|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
The difference between Neo-Liberal/Centrist incrementalism and actual incrementalism is that Neo-Liberal/Centrist incrementalism starts at the compromise and cedes ground from there, whereas actual incrementalism of the left starts from the ideal.
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:20 |
|
|
It's pretty safe to say you shouldn't vote for the Dems if you want a revolution. Arguing that they should be is pointless. That's a good reason for voting Trump in 2020 or third party.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
Kokoro Wish posted:But you accept you'd be okay for him running for presidential nomination, even if you wouldn't vote for him? I can't exactly do anything to stop him from running, aside from vote against him in a primary. Where are you going with this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
Kokoro Wish posted:The difference between Neo-Liberal incrementalism and actual incrementalism is that Neo-Liberal incrementalism starts at the compromise and cedes ground from there, whereas actual incrementalism of the left starts from the ideal. The con is in pretending today's dictates limit tomorrow's goals. Neo-Liberal Incrementalism: Long-term goals must be compatible with today's sausage-making -- or -- If you're left wing, don't have goals. Accretionist fucked around with this message at 02:37 on Aug 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
Sneakster posted:Clinton is synonymous with 90s prosperity for old white people in ways that Booker/Harris/Deval aren't, and cannot become. I firmly believe this is a large reason why Clinton even did as "well" as she did. God only knows how poorly she would have done if she didn't have this association working for her. I can't count the number of baby boomers (or gen X-ers) who supported her on the basis of thinking she'd do "whatever Bill Clinton did to make the 90's good."
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:It's pretty safe to say you shouldn't vote for the Dems if you want a revolution. Arguing that they should be is pointless. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
I can't wait to hear from WJ in 2020 why a vote for Goldman Booker is the only moral choice
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I can't exactly do anything to stop him from running, aside from vote against him in a primary. Where are you going with this? He's only one year younger than Bernie. Alot of people only seem to use the age argument for Sanders when they'd be okay with equally as old alternatives. By the way, this isn't a personal attack on you or anything, I'm just making a point. Kokoro Wish fucked around with this message at 02:51 on Aug 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
Kokoro Wish posted:He's only one year younger than Bernie. Alot of people only seem to use the age argument for Sanders. The age argument is for the voters to decide, ultimately. As long as he's polling as well as he was in 2016, I have no problem with Old Bernie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:I can't wait to hear from WJ in 2020 why a vote for Goldman Booker is the only moral choice there's no such thing as ethical voting under capitalism
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
the moral choice is to precommit yourself to voting for the democrat should the 2020 elections be held, and then working to bring about events such that they aren't because the revolution happened beforehand
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
Yeah I'll vote for Sanders if he makes it, Trump over a neolib like Booker or Harris. Funny how people like WJ are so obsessed with being a Dem toady that they want people to recommit to the Dems. Like what kind of trauma did you suffer to have to give such unconditional support to the centrists.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I firmly believe this is a large reason why Clinton even did as "well" as she did. God only knows how poorly she would have done if she didn't have this association working for her. I can't count the number of baby boomers (or gen X-ers) who supported her on the basis of thinking she'd do "whatever Bill Clinton did to make the 90's good." In a sane society, the fact that she conducted state business as a private entity should be a partisan scandal like Cheney and his black berry, that the bar is set so low it may as well be 6 feet underground is depressing. We literally a mafia owned celebrity retard openly monetizing the presidency as a direct result of citizens united. Decorum used to at least make it inappropriate to be brazenly criminal in public. Kokoro Wish posted:He's only one year younger than Bernie. Alot of people only seem to use the age argument for Sanders when they'd be okay with equally as old alternatives.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:the moral choice is to precommit yourself to voting for the democrat should the 2020 elections be held, and then working to bring about events such that they aren't because the revolution happened beforehand Yeah precommit to the people who are going to lead the counterrevolution, great idea idiot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
The problem with democrats isn't that they are weakly for incrementalism. It's that they have several "Nixon to China" moments where they give in on progressive issues in the name of a compromise that never comes. Obama deported more people than anyone else in history, cut more financial aid to students at HBCUs than anyone in history, and did all that with minimal push back from his party. In fact, the deportation data was actually bandied about as a good thing during 2016.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
he also had a chance to restructure the financial system and punish the people that destroyed the economy and didn't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:18
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:Yeah precommit to the people who are going to lead the counterrevolution, great idea idiot. the entire federal government is going to lead the counterrevolution the revolution won't happen at the ballot box - at least not via elections for federal elected officials hell, with dems in disarray, voting for centrist neolib shitlords will make the federal government more ripe to be cast aside
