|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
Condiv posted:describing hillary as progressive is a bit silly don't you think? she was about as anti-progress as you could get, which is why she said stuff like "america's already great" and "all lives matter" Hillary was not a progressive Democrat. I did vote for her in the general as there was no progresssive democrat or democratic socialists to vote for. Is it so surpring that Clinton would be the next choice? Edit: nobody say Jill Stein for the love of god. If you did vote for Stein please do not participate in democracy. Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 00:42 on Aug 23, 2017 |
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:49 |
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:retreat into nihilistic apathy because he's afraid to give a poo poo. it's a fairly common form of political disengagement after you get burned. That was the case for me, actually. I'm not in the US, but my GF is american so I always followed the politics there. I was a bit lukewarm on Obama during his first run (he seemed to get along too well with Joe Lieberman), but hell, he had voted against the Iraq war and knew how to get people engaged. I dared to hope. Then... -Tom Daschle as HHS secretary. (consultant for one of the top health-care law firms in the country, board member of the Mayo Clinic (a major recipient of NIH grants) and the husband of one of America's biggest defense lobbyists — wife Linda Hall lobbies for Lockheed-Martin and Boeing) -Eric Holder as AG, free to run his "No wealthy crooks in jail, ever" approach to financial crime. -Timothy Geither at the Treasury, the weasely homunculus lovechild of Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, two of the architects of a fuckton of corruption and big-money fuckery of the last 25 years. From that point on, it was clear to me. If democrats would not pull left after a world-shaking crisis of capitalism after 8 years of disastrous foreign wars and incompetence at home, they were never, ever going to. They will gladly strangle the last single-payer advocate with their own leaking entrails before they'll ever dirty the shoes of the donor class.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
thats not a joke, even regular arm michael jordan could make a serious presidential bid if he wanted to
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Hillary was not a progressive Democrat. I did vote for her in the general as there was no progresssive democrat or democratic socialists to vote for. Is it so surpring that Clinton would be the next choice? she was the first choice of some people on these forums, which is pretty messed up when you think about it. also, she should've never made it to the general since she apparently can't figure out how our political system works despite her wonkishness. not gonna say you did a bad or hosed up in voting for her in the general tho
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
"eeyyyyy, im wonkin here!" *loses to a clown*
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:"eeyyyyy, im wonkin here!" *loses to a clown* 
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:"eeyyyyy, im wonkin here!" *loses to a clown* The day the clown cried is a good movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
Condiv posted:she was the first choice of some people on these forums, which is pretty messed up when you think about it. also, she should've never made it to the general since she apparently can't figure out how our political system works despite her wonkishness. not gonna say you did a bad or hosed up in voting for her in the general tho I too would have preferred a different outcome. My overall point is that in voting, there is little difference between someone on my side of the spectrum compared to where others in the thread are. I think we can all agree that the DNC and all party officials should be held accountable for their failures. I think it is starting to change, but change comes slowly to those kinds of organizations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
JailTrump posted:The day the clown cried is a good movie. Impossible to know for eight more years
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I too would have preferred a different outcome. I think you'd be right re voting before this election but now? Nah
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:I think you'd be right re voting before this election but now? Nah I think it is going to depend very much on 2018 for me. If the DNC doesn't make a push left even a bit, then i'll likely bail and vote third party. I don't live in California any more so my vote matters somewhat more. If 2018 is a wave, and the actual party leadership puts up some fight and advocates for some basic things, I will continue with the Democrats.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I think it is starting to change, but change comes slowly to those kinds of organizations. Even if incrementalism can work in theory given enough time (it can't, at least not with these Democrats), the fact is incrementalism doesn't work because the poo poo we have to overcome will destroy us first.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:We don't have time, both because fascists are making serious gains and also because we're all going to boil alive in the next few decades if we don't fix our poo poo, and even then. this pretty much. we need a tidal wave of change and the dems really haven't shown they're interested in much of anything than preserving the status quo. we're on course to lose the polar ice caps soon and dems are fighting to let oil companies build megapipelines and their spineless incrementalist approach to politics has ceded so much political ground to the republicans that we now have a nazi in chief in the oval office
