The democrats are a waste

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The democrats are a waste

Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed.
B	77	25.50%
K	160	52.98%
M	65	21.52%
Total:	229 votes

[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

Ze Pollack posted:

a trump voter who views opposing gay marriage and wanting to throw the muslims in camps as the Right Thing

surprise, surprise

Yeah, that's really what this is coming down to: the Tulsi fans here see those things as acceptable sacrifices, as long as we get single payer out of it. The rest of us, well...don't. We want single payer too, but there are some things we're not going to give ground on to get it.

# ? Jul 6, 2017 22:18

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 28, 2024 07:39

paranoid randroid: Mar 4, 2007

call me crazy but i dont think a woman who goes on Neil Cavuto to rant about how material circumstances behind terrorism are a fake idea and actually they hate us for our freedom is going to go to bat for vulnerable members of our society

# ? Jul 6, 2017 22:23

pigdog: Apr 23, 2004; by Smythe

An IMHO exceptionally good article on Archieving Our Country by Richard Rorty, which predicted the rise of someone like Trump and the Democrats' problems as far back as in 1998. Thankfully it also offers solutions, which I quite like.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/advice-for-the-left-on-achieving-a-more-perfect-union/531054/

# ? Jul 6, 2017 22:24

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

Reminder that over 50% of Republicans support gay marriage. Championing the basic market tested social policies is no longer a viable tactic for Democrats, because the difference in acceptable outcomes for the two parties has dangerously narrowed.

# ? Jul 6, 2017 22:26

Yeowch!!! My Balls!!!: May 31, 2006

it turns out the problem with Hillary Clinton wasn't the willingness to sacrifice human lives to the right on grounds she didn't give a poo poo about them, it was her precise choice of who to sacrifice

neat

# ? Jul 6, 2017 22:27

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

A lesson of 2016 is certainly that we don't need to look at only Senators/Governors/etc. A good candidate that's a mayor, statewide official, or even an activist or organizer can do better if they're an actually better candidate. Trump has broken the norm that the president needs vague foreign policy experience and we should take advantage of that.

# ? Jul 6, 2017 22:28

paranoid randroid: Mar 4, 2007

Ze Pollack posted:

it turns out the problem with Hillary Clinton wasn't the willingness to sacrifice human lives to the right on grounds she didn't give a poo poo about them, it was her precise choice of who to sacrifice

neat

small brain - hanging out with Henry Kissinger
large brain - not hanging out with war criminals
galaxy brain - hanging out with Narendra Modi and the Lion Assad

# ? Jul 6, 2017 22:29

Yeowch!!! My Balls!!!: May 31, 2006

guy recoiling in disgust: jail the poor, more poc guards for their prisons
guy giving thumbs up: jail the gays and muslims, more guards from underprivileged backgrounds for their prisons

# ? Jul 6, 2017 22:31

steinrokkan: Apr 2, 2011; Soiled Meat

is there a single us politician who has expressed any level of dismay at Modi?

# ? Jul 6, 2017 22:31

WhiskeyJuvenile: Feb 15, 2002; by Nyc_Tattoo

Ze Pollack posted:

it turns out the problem with Hillary Clinton wasn't the willingness to sacrifice human lives to the right on grounds she didn't give a poo poo about them, it was her precise choice of who to sacrifice

neat

https://twitter.com/Mondoweiss/status/882972998432686080

# ? Jul 6, 2017 23:02

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

WhiskeyJuvenile posted:

https://twitter.com/Mondoweiss/status/882972998432686080

The study doesn't actually say that. The study makes the much more nuanced point that Trump appealed to communities with high amounts of military sacrifice. It doesn't extend that to being pro or anti war. I think Trump even as a candidate was no dove, but his vision of future US conflict was different that Clinton's and that's a key difference rather than pretending Trump was anti-war:

quote:

