|
zegermans posted:I'm the person who proxies between accounts to keep up my posting identities.
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:05 |
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:i thought mods could see alts via ip or something The admins can check to see if someone is another's alt that way, but I don't remember whether or not anyone ever confirmed the one was the other.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
Time for some feel good news https://mobile.twitter.com/KrangTNelson/status/892092524742967300
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
adopting left platform and policy is not only ideologically incompatible with liberalism but leftism is not within the democratic party's nature you can't make them adopt left issues because they can't they must be CRUSH SEE THEM DRIVEN BEFORE US AND HEAR THE LAMENTATION OF THEIR PUNDITS
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Higgy posted:just fickin embrace socialist platforms and do away with the Cold War era stigma of that bs geez the dems dont actually want any of that tho
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:adopting left platform and policy is not only ideologically incompatible with liberalism but leftism is not within the democratic party's nature My main problem right now isn't that they're not leftist or even social democrats, but that they're exploiting the opportunity provided by Trump to lurch hard to the right and reneging long-term promises like protecting abortion rights (which people are somehow blaming on Bernie? what?)
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:My main problem right now isn't that they're not leftist or even social democrats, but that they're exploiting the opportunity provided by Trump to lurch hard to the right and reneging long-term promises like protecting abortion rights (which people are somehow blaming on Bernie? what?) I hadn't heard that take but it surprises me so little essentially negative surprise factor If anybody's got some Twitter takes I'm ready for 'em
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
loquacius posted:I hadn't heard that take but it surprises me so little I'm not going to give the demented hot-takers a platform but here's the news. https://twitter.com/thehill/status/892026828080152577
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:My main problem right now isn't that they're not leftist or even social democrats, but that they're exploiting the opportunity provided by Trump to lurch hard to the right and reneging long-term promises like protecting abortion rights (which people are somehow blaming on Bernie? what?) Nationalism provides better kneejerk, gut politics for the social class they're trying to actually reach.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Basically the only people retarded enough to think that the other party winning means you should be more like that party are the Democratic Party
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:My main problem right now isn't that they're not leftist or even social democrats, but that they're exploiting the opportunity provided by Trump to lurch hard to the right and reneging long-term promises like protecting abortion rights (which people are somehow blaming on Bernie? what?) How are people acting like this is something new though? The Democratic Senator from PA is pro-life and the party supports him. If promises have been reneged, this isn't a new thing that just happened. It's business as usual. Hell, when he and Specter were both in office we had a pro-choice Republican and a pro-life Dem representing us. When Bernie said it was okay to support a pro-lifer, he was just repeating the Democratic party line. quote:Casey attempted to follow in his father's footsteps by running for Pennsylvania Governor. Casey faced former Philadelphia mayor Ed Rendell in the Democratic primary election. The Pennsylvania Democratic Party threw their support behind Casey, whom they saw as a more electable candidate than Rendell. In a bitter primary, Rendell won the nomination by winning only 10 out of 67 counties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Casey_Jr. FuriousxGeorge has issued a correction as of 20:38 on Jul 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:I'm not going to give the demented hot-takers a platform but here's the news. Not seeing anything in the comments, but a lot of people are good and mad about it which is great It'd be cool if the Dem leadership manages to mend the rift and end the civil war by being so lovely that everyone unanimously agrees they stand for nothing and need to be thrown out https://twitter.com/rokeypdx/status/892038554032812033 About time u guys decided to show up *revs motorcycle*
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:Basically the only people retarded enough to think that the other party winning means you should be more like that party are the Democratic Party they've been chasing the rightward lurch of repubs for 40 years and keep losing
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
The Democrat's plan For the next election year Trump said covfefe
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:How are people acting like this is something new though? The Democratic Senator from PA is pro-life and the party supports him. If promises have been reneged, this isn't a new thing that just happened. It's business as usual. Hell, when he and Specter were both in office we had a pro-choice Republican and a pro-life Dem representing us. Pro-life Dems aren't a new thing but party leaders getting up on stage and essentially jettisoning their commitment to abortion rights is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
it's going to be hilarious if the cabinet finally removes trump because democrats will have gently caress all to campaign on
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Taintrunner posted:love to be mandated by the government to give a private health insurance company free money for a health insurance plan that has a $5000 premium. the aca had significant regulations on insurance companies - a cap on profits from individual insurance plans, a ban on discrimination for pre-existing conditions, a ban on the practice of kicking people off plans when they get sick. the fact that insurance companies lose money on these $5000 deductible plans means they are actually subsidizing them. the principle of the aca's universal coverage was not "everyone can get all the care they need," even if it should have been that. the goal was a more modest one - use federal subsidies and medicaid expansion to make the healthcare system accessible to everyone. it's an improvement over what we had, but it's hardly the end of the story and did not go as far as it obviously needed to go. the issue with the aca is not really insurance, because that isn't really the problem when it comes to healthcare - even non-profit insurance companies are not really better than for-profit ones. they are a middleman that add some cost to the system, but not that much. the problem is that actually providing care is too expensive, and the costs are driven by pharma and cost of delivery. this problem is relatively easy to solve, given the political will to take on hospitals, doctors, and big pharma by forcing them to provide cost transparency and empowering a board to set allowed prices for a wide array of procedures/drugs as EVERY OTHER COUNTRY with working healthcare does. deductibles & premiums will go down when hospitals charge a few hundred dollars to fix a broken leg instead of thousands of dollars, or when cancer-treatment drugs are $1000 per month instead of $100,000 per month. you look at a case like iowa, where the entire individual market blew up because a super-sick patient with a very rare disease costing $1 million per month to treat singlehandedly made the entire market unprofitable. in essence, the aca created price controls on insurance but didn't control the price of delivery, so medical inflation continues to exceed the general rate of inflation. since cost of delivery is directly correlated to price of insurance, but we don't pay for healthcare directly, it creates the illusion of insurance being the issue when it's not. Concerned Citizen has issued a correction as of 20:45 on Jul 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