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
The sad part is Loam is right about change coming slowly, at least through the traditional "political process". Honestly the best thing the left can hope for is a complete and utter economic collapse before the election. It's one of the few events that can spur rapid political change in this country and would probably galvanize voters even further away from anyone who represents "the status quo". Ironically it would also be ideal as far as slowing down the rate of warming wrt climate change.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:The sad part is Loam is right about change coming slowly, at least through the traditional "political process". Honestly the best thing the left can hope for is a complete and utter economic collapse before the election. It's one of the few events that can spur rapid political change in this country and would probably galvanize voters even further away from anyone who represents "the status quo". Ironically it would also be ideal as far as slowing down the rate of warming wrt climate change. Did you earlier insult me for being an incrementalist, and then unironically become an accelerationist? God drat man, what happened to make you this way?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Did you earlier insult me for being an incrementalist, and then unironically become an accelerationist? Learning about climate change mostly
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:The sad part is Loam is right about change coming slowly, at least through the traditional "political process". Honestly the best thing the left can hope for is a complete and utter economic collapse before the election. It's one of the few events that can spur rapid political change in this country and would probably galvanize voters even further away from anyone who represents "the status quo". Ironically it would also be ideal as far as slowing down the rate of warming wrt climate change. Indeed, we all hope for revolution, as the left will undoubtedly win. As they always do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:Indeed, we all hope for revolution, as the left will undoubtedly win. As they always do. Well that's the other side of the coin, the left probably won't win and we'll be thrown into a neonazi hellscape. But if that's the case I say let's just get it over with because there's no hope if the nazis actually win.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
I was literally willing to kill for Hillary and had lost thirty pounds so I could deliver incremental process into the skulls of Abuela's enemies, one bullet at a time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 01:49
|
|
|
Actually, history is a bit different than that. Frequently, the incremental policies were not passed because the alternative was nothing. Instead, they were passed because the alternative was more radical. When J Hamilton Lewis started talking about including healthcare in the new deal, Marvin McIntyre (FDR's Presidential Secretary) reached out to him on background to cool it. Wilbur Mills had blocked medicare for years, and he ended up supporting what was passed not because the alternative was nothing, but because the alternative was more aggressive and expansive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SenSanders/status/900153026631139329 Bernie Sanders announces his retirement
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
Al Borland Corp. posted:https://twitter.com/SenSanders/status/900153026631139329 he didn't lose based on his ideas, he was cheated by the dnc 
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
Condiv posted:he didn't lose based on his ideas, he was cheated by the dnc I mean when questioned on the fairness of the process the DNC literally said 'We never actually said the primaries were fair and are under no legal obligation to make them fair, so...'
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
Also ultimately the incremental reforms just end up stalling things enough to stew into a real crisis as the underlying issues more often than not remain. Lead up to the Thirty Years War seems like a classic example of reforms just stalling or getting rolled back over time leading to continual resurfacing of regional crisis until the ideological underpinning of the western world blows up. Seems to be the case that reforms usually fail unless the reforms are so extensive rollback is impossible because the structure for a rollback no longer exists, which is really a bureaucratically facilitated revolution. What we take as the success of reform is really a very tiny sample of history and with a very mixed and uncertain record. AstheWorldWorlds fucked around with this message at 03:20 on Aug 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
Sneakster posted:Is JC actually fake or real? Cause he's consistently dedicated to being an amoral sociopath, but seems a little too composed to real. Trust me, he's a gimmick, not the real thing. His gimmick (center/right) is taking the other side of the debate (otherwise, we'd just have an echo chamber. He does back down when confronted with citations depending on the subject), but he seems to have a habit of deliberately pushing and pushing to bait his debate opponents into using ad hominem attacks, then responding in kind to keep pushing their buttons. If centrists can be defined by their sense of decorum and propriety even as they tear apart the middle class, then "winning" the debate by having your opponent devolve into name calling is an approved tactic. Mister Facetious fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Aug 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 03:23