In sum, Trump promised a foreign policy that would be both simultaneously more muscular and more restrained. Trump promised to rebuild and refocus the military: �Our active duty armed forces have shrunk from 2 million in 1991 to about 1.3 million today. ... Our military is depleted, and we�re asking our generals and military leaders to worry about global warming.� And he also promised to be much more reticent in its use: �Our friends and enemies must know that if I draw a line in the sand, I will enforce it. However, unlike other candidates for the presidency, war and aggression will not be my first instinct. You cannot have a foreign policy without diplomacy. A superpower understands that caution and restraint are signs of strength.�26

So the conclusions for democrats are more along the lines of:

quote:

Second, the findings are also a lesson for the Democrats and establishment Republicans who are still trying to figure out how to beat Trump. Our analysis suggests that politicians from both parties would do well to more directly recognize and address the needs of those communities whose young women and men are making the ultimate sacrifice for the country.

# ? Jul 6, 2017 23:11

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

Trabisnikof posted:

So the conclusions for democrats are more along the lines of:

In other words, stop wasting time and money in affluent white GOP suburbs. You will not win elections by making the Dems purely an "urban party," or whatever stupid way Dan Savage put it.

# ? Jul 6, 2017 23:15

Call Me Charlie: Dec 3, 2005; by Smythe

Majorian posted:

Yeah, that's really what this is coming down to: the Tulsi fans here see those things as acceptable sacrifices, as long as we get single payer out of it. The rest of us, well...don't. We want single payer too, but there are some things we're not going to give ground on to get it.

Nah, it's more like...

Tulsi fans see her as the best choice to fight for progressive domestic issues on a national stage and take down Trump in 2020 while ~~Hillary fans~~ Tulsi critics ~~THINK SHE'S A loving LUNATIC TRUMP-ESQUE DEMAGOGUE THAT WANTS TO MURDER ALL MUSLIMS AND FORCE ALL THE QUEERS BACK INTO THE CLOSET~~ think we should be pragmatic and not box ourselves into a corner by supporting an Alt-Right queen like Tulsi when literally anybody could defeat Trump in 2020 (in before Trump gets a second term after you idiots try to rally behind Cory Booker)

# ? Jul 6, 2017 23:15

Kokoro Wish: Jul 23, 2007; Post? What post? Oh wow.
I had nothing to do with THAT.

I keep hearing here that she's an Assad apologist. When I read around though it seems that Tulsi's position is more that "Yes, Assad is bad, but the Syrian people seem to want a return to that more than continued war and US supported terrorists like Al Shabaab or ISIS affiliated factions or "name of fundamentalist faction" taking power if he falls". I don't see that as an unreasonable position in the slightest.

# ? Jul 6, 2017 23:26

Yeowch!!! My Balls!!!: May 31, 2006

only one of the two of us is talking about how surrendering abjectly to the right wing in order to achieve Compromise Policy is a good thing, friend Trump voter.

and it ain't the one you're calling a Hillary supporter.

# ? Jul 6, 2017 23:27

RedSpider: May 12, 2017

Kokoro Wish posted:

I keep hearing here that she's an Assad apologist. When I read around though it seems that Tulsi's position is more that "Yes, Assad is bad, but the Syrian people seem to want a return to that more than continued war and US supported terrorists like Al Shabaab or ISIS affiliated factions or "name of fundamentalist faction" taking power if he falls". I don't see that as an unreasonable position in the slightest.

Exactly. Too bad most of the posters ITT are too retarded to understand this.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Jul 6, 2017 23:35

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

Kokoro Wish posted:

I keep hearing here that she's an Assad apologist. When I read around though it seems that Tulsi's position is more that "Yes, Assad is bad, but the Syrian people seem to want a return to that more than continued war and US supported terrorists like Al Shabaab or ISIS affiliated factions or "name of fundamentalist faction" taking power if he falls". I don't see that as an unreasonable position in the slightest.