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:22
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:The problem with democrats isn't that they are weakly for incrementalism. It's that they have several "Nixon to China" moments where they give in on progressive issues in the name of a compromise that never comes. Obama deported more people than anyone else in history, cut more financial aid to students at HBCUs than anyone in history, and did all that with minimal push back from his party. In fact, the deportation data was actually bandied about as a good thing during 2016. In the TVIV Apocalypse thread, arguing about Trump policy, is considered a distraction, from the retard TV special. This is the level of discourse in Trumps America: "I can't follow along more than 2 sentences and don't care about boring stuff, I wanna see the monkey go boom boom." Groovelord Neato posted:he also had a chance to restructure the financial system and punish the people that destroyed the economy and didn't. Sneakster fucked around with this message at 03:30 on Aug 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
he could've turned on them once he was elected. fdr was a traitor his class.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:the entire federal government is going to lead the counterrevolution And the mask slips yet again as you advocate moronic 11th dimensional chess strategies like the stupid liberal you are.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:31
|
|
|
Just remember all the times WJ and his ilk posted "post your map" last year when he speaks
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:33
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:And the mask slips yet again as you advocate moronic 11th dimensional chess strategies like the stupid liberal you are. It's not a chess strategy - the Democrats will simply do less damage than the Republicans during the collapse of late capitalism that we're going through. I never once said they're going to be capable of staving off the collapse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:39
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:It's not a chess strategy - the Democrats will simply do less damage than the Republicans during the collapse of late capitalism that we're going through. I never once said they're going to be capable of staving off the collapse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:he could've turned on them once he was elected. fdr was a traitor his class. FDR was just a forward looking capitalist who saw a red future for the united states and unlimited labor strife if they didn't rein in the excesses of the past. Keep in mind, old GOP fogies like Winthrop Rockefeller ran on platforms in the 60s like a higher minimum wage and universal kindergarden. That's how far right this country has shifted since then
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:41
|
|
|
a republican once said:quote:Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. . . . This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
The price of military gear has actually gone way above inflation so the same math today would look even more obscene. Also it's mainly the result of triumphant liberalism getting victory disease as the USSR faltered.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:47
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:a republican once said: The Republicans now represent wealthy rural interests like the two billionaires in Kentucky. Sheldon Adelson owns all the media of Nevada. Steve Wynn single handedly twisted Heller's arm despite the wishes of the governor. A single billionaire had more control over a senator than his own governor of the same party that he had pledged fealty to, over an issue that that the entire voter base was against and would literally murder thousands and thousands of his own constituency of a party that is going to have 70% of the senate as the country urbanizes. GOP agenda is defined by 400 people, which is what, ~8 people per state? (assuming evenly distributed, which is doubtful). A group of insatiable psychopaths the size of a modern high-school dictate the policy. Giving up on the federal government is probably for the best in terms of having realistic expectations. Everything leftists want is already part of NYC, everyone that has money, power, or choices has or is fleeing the portions of the country that would most benefit from federal policy, but has the least democratic influence. If you want a modern quality of life, you have to go to the first world part of the country. Sneakster fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Aug 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
Michigan Democratic senators cave to Trump on powerful judicial appointmentquote:Senators Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Gary Peters (D-MI) capitulated to Donald Trump’s effort to place a conservative former clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia on a powerful court of appeals. Stabenow and Peters briefly refused to return a “blue slip,” a procedural formality that prevented the nomination of Justice Joan Larsen to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit from moving forward. They have now reportedly given up their resistance. lmao
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Michigan Democratic senators cave to Trump on powerful judicial appointment Time for some Purges.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Michigan Democratic senators cave to Trump on powerful judicial appointment True story.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 05:46
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Time for some Purges. Starting with the questionable trad cath allies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 06:11
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:Starting with the questionable trad cath allies. LOL, yes I am the bad guy.I am the one rooting for Hillary and her slaves, for Kamalha and her defence of police acting like thieves, for Corey and his prostituting himself for wall street, for Zuck and his reptilian brotherhood. I am the one who just agreed to put people in power who would destroy voting rights. Crowsbeak fucked around with this message at 06:49 on Aug 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 06:45