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHS-K7OuLAc
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
Condiv posted:he didn't lose based on his ideas, he was cheated by the dnc But he couldn't win based on his ideas
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 03:39
|
|
|
Al Borland Corp. posted:But he couldn't win based on his ideas Bernie Sanders has won many elections based on his ideas, just not the one that we really really wanted him to win.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:Trust me, he's a gimmick, not the real thing. His gimmick (center/right) is taking the other side of the debate (otherwise, we'd just have an echo chamber. He does back down when confronted with citations depending on the subject), but he seems to have a habit of deliberately pushing and pushing to bait his debate opponents into using ad hominem attacks, then responding in kind to keep pushing their buttons. Yeah, it's because of the specific nature of his gimmick that a very small part of me is conflicted about it. After all, nothing good or constructive comes from a pure echo chamber, and iron sharpens iron, and he could serve some good being a kind of rhetorical sparring partner--after all, all the arguments he brings forth, and the way he debates, are all things that we have to deal with from actual real-life centrists and Dems. But he's so relentless about it that he ends up stifling the dialogue and totally derailing whatever topic he starts posting about, and every single time the thread ends up derailing and losing focus. I dunno what I'm trying to say here, I guess that like this thread better when we're talking leftist perspectives and ideas and debating better ways forward rather than constantly reacting to posters like JC and the like. I'm not sure the best way to go about that, other than to minimize engagement and try to keep the thread's focus as a whole in a constructive, forward-looking direction? For instance I'd love to finally quit relitigating the primaries, at this point anyone who's going to argue "superdelegates had no effect" with a straight face has already dug in their heels against reality and isn't worth engaging (on that issue at least). re: incremental changes, any change is going to be incremental under our system (and I'd say in any representative system); I feel like that should be self-evident. Anyone who positions themselves as being "for" incrementalism either doesn't understand the negotiation and back-and-forth dealings that occur until a bill becomes law, or is signaling/arguing in bad faith. But that kind of positioning is done because it has power, because by claiming to be a Serious Adult for Incremental Changes (which is obviously how things are done), by implication anyone who disagrees with you must be a Not-Serious Babby who wants everything now. How can that be countered, in a way that convinces bystanders on the fence, I wonder?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
We're (nominally at the very least) leftists, and understand the role of regulation in reigning in excess. The problem with D&D is no referees. It's just a slugfest of ideology, sincere and otherwise. Ad yet it's also the clearest example of real life; few argue political matters in good faith.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
Two Trump voters for every Bernie voter. What a deal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Did you earlier insult me for being an incrementalist, and then unironically become an accelerationist? Eight years of King Hussein promising a better way and then being Blackface Reagan tends to do thing to a man. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 07:17
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Eight years of King Hussein promising a better way and then being Blackface Reagan tends to do thing to a man. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 10:40
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Eight years of King Hussein promising a better way and then being Blackface Reagan tends to do thing to a man. What is wrong with you that you think this was appropriate?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 10:47
|
|
|
Condiv posted:What is wrong with you that you think this was appropriate? It could have been phrased better but was essentially accurate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 13:11
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:It could have been phrased better but was essentially accurate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:It could have been phrased better but was essentially accurate. it was actually not? in addition to being hatefull it was a lie too
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
Goa Tse-tung posted:it was actually not? in addition to being hatefull it was a lie too Definitely not a lie, maybe slightly hateful (he deserves hate tho)
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
Look, Obama was disappointing, but he wasn't loving Reagan. Also ignore the obvious troll who refers to him as "King Hussein," this isn't hard to figure out. E: vvv Reagan slashed taxes, Obama didn't. That's the biggest and most obvious difference right there. WampaLord fucked around with this message at 14:30 on Aug 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 14:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:49 |
|
|
I'd say linking him to Reagan is fair, perhaps he was a bit nicer about things than Reagan was. Edit: Hoover might be a more accurate comparison, though. AstheWorldWorlds fucked around with this message at 14:31 on Aug 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 14:29
|
|