|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
readingatwork posted:Not to pick on you personally, but words can't describe how done I am with the phrase "we can pressure them to move left once in office". Yeah it's sort of true, but we're talking years of intense organization and pressure for a policy outcome that will be compromised and useless (see: Dodd Frank). Meanwhile they'll be getting away with tons of horrendous poo poo because the opposition's energy and attention is focused elsewhere. No dems moves left after being voted in. Hussein ran on being hard left, swerved right into being center-right the second after taking the oath and stayed there for three years, campaigned again on being on the left, and ran right back into the center-right after winning re-election. Elected dems move to the center-right, elected GOP move further to the right. Without fail.
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
Peachfart posted:Um, it's not a cult of personality if *I* like it. I see it as like the time Bush dodged that shoe or Obama swatted that fly in an interview
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Yeah, the Birdie sanders stuff got a bit much but it was mostly secondary to the issues at hand...but I don't think it is comparable to the degree Hillary herself was pushed at the center of essentially everything. Btw, Obama didn't really run as hard left, it was vaguer center-left populism but he certainly played up the hope for something more to the full hilt. His second election was more muted, and seemed to generally rely on coasting on his popularity and the fact that Romney was ridiculously easy to pigeon hole. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Aug 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
i think most people who voted for obama the first time were under the assumption he was going to do some fdr poo poo considering the global economy had melted down. i don't think any of us expected "the exact same system but maybe 5 percent less bad".
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:No dems moves left after being voted in. Hussein ran on being hard left, swerved right into being center-right the second after taking the oath and stayed there for three years, campaigned again on being on the left, and ran right back into the center-right after winning re-election. Funny how you like to call him by his middle name for some weird reason.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Not to pick on you personally, but words can't describe how done I am with the phrase "we can pressure them to move left once in office". Yeah it's sort of true, but we're talking years of intense organization and pressure for a policy outcome that will be compromised and useless (see: Dodd Frank). Meanwhile they'll be getting away with tons of horrendous poo poo because the opposition's energy and attention is focused elsewhere. Well, but "years of intense organization" is what we're going to need to do going forward, one way or another. The leftist objective is pretty clear: we need to put pressure on candidates to move them to the left, and to normalize left-of-center policies. That goes for Sanders and Warren as much as it goes for Harris. You can be skeptical of whether or not that effort will successfully move Harris enough to the left that she'd be a palatable candidate for any of us, and that's perfectly fair. I know I'm not certain of it myself. But it's not like we're going to be going out of our way to lure Harris to the left; we're already going to be organizing and making that push nationally (if we can get our poo poo together, that is). The only question will be whether Harris (or Warren or any candidate) is canny enough to ride that wave or not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Hot take; cults of personality dont instantly mean someone is good or bad, only that they have some trait that resonates with people Actually, how a candidate or official interacts with, enables, encourages, or treats their cults is a huge reflection of what that person is actually like. Trump is obviously the most gregarious at fanning the flames of his Pepersonality with all the dumb MAGA poo poo and retwittering of memes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Funny how you like to call him by his middle name for some weird reason. If you say his real name, the drones come for you 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
Well, I tried, but the Trump thread has successfully defeated leftists for another day. Anything to avoid looking inwards. I can't believe how much they still think the platform means something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
Actually the platform is far better than I expected, to the point I would actually consider myself satisfied if they pursued it. Its actually startlingly good in contrast to leadership explicitly stating they aren't going to raise taxes, and they have a tax credit and job training plan that is almost definitely a stealth measure to cut public services. I think I would technically count as a revolutionary for my incredibly reasonable demands, but I'm satisfied with the platform, but I don't trust leadership to actually pursue it when they're refusing to entertain the idea of raising taxes. Especially since the party has a propaganda corp railing against socialism. The apparent liberal resistance to raising taxes is actually extreme and a huge loving problem. Billionaires can buy elections but even they've called for raising their own taxes, whereas the upper middle class still needs to actually vote, and them comparing to being murdered is a little disconcerting. As a white man you you have no business engaging or criticizing a rainbow coalition of corncobs advocating unsustainable predatory economic practices. I, however, have transcended my class, gender, flesh, and biases to become a beautiful and pure force of uncompromising takes so hot it destabilizes the visible light spectrum with its burn. Sneakster fucked around with this message at 23:11 on Aug 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
In theory, the platform is great. But I've been burned too much to trust just a platform at this point. The Dems really need to capture the rhetorical battle. They should be running on "Those Fuckers, Our poo poo!" not "Have you seen the other guys?"
