to him to do what he wants. Getting tied up in knots over what the ex president is doing feels like a huge waste of energy to me. PerniciousKnid posted:GOP gonna GOP. You're being a real dumbo here because the GOP sure as poo poo won't ignore what Obama is doing and will happily use that to tar the entire Democratic Party by association. Bill Clinton getting a blowjob was used to rile up the GOP base for decades. Bill Clinton signing NAFTA was exploited by Trump to win the rust belt only seven and a half months ago. You don't actually have your preferred fantasy electorate, and this kind of poo poo does matter. Obama taking wall street cash could just as easily be used come the next election to paint the Dems as corrupt corporate stooges in the pocket of big money, which is a really good way of killing grassroots enthusiasm for a Dem candidate because it's actually got truth to it. So maybe Obama shouldn't be taking that dirty cash, eh?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:Is is that bad for Obama to speak with rich people and try to get them on board with more liberal ideas and make some money (because they can afford it)? He didn't charge fees when he was speaking at schools from what I remember. In criminal law there's a principle called "Fruit of the Poison Tree" that refers to when evidence is gathered illegally, the idea being that no matter how compelling the evidence it is tainted by the way it was gathered. Money given by Wall Street bankers should be seen the same way, as ill gotten gains that cannot and should not be taken by people of conscience.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:this is a bigger part of the problem than you realize but "make a new third party" is not the solution to that, or a solution to anything for that matter But Bernie would have won though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
Avirosb posted:But Bernie would have won though. Because he ran as a Democrat
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:29
|
|