it will also be hilarious if Linda votes to remove trump but keeps him in the hall of fame
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:Basically the only people retarded enough to think that the other party winning means you should be more like that party are the Democratic Party I don't believe for a second it has anything to do about winning. That's just some excuse they use to dupe idiots.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:it will also be hilarious if Linda votes to remove trump but keeps him in the hall of fame vince mcmahon should give donald trump the barry bonds treatment on his wwe hall of fame spot "president* donald trump, wwe hall of fame class of 2014"
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:I don't believe for a second it has anything to do about winning. That's just some excuse they use to dupe idiots. nah parties do this stupid tack to the center to split the other party all the time, it just never loving works
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:nah parties do this stupid tack to the center to split the other party all the time, it just never loving works clinton did it in 1992 and 1996, gwb did it in 2000, worked for them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:gwb did it in 2000, worked for him. candidates can tack, it's when parties do it that it all falls apart
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:nah parties do this stupid tack to the center to split the other party all the time, it just never loving works The Dems are so stat-obsessed that I can't believe they've missed the obvious conclusion that Republican voters vote Republican come hell or high water. There's probably a layer of useful idiots that genuinely believe that they're going to win by lurching right, but the people who are running the show are under no such illusion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I aM a MaStEr LeGiSlAtOr
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
there has never been a democratic majority post-civil rights era that wasn't provided by winning conservative seats. strategies that write off those areas are doomed to permanent minority status. people switch parties all the time. it's one of the most fluid numbers in polling. you don't even have to go back very far to find gop-leaning voters ousting republicans in favor of democrats in 2006 and 2008. arguing that there's a better way than boring centrism to reach those voters is fine, let's try it and see how it works. arguing those voters will vote republicans forever and there's nothing we can ever do to stop it means we might as well go full accelerationist for any hope to ever actually achieve a progressive agenda.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:we might as well go full accelerationist for any hope to ever actually achieve a progressive agenda. finally you understand
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:finally you understand unfortunately i'm generally against the wholesale slaughter of poor people for the sake of maybe possibly making legislative progress, but to each their own.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
that's because they've been chasing consensus politics since Goldwater and it's why there hasn't been a great liberal program since LBJ's great society
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
could the saurus be right? no
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:there has never been a democratic majority post-civil rights era that wasn't provided by winning conservative seats. strategies that write off those areas are doomed to permanent minority status. This is mostly horseshit. There was supposed to be some sort of groundswell of moderate Republicans voting for Clinton and it ended up being 95% of Republicans going for Trump which is exactly the same it is every year.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:unfortunately i'm generally against the wholesale slaughter of poor people for the sake of maybe possibly making legislative progress, but to each their own. i thought you voted for clinton though?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:i thought you voted for clinton though? Excuse me Clinton was in favor of wanton butchery of poor people, not wholesale slaughter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:This is mostly horseshit. There was supposed to be some sort of groundswell of moderate Republicans voting for Clinton and it ended up being 91% of Republicans going for Trump which is exactly the same it is every year. hillary actually extracted significantly more votes than obama out of suburban, conservative areas in PA, WI, and MI. didn't do as well as she wanted, but still a lot if improvement. she lost because a massive pile of blue collar voters in more rural areas flipped to trump, along with a modest turnout decrease in urban areas. the reason why the exit polls/approval polls always say 90+% of gop voted for/support trump is because the people who flipped stopped calling themselves republicans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:unfortunately i'm generally against the wholesale slaughter of poor people for the sake of maybe possibly making legislative progress, but to each their own. Since loving when.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:hillary actually extracted significantly more votes than obama out of suburban, conservative areas in PA, WI, and MI. didn't do as well as she wanted, but still a lot if improvement. she lost because a massive pile of blue collar voters in more rural areas flipped to trump, along with a modest turnout decrease in urban areas. Oh sounds like a great strategy to lose states then, you loving idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
Shoot every lib in the god drat head.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/KamalaHarris/status/891866261461901313 Unless that problem is that the government seized your assets without charging you with a crime in which case 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Oh sounds like a great strategy to lose states then, you loving idiot. well hillary did not actually try to win the votes of rural working class people, and she lost. had she done so, she probably would have won. so i think history is on my side here - you need those votes to win.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:05 |
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:hillary actually extracted significantly more votes than obama out of suburban, conservative areas in PA, WI, and MI. didn't do as well as she wanted, but still a lot if improvement. she lost because a massive pile of blue collar voters in more rural areas flipped to trump, along with a modest turnout decrease in urban areas. yeah, she actually did get a lot of the Romney voters she devoted so much effort to pursuing. there just either weren't enough of them, or they weren't in electorally relevant states
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 21:16
|
|