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Well, I tried, but the Trump thread has successfully defeated leftists for another day. Anything to avoid looking inwards. I am surprised anyone would bother posting about Democratic politics in the Trump thread when the de facto policy is almost explicitly 'sweep this poo poo under the rug'.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:I am surprised anyone would bother posting about Democratic politics in the Trump thread when the de facto policy is almost explicitly 'sweep this poo poo under the rug'. It's more like I use it to test out my arguments. If it makes certain people mad, I tend to think I'm onto something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:It's more like I use it to test out my arguments. If it makes certain people mad, I tend to think I'm onto something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
Sneakster posted:I like you and your merkin, and there's reasons to be skeptical of party leadership and interests, but I think you kind of lost that argument. The actual posted platform is disorientingly better than their messaging, but I don't see how they can expect to implement anything without compromising donors or raising taxes, so they'll just settle for fellating bourgeois liberals and now religious fundamentalists anti choicers apparently, and probably soon racists. It wasn't my finest hour, I'll fully admit. I need to call up Skymall and order some more merkins... But hey, if I'm wrong and the Dems finally do Get It and start doing the right thing, I will be 100% on board and become the biggest loving Dem sycophant ever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
The new Democratic platform is only rehtoric until they actually take some action, and no-one trusts the Democrats to actually do anything. The only thing that could convince people before the elections happen would be changing how they fund themselves. Until then, following the money will always lead to bad places regarding who has influence over the party and the politicians.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Well, I tried, but the Trump thread has successfully defeated leftists for another day. Anything to avoid looking inwards. It will be funny when they finally get a liberal democrat in power, only to see him/her be DESTROYED by the newly overcharged deep stated secret service with leaks and subpoenas and inquiries whenever they are unhappy or just bored. Not to say that there's not a nest of creepy, shady stuff surrounding Trump and his crew, but this elevation of technocratic security spooks to the new heroes of our day and age is weird. It'll be like whistle-blowers. Gallant guardians of our freedom under Dubya, traitorous poo poo-disturbers under Obama, and now in a moral void since the existing ones either annoyed the Dem administration or turned out to be kinda creepy. Next time I'm chronically bored I might fish through some D&D threads and find people's posts about Comey during the election when he was Trump's personal Hillary-slaying hatchetman and then a few months back when he was the hero we deserve AND need.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
I remember people in the Trump thread unironically calling for a CIA junta to save us from Trump after the election. Well, when they weren't posting about crying all day or checking themselves into mental institutions. I'm cool with them having their own containment thread where I never have to interact with them. No harm done letting them live in an alternate reality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 00:07
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:I remember people in the Trump thread unironically calling for a CIA junta to save us from Trump after the election. Well, when they weren't posting about crying all day or checking themselves into mental institutions. They likely think the same about us here, and while that is cool to keep the place from becoming a shitfest, it's still kind of sad. I don't see how any major party not just in the US but in the world now can survive without having a lot of people with their ear to the ground, spotting trends that motivate people and nurturing new leaderships that answer those demands. Not just focus polling, but actively finding the people who have taken it on and invited them to do more and get exposure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:It wasn't my finest hour, I'll fully admit. I need to call up Skymall and order some more merkins... That platform is a reason to celebrate. I achieved class consciousness at an unusually young age, and have been paying attention since the 90s. I don't recall ever hearing calls for most of that platform in any mainstream sense at any point before (hillary care was not UHC by any means). So, the fact that they've straight up put that on their platform is a good sign. The continued presence of the DLC and corncobs calling any tax raises a form of murder is not a good sign. The extremely hostile reaction to reducing the massive subsidies for all white neighborhoods was not expected, I did not expect the mask to be taken off that quick. I'm not being a contrarian gimmick prick, I'm sincerely loving horrified. I was not expecting that reaction, and I'm kind of shaken, because thats probably not an unusual view for a corncob Phil Ochs posted:"But if you ask me to bus my children  - $15/hr and uhc is cool, even if not important - We need to raise taxes even just modestly. -Thats class envy punishing my success! - We have unsustainably low taxes, reforms can't do much with austerity - I don't consent to tax raises and purity tests. - We also need to address reductions in federal subsidies for property most economists support, its the engine of an unstable growth scheme. Racist poor people agitating for reforms are just crabs in a bucket! - The gentry can't rob the poor to fund unsustainable white flight development forever. - You're communist garbage - But we can't sustain economically unstable white flight policies