|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
paragon1 posted:sometimes they play softball together too. He shouldn't be doing that either. The bare minimum for Democratic politicians should be complete and total shunning of anyone working with or associated with the Republican Party, ideally they would be shiving them in dark alleys.
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 20:54 |
|
|
Glazier posted:He shouldn't be doing that either. The bare minimum for Democratic politicians should be complete and total shunning of anyone working with or associated with the Republican Party, ideally they would be shiving them in dark alleys. Might make participating in government difficult, if they can't be in the same room at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:So how was it exactly that ending prohibition of alcohol stopped so much violence associated with selling alcohol when it was done using an approach that respected state and local rights? I mean, is Atlantic City's biggest crime problem still bootlegged alcohol because Ocean City, NJ is dry? he agress with you on legalization, he disagrees with you on the states rights approach you know, like he explicitly wrote in the post you're quoting
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:The Senate minority leader is partying with the enemy No, all it means is that they're at the same party unless they're samizdat footage of them palling around and playing beer pong together while conspiring together Snidely Whiplash-style.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:Might make participating in government difficult, if they can't be in the same room at the same time. You can be in the same room, just limit conversation to only business, no more friendly banter or cocktail parties.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
Glazier posted:You can be in the same room, just limit conversation to only business, no more friendly banter or cocktail parties. So if a Republican is going to a charity ball all Democrats should boycot the event?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
Glazier posted:You can be in the same room, just limit conversation to only business, no more friendly banter or cocktail parties. What if they want to make out and JO each other a little bit?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
I mean it's a joke more worn down than the soles of my tennis shoes but goons really don't understand how social interaction works. Two people at the same social gathering must mean they're together and not just attending the same event.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:I mean it's a joke more worn down than the soles of my tennis shoes but goons really don't understand how social interaction works. Two people at the same social gathering must mean they're together and not just attending the same event. Vvg.jpg
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:46
|
|
|
Let's not let party affiliation stand in the way of rampant old man on old man love.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:48
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:Let's not let party affiliation stand in the way of rampant old man on old man love. A new party. A lemon party.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
Barbe Rouge posted:he agress with you on legalization, he disagrees with you on the states rights approach I understand that. I am explaining why there is no reason to give a gently caress about that criticism and why Marijuana reform activists ignore it as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:So if a Republican is going to a charity ball all Democrats should boycot the event? I would, they need to feel the social stigma of having an (R) after their name.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
Topics like this makes me glad Trump is president.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:I understand that. I am explaining why there is no reason to give a gently caress about that criticism and why Marijuana reform activists ignore it as well. Marijuana reform activists ignore it because they're ineffective morons that only care about getting weed in their local area and nothing more. They, like you, are selfish and greedy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 01:04
|
|
|
Dem and Repub leaders palling it up while the rest of america suffers is transparently a case of then being out of touch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Dem and Repub leaders palling it up while the rest of america suffers is transparently a case of then being out of touch. Agreed, they should be Preston Brooksing each other 24/7.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
Its a demonstration of their class position, and should be rightly pointed out and emphasized by anyone who wants to change the system. 'Your leaders are partying in the Hamptons, with their supposed enemies, while you suffer from the conflict between them' is a great metaphor for creating class consciousness.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Marijuana reform activists ignore it because they're ineffective morons that only care about getting weed in their local area and nothing more. They, like you, are selfish and greedy. Yes clearly someone who only wants weed in their area and doesn't give a gently caress about anyone else would support allowing his own annoyingly conservative on the issue state to prohibit it if they want, which they do. You realize that makes no loving sense, right? "You only care about an issue if you want to force the federal government to make every state do things exactly the way you want," is a plainly absurd argument dude. Over-reliance on the power of the federal government seems to me like a major reason the left has so much trouble winning elections at the state and local levels, by the way. Nobody cares about anything until it's time for the federal elections. There are some issues where you have to rely only on federal action, there are some areas where you don't. We have a proven track record of managing the end to a dumb prohibition without forcing every town in the country to do things our way. It's an unnecessary use of federal power for this situation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Lead by the likes of you? Yes. There's no better way to signal your politics are poo poo and you should be ignored than to suggest the democrats and republicans are indistinguishable. It takes a special kind of stupid to argue the republicans are actually better, while simultaneously fawning over Bernie Sanders' every statement and action. You know, the guy who caucuses with the democrats and campaigns for their candidate for president.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:"You only care about an issue if you want to force the federal government to make every state do things exactly the way you want," is a plainly absurd argument dude. I fail to see how caring about the only effective form of effecting change is at all absurd.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Topics like this makes me glad Trump is president.  This has been one of my favorite threads to read since the election, for many reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:There's no better way to signal your politics are poo poo and you should be ignored than to suggest the democrats and republicans are indistinguishable. It takes a special kind of stupid to argue the republicans are actually better, while simultaneously fawning over Bernie Sanders' every statement and action. You know, the guy who caucuses with the democrats and campaigns for their candidate for president. Nobody is arguing that Republicans are better people. We're arguing that their naked contempt for the human race makes their odiousness obvious to even the most casual observer. As a result it's actually pretty hard for them to do evil poo poo when they get in power because the public and various institutions get defensive and fight then at every turn. Centrists on the other hand wrap themselves in more noble causes and as a result they often fly under people's radar. True, what they want to do isn't as evil as the Republicans, but they're MUCH more likely to actually get what they want when elected. This, arguably, makes them far more dangerous by comparison.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:05
|
|
|
Actually NFS is taking the opposite view, arguing that Democrats can't ever get elected or pass policies, and that trump was preferable from a policy standpoint. Not that your argument is substantially less stupid. That accursed obama and his centrist Medicaid expansion! If only he'd been a republican so we could stop his schemes!