The Jacobin piece that was posted upthread does a good job of detailing why her positions on Syria, the Middle East, and foreign policy in general, are so questionable:

quote:

In February 2015, Gabbard had the chance to question Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Vincent Stewart. She asked him (while clearly fishing for a particular answer) about the debate over �how this ideology, how this motivation, must be identified� and what �common elements� existed among different Islamic terrorist groups, including ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Boko Haram. She then went on Fox and reported that Stewart had �identified very clearly that it is this radical Islamic ideology that is fueling� these groups.

But Gabbard had heavily distorted what Stewart actually said. While he did call ISIS �a radical ideology that must be countered with a moderate ideology,� he also pointed out that the common elements that had produced such groups were �ungoverned states, weak government institution, economic instability, poverty.�

This was par for the course for Gabbard, who regularly used her TV appearances to brush off, even mock, alternative explanations for terrorism. After Kerry gave a speech at Davos stressing the importance of acknowledging the various drivers of extremism � noting that some extremist fighters �are lured by basic, material considerations� like �the promise of regular meals, a paycheck,� while others are motivated by the chance �to escape boredom� and �be lured by a false sense of success� � Gabbard tore into him on CNN.

�This is completely missing the point,� she said, calling it a �huge mistake� to think �that somehow, okay, well, look if we give them $10,000 and give them a nice place to live, that somehow they�re not going to be engaged in this fighting.� She cited Osama bin Laden as an example, a �multi-millionaire who left his mansions, went and lived in the desert because of this radical ideology.� She reappeared on CNN a month later, denying that �if we just go in and alleviate poverty, if we go in and create jobs and increase opportunity,� it would help solve the problem.

Naturally, it wasn�t long before she appeared on Bill Maher�s program, where the two bonded over their mutual distrust of �Islamic extremism� and their disagreement with Kerry�s comments. After agreeing with Maher that it was �crazy� Obama didn�t want to use the two magic words, Gabbard reiterated her point: �Give them a big house, give them a skateboard, send them on their way. You think that�s going to solve the problem? It�s not.�

quote:

Gabbard�s worldview also leaves out the role that European and US governments, particularly the Reagan administration, have played in bringing hardline fundamentalists to power and prominence. Bin Laden may have been a millionaire, but he was also a CIA recruit.

Gabbard�s suspicion of Islam goes beyond rhetoric. Last year, she supported legislation that would have barred those on the no-fly list � a list that makes a mockery of due process � from buying guns. Before that, in 2014, Gabbard introduced a bill that would have halted the visa waiver program for countries whose citizens had gone to fight with extremists, claiming that the program �puts the American people in danger.� Had it passed, people from the UK, France, Germany, and many other European countries would have been forced to apply for visas before visiting the United States.

In reality, foreign-born terrorists carrying out acts of violence in the United States, particularly from visa waiver countries, is virtually nonexistent. Yet Gabbard hyped the threat. �If we do nothing to close this loophole, and allow a terrorist to carry out an attack on our homeland, the impacts will be devastating,� she warned.

Gabbard�s hardline stance carried over to the subject of refugees. She was one of forty-seven Democrats to join the House GOP in passing the SAFE Act in 2015, which would have added extra requirements to the already onerous refugee vetting process and effectively ground to a halt the admission of Syrian and Iraqi refugees into the country. In a statement, Gabbard claimed she was voting for the bill to save the refugee program.

Two months before that, however, she had introduced a resolution calling for the United States to prioritize religious and ethnic minorities in the Middle East � namely, Christians and Yezidis � when granting refugee status. �These persecuted religious minority groups must be our first priority,� she said. In essence, her position � throwing more roadblocks in front of Syrian refugees, while making an exception for Christians � is the same as that of the Trump administration, whose original refugee ban exempted �religious minorities.�

On top of that, add her weird "secret meeting" with Assad earlier this year, as well as her denial of Assad's involvement in the chemical attacks.