forever. - "I demand economic stability" -   I'm starting to think the bourgeois are fair weather allies who can't be trusted. Certainly they wouldn't support fascism if it served their interests, there's no history of anything like that. This might be out there, but I wonder if people who use vacuous phrases like anti-racist ally while exploiting and even fighting for the economic basis of the white supremacist power structure , and their reactionary resistance to the inevitability of integration might mean they actually have fascist sympathies. In terms of the base, and just not the leadership.... I think the democrats might be a waste. If reforms of the unsustainable white supremacist power structure are inevitable then..... https://twitter.com/randygdub/status/796229362643152896 And if liberals are compromised by their investment in this white supremacist power structure, its like you could say they're owned by it. - "im not owned! im not owned!!", i continue to insist as i slowly shrink and transform into a corn cob
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 00:17
|
|
|
Buddy, if you're only starting to think that the petty bourg can't be trusted just now I have some bad news about your class consciousness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 00:22
|
|
|
Sneakster posted:I'm starting to think the bourgeois are fair weather allies who can't be trusted. Certainly they wouldn't support fascism if it served their interests, there's no history of anything like that. Look, you ever see that Peanuts cartoon where Charlie Brown is winding up to kick the football and Lucy is giving him all kinds of encouragement, then snags the ball away at the last moment? It ain't like that at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
Charlie Brown didn't kick the ball, though he did look the other way while someone else kicked the football repeatedly for trying to bus his children. Cerebral Bore posted:Buddy, if you're only starting to think that the petty bourg can't be trusted just now I have some bad news about your class consciousness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:They likely think the same about us here, and while that is cool to keep the place from becoming a shitfest, it's still kind of sad. Democrats do this. They know exactly what people want, it's just politically impossible for them to run/act on those things because their donors won't let them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
 Lot of people admitting to supporting Bush and McCain like thats not the equivalent of having downs. Would certainly explain the reactionary complaints about leftists ruining the democrats.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 01:22
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Democrats do this. They know exactly what people want, it's just politically impossible for them to run/act on those things because their donors won't let them. That or we keep electing people who like money just as much as the republicans do. Social issues are used (by both parties) as a platform to string the base along and paint the other side as evil wrongthinkers. It's a p.neato distraction too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 02:35
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Democrats do this. They know exactly what people want, it's just politically impossible for them to run/act on those things because their donors won't let them. I don't think it's the donors, or at least not entirely or even mostly the donors. I think the political and media class that run the Democratic Party see themselves as a rightful meritocratic elite, and think universal social democratic programs are bad because they would fail to render them their deserved superior status in society. It's the politicos and staffers and journalists and think tank fellows themselves who are the problem
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
Wow. There are literally electability arguments being used against moving to the left in the Trump thread. It's kinda magical really. In the Trump thread in 2000 mother-loving 17. Because really, remember Reagan? Remember the period of Republican presidential dominance of 1968 to 1992? Democrats had to move right. It's the only way to win. Never mind that it's kinda dumb to bring up the spectre of old Republicans who were basically the same as current-day establishment Democrats. Oh just imagine if anti-welfare, anti-union, pro-monopoly corporatists were never thrown out of the white house by the left! Yeah, imagine. If there was a reset button that let us keep the social and technological progress we've made over the years but turned politics and economics back 50 years we'd be jamming it like crazy. Futuresight fucked around with this message at 03:02 on Aug 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 03:00
|
|
|
Futuresight posted:Wow. There are literally electability arguments being used against moving to the left in the Trump thread. It's kinda magical really. Int he Trump thread in 2000 mother-loving 17. "A Republican Won" => "Move Right" => repeat forever. That's as deep it goes. Libs are loving stupid.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 03:03
|
|
|