|
|
|
maybe the democrats... are a waste 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:LOL, yes I am the bad guy.I am the one rooting for Hillary and her slaves, for Kamalha and her defence of police acting like thieves, for Corey and his prostituting himself for wall street, for Zuck and his reptilian brotherhood. I am the one who just agreed to put people in power who would destroy voting rights. Why wouldn't you root for Hillary's slaves? The gently caress is wrong with you?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 06:55
|
|
|
Also I'm just ribbing you. Although I do think your religious beliefs are seriously stupid and I never want your kind anywhere near power.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
 I think I broke the TV.I'm starting to think the true danger of Trump is that he's an Archie Bunker figure people can point and laugh at because he's so stupid its silly, but he represents the ugliest truth about the audience laughing at him. He's taking off the mask for middle america. Christ, no wonder the Democrats are a waste.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:Also I'm just ribbing you. Although I do think your religious beliefs are seriously stupid and I never want your kind anywhere near power. lol Truly the enlightened will rule when this sort gets power.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
Sneakster posted:
I've mentioned that Trump was a dangerously good candidate, not only having experience on reality TV and rightly figuring that the elections are the biggest, ugliest reality TV show of them all, but he basically stole Obama's campaign strategy in many ways (and a smart move, given it was a successful one). While Hillary was aloof and self-obsessed, partying with celebrities, ignoring much of the country and being incredibly hostile to the idea of anyone running against her, Trump made his rallies and visits into events like rock concerts, interacted with people, and said all kinds of weird crazy dumb poo poo that was actually interesting to people willing to believe they could read anything they wanted between the lines. His Republican challengers were a gaggle of hobgoblins who couldn't be trusted to hold a piss-up in a brewery, being effortlessly made laughing stocks by a challenger who rightly didn't take them seriously at all. It isn't exactly a world-class political campaign, but it's the dark mirror of one, which succeeds because everyone else involved is utterly insufferable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 07:29
|
|
|
Inescapable Duck posted:I've mentioned that Trump was a dangerously good candidate, not only having experience on reality TV and rightly figuring that the elections are the biggest, ugliest reality TV show of them all, but he basically stole Obama's campaign strategy in many ways (and a smart move, given it was a successful one). While Hillary was aloof and self-obsessed, partying with celebrities, ignoring much of the country and being incredibly hostile to the idea of anyone running against her, Trump made his rallies and visits into events like rock concerts, interacted with people, and said all kinds of weird crazy dumb poo poo that was actually interesting to people willing to believe they could read anything they wanted between the lines. His Republican challengers were a gaggle of hobgoblins who couldn't be trusted to hold a piss-up in a brewery, being effortlessly made laughing stocks by a challenger who rightly didn't take them seriously at all. I'm starting to think liberals would support a nazi over a socialist that didn't support unsustainable ponzi scheme of robbing the poor to support the bourgeois. The ferociousness of liberals the moment their god given right to government subsidized property is questioned is a tad... reactionary. Socialists advocating even the most minor reforms are an existential threat that needs a harsher crackdown on than fascists who respect property rights. Not that my feelings are personally hurt, but I don't think even literal nazis in the history of the forums got that kind of hostility I got for the controversial opinion of saying unsustainable practices shouldn't be sustained. It's almost like... fascists... get into power.... when.... liberals... suppress... socialists... (for calling into question reforms of unsustainable policies that benefit bourgeois liberals). The system itself doesn't need reforms, we just need to reign in the excesses of ((crony)) capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 07:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:20 |
|
|
Inescapable Duck posted:I've mentioned that Trump was a dangerously good candidate, not only having experience on reality TV and rightly figuring that the elections are the biggest, ugliest reality TV show of them all, but he basically stole Obama's campaign strategy in many ways (and a smart move, given it was a successful one). While Hillary was aloof and self-obsessed, partying with celebrities, ignoring much of the country and being incredibly hostile to the idea of anyone running against her, Trump made his rallies and visits into events like rock concerts, interacted with people, and said all kinds of weird crazy dumb poo poo that was actually interesting to people willing to believe they could read anything they wanted between the lines. His Republican challengers were a gaggle of hobgoblins who couldn't be trusted to hold a piss-up in a brewery, being effortlessly made laughing stocks by a challenger who rightly didn't take them seriously at all. I read Gamechanger after this past election and the parallels between Trump and Hussein were there. Both created a movement instead of just a campaign and Abuela had no clue what was about to hit her. But before you say "  bernie had a movement too he woulda won " Trump's movement was far stronger than Bernie's and once Trump won the GOP bent the knee. Had Bernie actually somehow broken through the Clinton machine she never would have surrendered what was supposedly her final shot at realizing her birthright and Trump would have won 450ev/+10m popular votes, which is what he'll win by if Abuela does run in 2020.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 08:59
|
|