# ? Jul 6, 2017 23:48

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

RedSpider posted:

Exactly. Too bad most of the posters ITT are too retarded to understand this.

That's parroting Assads position, which isn't reality.

But you don't know that, because you don't know poo poo about Syria but LOL you are calling other people dumb?

# ? Jul 6, 2017 23:51

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

Can someone please explain to me why someone's position on a PM is disqualifying and not being pro single player isn't? Besides the obvious FYGM angle I mean

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:22

RedSpider: May 12, 2017

Jaxyon posted:

That's parroting Assads position, which isn't reality.

But you don't know that, because you don't know poo poo about Syria but LOL you are calling other people dumb?

This post demonstrates how ignorant you are. I don't support Western powers overthrowing Assad so you might as well strawman me as an Assad supporter.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:23

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

Kokoro Wish posted:

I keep hearing here that she's an Assad apologist. When I read around though it seems that Tulsi's position is more that "Yes, Assad is bad, but the Syrian people seem to want a return to that more than continued war and US supported terrorists like Al Shabaab or ISIS affiliated factions or "name of fundamentalist faction" taking power if he falls". I don't see that as an unreasonable position in the slightest.

No poo poo, of course it's a reasonable position that's going to hurt the careers of the poor neoliberal slobs that oppose her. It's far more convenient to twist the above into "literally wants to exterminate all brown people"

Notice how they have to go to Jacobin for a takedown because everything she says is fully within the acceptable discourse re: foreign policy

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:25

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

RedSpider posted:

This post demonstrates how ignorant you are. I don't support Western powers overthrowing Assad so you might as well strawman me as an Assad supporter.

It's a completely made up position that Assad uses to give himself legitimacy and used to fool low-info foreigners and complaint journalists as it's doing with you, but tell me more about your deep understanding of a conflict that has at least 4 different sides and rapidly changing loyalties.

call to action posted:

Can someone please explain to me why someone's position on a PM is disqualifying and not being pro single player isn't? Besides the obvious FYGM angle I mean

People are upset she's a racist but since you're going to minimize that it's probably because everyone here isn't' as leftist as you, bro. You figured it out!

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:26

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

Jaxyon posted:

It's a completely made up position that Assad uses to give himself legitimacy and used to fool low-info foreigners and complaint journalists as it's doing with you, but tell me more about your deep understanding of a conflict that has at least 4 different sides and rapidly changing loyalties.

People are upset she's a racist but since you're going to minimize that it's probably because everyone here isn't' as leftist as you, bro. You figured it out!

If she is a racist, then Hillary was a slaveowner. If you admit to the second I'll admit to the first.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:27

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

call to action posted:

If she is a racist, then Hillary was a slaveowner. If you admit to the second I'll admit to the first.

Hillary did have slaves, they were working for her as first lady of Arkansas.

Now you go.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:29

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

Jaxyon posted:

Hillary did have slaves, they were working for her as first lady of Arkansas.

Now you go.

Say the magic "s" word first.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:30

RedSpider: May 12, 2017

Jaxyon posted:

It's a completely made up position that Assad uses to give himself legitimacy and used to fool low-info foreigners and complaint journalists as it's doing with you, but tell me more about your deep understanding of a conflict that has at least 4 different sides and rapidly changing loyalties.

Bloodshed, anarchy, and mass exterminations will occur tenfold is Assad is removed. This really isn't debatable at this moment in time. So far, I haven't heard a coherent nor longterm plan from neoconservatives and their lackeys (you) for what comes after Assad's removal if it were to occur. Even if you had one, I strongly doubt it would be effective as evidenced in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:31

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

call to action posted:

Say the magic "s" word first.