Marxalot posted:That or we keep electing people who like money just as much as the republicans do. Social issues are used (by both parties) as a platform to string the base along and paint the other side as evil wrongthinkers. Some very stupid arguments about "yeah, support the person propped up by corporate interests already antagonistic to the base, and then put pressure on them, after they were elected, and there's literally no leverage, except for the people who are going to pay them for some speeches after their time in office". Look at Harris, this is literally a sleazy attorney who jails kids for career moves and is literally on the take from white collar criminals with a propaganda corp funded by those criminals shouting down any criticism of this that this person has done everything to make it clear they're a complete corncob. I've also noticed: ever since the Republicans pushing their not-quite-retards into the Democratic party from their constant compaction cycles leading to Trump, you now hear disingenuous "leftists are the real racists" from conservative democrats rather than Republicans. The GOP is loving dead nationally. There's no Trump 2, or coming back from that insanity, this a party that has ceded any claim to the executive office, because even Trump is still more electable than anyone they have left in a party of collapsing demographics. Now the ex-Republicans in the DNC consider tax raises a murderous act of class war crimes, unless you want an austerity-for-the-20th-year corncob, The DNC primary is effectively the actual presidential election, and where purity tests actually matter since people who thought Bush and Palin were not-retarded-at-the-time will consider anything left of center stupid leftist purity tests. Always remember: The purity-test candidate (note, usually a euphemism for objectively better in every way), is the alternative, to a candidate supported by people who thought Palin seemed like a good idea as teenagers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
Huzanko posted:"A Republican Won" => "Move Right" => repeat forever. That's as deep it goes. Libs are loving stupid. See also: "A Democrat Won" => "Move Right" => Repeat forever
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 03:21
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:See also: "A Democrat Won" => "Move Right" => Repeat forever Nah, Obama is further left than Bill Clinton.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
The constitutonal scholar who executed a US citizen in Yemen without due process of the law?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 05:28
|
|
|
Former DILF posted:The constitutonal scholar who executed a US citizen in Yemen without due process of the law? you are going to find what Bill Clinton did to African aspirin factories surprising
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:you are going to find what Bill Clinton did to African aspirin factories surprising ONE secret that CLINTON doesn't want you to know!
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
(Stolen from D&D chat) Stopped clocks Pretty solid argument honestly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 05:53
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Well, I tried, but the Trump thread has successfully defeated leftists for another day. Anything to avoid looking inwards. lol, back around the time of the DNC people were saying the platform was a meaningless non-concession to "Bernouts".
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 06:18
|
|
|
Motto posted:lol, back around the time of the DNC people were saying the platform was a meaningless non-concession to "Bernouts". Are you telling me they were lying to protect their interests, or that they might even just not care about things don't effect their property? Does this mean it's possible that anti racist liberal allies are actually disingenuous staunch reactionary opponents of integration exploiting the language of the civil rights movement while undermining it? The democrats.... are a waste? How do you declare an intifada between socialists and corn cobs?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 06:34
|
|
|
I just don't know how you look at the last two decades of politics in which Democratic primaries have picked one winner out of four and with an exception of after the cataclysmicly disasterous Bush administration they have either been losing seats or failed to retake the majority (and in the American system that means almost everything) and think that a huge change isn't needed. Maybe swinging to the left isn't the answer but the people smugly talking about letting the adults in the room handle this is maddening and like looking at a bizarro universe where the DNC isn't losing elections on all levels left and right. I guess they think this will be like 2008 and forget that 2004 was actually a thing. The platform is all well and good but the issue is that they have to sell it. After years of Democrats moving right, it's hard to just look at their on paper proposals and trust them. For instance in their platform: quote:Democrats are committed to protecting and advancing reproductive health, rights, and justice. We believe unequivocally, like the majority of Americans, that every woman should have access to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion—regardless of where she lives, how much money she makes, or how she is insured. We believe that reproductive health is core to women’s, men’s, and young people’s health and wellbeing. We will continue to stand up to Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood health centers, which provide critical health services to millions of people. We will continue to oppose—and seek to overturn—federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment. We condemn and will combat any acts of violence, harassment, and intimidation of reproductive health providers, patients, and staff. We will defend the ACA, which extends affordable preventive health care to women, including no-cost contraception, and prohibits discrimination in health care based on gender. which is somewhat at odds with the recent messaging of allowing pro-lifers to get support if they think that will help them get elected in certain areas (it won't since it's not about abortion it's about women's rights and agency).
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 13:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
Folks have to remember that the platform that came out of 2016 was hammered out with incredible levels of acrimony----anything they brag about now or would brandish about as a bludgeon, especially the establishment types, was the bare minimum they were able to bitterly argue them down to. The Most Progressive Platform folks fought their hardest to keep as diminished as possible~
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 14:05
|
|