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:11
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:I fail to see how caring about the only effective form of effecting change is at all absurd. Because it's not the only way, or the best way for this issue.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:That accursed obama and his centrist Medicaid expansion! If only he'd been a republican so we could stop his schemes! As an aside, living in a state where our governor denied the Medicaid money, it basically amounts to a whole lot of nothing to me. I'm unemployed right now and really wish I could get Medicaid, but gently caress me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Its a demonstration of their class position, and should be rightly pointed out and emphasized by anyone who wants to change the system. Of the dems and republicans were palling it up things would be vastly different. They're not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
That's where you're wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
The Great Game that political pundits make hay out of, drives their career, is just business to these guys. The politicians are themselves insulated from the downsides of everything they ever do, no matter what. It's all about working the system and responding to feedback -- buttons are pushed, numbers come out. Everything is meaningless, even the 'feuds'. But that's not how the people they govern see it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:As an aside, living in a state where our governor denied the Medicaid money, it basically amounts to a whole lot of nothing to me. I'm unemployed right now and really wish I could get Medicaid, but gently caress me. A democratic governor would have accepted the Medicaid, but her perfidious centrism would have outweighed that, somehow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
Dem Senators don't have any plan to fix health care but they have time to go party with Republicans while costs go up and McConnell tries to take care away from millions of people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
Ah yes, a plan to fix healthcare that could pass the republican house and senate, and get Trump's signature. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Ah yes, a plan to fix healthcare that could pass the republican house and senate, and get Trump's signature. They should be working on a plan now so they can run on it, rather than hoping Republicans kill enough people to let Democrats win by default and then suddenly have to slap something together Paul Ryan style or have to bargain away everything good to whoever the new Joe Lieberman will be in 2024 Oh hey you're back, how did Ossoff's smart centrist campaign go? Did he win that Romney district with his sensible pro-business policies, opposition to a government takeover of healthcare, and a promise to cut spending and kill the poor?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Ah yes, a plan to fix healthcare that could pass the republican house and senate, and get Trump's signature. It's actually possible to win elections and change that situation. In fact, having a plan to fix healthcare to share with the voters could help make that happen. I'm not surprised that you don't realize this, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
rudatron posted:The Great Game that political pundits make hay out of, drives their career, is just business to these guys. The politicians are themselves insulated from the downsides of everything they ever do, no matter what. It's all about working the system and responding to feedback -- buttons are pushed, numbers come out. Everything is meaningless, even the 'feuds'. But that's not how the people they govern see it. Wrong and simplistic but it also doesn't matter because voters are getting the partisanship they're asking for in the actual votes (and the consequences of it). If the reps are partying in between in doesn't show or matter (but they're not).
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:They should be working on a plan now so they can run on it, rather than hoping Republicans kill enough people to let Democrats win by default and then suddenly have to slap something together Paul Ryan style or have to bargain away everything good to whoever the new Joe Lieberman will be in 2024 quote:Oh hey you're back, how did Ossoff's smart centrist campaign go? Did he win that Romney district with his sensible pro-business policies, opposition to a government takeover of healthcare, and a promise to cut spending and kill the poor?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:A vox piece that asked 8 democratic senators how to fix healthcare in the hypothetical scenario where they can reach a compromise with the republicans has convinced you they'll have no healthcare message in a year. Did you even read that article? Republicans are not going to vote for single payer. It asked them what they would suggest if there was a fantasy scenario where the republicans turned to them for their ideas. There's nothing stopping them from suggesting ideas that the republicans wouldn't go for.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:So you're still convinced Bernie would have won Alabama? That's precious. So not interested in evaluating your strategy to see if it worked eh. If you want to quietly abandon it to save face, that's okay too, just tell me you're not going to memory hole this and double down on winning that patrician Mittens demographic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 03:22
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:It asked them what they would suggest if there was a fantasy scenario where the republicans turned to them for their ideas. There's nothing stopping them from suggesting ideas that the republicans wouldn't go for. Except common sense and history. They don't have the luxury of living in some Bernout bubble where the republican party doesn't control the legislative and executive branches. They're not neophytes who think Republicans will hear "single payer" and think "great idea!" VitalSigns posted:So not interested in evaluating your strategy to see if it worked eh. If you don't think a Bernie candidate would have won the district (as one failed to do in Montana), I don't think you have any point worth responding to.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 20:54 |
|
|
I don't think a Bernie candidate would have won the district, because it was a district full of complete dickbags who only want tax cuts for them and gently caress everyone else. I doubt even Mitt Romney with a (D) next to his name would win in a place like that. That's why it was the wrong place to invest 5 million dollars, whereas the populists in poorer districts that do benefit from progressive policies achieved bigger vote swings on a shoestring budget. Hopefully the Democratic Party learns this lesson for 2018.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 03:35
|
|