Hahahah yeah I figured you were full of poo poo.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:31

paranoid randroid: Mar 4, 2007

call to action posted:

Notice how they have to go to Jacobin for a takedown because everything she says is fully within the acceptable discourse re: foreign policy

accepted standards for foreign policy are real fuckin bad and the alleged leading light of progressivism should probably not be doing poo poo like spouting off about how terrorists just hate freedom

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:32

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

RedSpider posted:

Bloodshed, anarchy, and mass exterminations will occur tenfold is Assad is removed. This really isn't debatable at this moment in time. So far, I haven't heard a coherent nor longterm plan from neoconservatives and their lackeys (you) for what comes after Assad's removal if it were to occur. Even if you had one, I strongly doubt it would be effective as evidenced in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya.

"We have to support this murderous dictator!"

- Kissinger

and

- A leftist

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:32

WampaLord: Jan 14, 2010

Forgive me, but wasn't one of the reasons for not voting for Hillary was that she was a hawk that was going to bring us into WW3, but now, eh gently caress all that, Gabbard's WW3 will include healthcare!

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:34

RedSpider: May 12, 2017

Jaxyon posted:

"We have to support this murderous dictator!"

- Kissinger

and

- A leftist

Your arguments are no different from the Fox News and Talk Radio brigade leading up to Iraq. It's the same identical bullshit.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:34

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

call to action posted:

Can someone please explain to me why someone's position on a PM is disqualifying and not being pro single player isn't? Besides the obvious FYGM angle I mean

They both should be disqualifying. :ssh:

RedSpider posted:

Your arguments are no different from the Fox News and Talk Radio brigade leading up to Iraq. It's the same identical bullshit.

That's ridiculous and you know it. No one here is supporting greater involvement in Syria, and I think we're all agreed that taking out Assad anytime soon would be a big mistake.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:35

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

RedSpider posted:

Your arguments are no different from the Fox News and Talk Radio brigade leading up to Iraq. It's the same identical bullshit.

Yeah man, it's basically exactly the same.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:38

JeffersonClay: Jun 17, 2003; by R. Guyovich

steinrokkan posted:

is there a single us politician who has expressed any level of dismay at Modi?

In 2005, years before he became PM, the US denied Modi a visa for being too enthusiastic about burning muslims alive and Tulsi called it a grave injustice. There's a difference between Obama being cordial with another head of state and going to bat for some murderous Indian regional governor in your first session in congress.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:44

RedSpider: May 12, 2017

JeffersonClay posted:

In 2005, years before he became PM, the US denied Modi a visa for being too enthusiastic about burning muslims alive and Tulsi called it a grave injustice. There's a difference between Obama being cordial with another head of state and going to bat for some murderous Indian regional governor in your first session in congress.

How many muslims have been 'enthusiastically' killed under Abuela's SOS foreign policy positions again?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DXDU48RHLU

Oh.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:49

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

paranoid randroid posted:

accepted standards for foreign policy are real fuckin bad and the alleged leading light of progressivism should probably not be doing poo poo like spouting off about how terrorists just hate freedom

You mean like this forum's Sainted Queen has done over and over again?

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:54

Willie Tomg: Feb 2, 2006

I am convinced. The Democrats are a waste.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:54

paranoid randroid: Mar 4, 2007

yall keep bringing up Clinton like you expect anyone in here to defend her and its pretty laffo

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:55

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

call to action posted:

You mean like this forum's Sainted Queen has done over and over again?

LOL remember when you were convinced I wouldn't admit Hillary had slaves like 5 minutes ago and when I agreed you ran off hoping we'd forget that you were supposed to admit Tulsi's a racist?

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:56

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 28, 2024 07:39

RedSpider: May 12, 2017

paranoid randroid posted:

yall keep bringing up Clinton like you expect anyone in here to defend her and its pretty laffo

I see you're not very well acquainted with JeffersonClay. Also, Clinton's brand of centrism (aggressive foreign policy, neoliberal economics) still dominates the Democratic Party, so it's relevant.

# ? Jul 7, 2017 00:58

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > The democrats are a waste

«‹›483 »