|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
frest posted:Look I get it, I live in white suburbia surrounded by republican-voting and right-leaning white people who are terrified of the blacks. I don't want to engage in vigilante violence myself. I want to trust in the ability of local law enforcement and national policy-makers to take a stand against Nazis and white supremacy. Opposing the most nakedly evil, the least dog-whistle form of evil in our lifetime should be stone simple. These are the stories liberals need to be focused on:  Trump is so irregular that this Ossoff is a lock and I am sure that Democrats can repeat this success from here through 2020!
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 18:39 |
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Serious question, isn't huffing your own farts dangerous to your long term health? you tell me
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
frest posted:The disconnect between what I see coming from the DNC and the news that exists is so severe it hurts. Trump is the personification of the RNC troll-culture that cares more about pissing off liberals and scoring points, he's accomplishing nothing besides their Supreme Court seat, and hopefully all of his retarded non-actions and executive order rollbacks of Obama-era poo poo will wash away when White House trades again. That is a massive part of my frustration with the democrats. Single payer or a medicare for all are widely popular. Raising the minimum wage to 12 to 15 dollars an hour is widely popular. Bernie Sanders is widely popular. Free college is widely popular. Virtually all policies that tend to be more closely linked with democrats are more popular. And instead the democratic establishment decided on punching left and resisting any efforts at leadership change. It has to be a historical low for a party leadership to have both the most popular policies and most popular figures at least in theory on their side and still manage to be as unpopular than the republicans. I still think that one of the most underreported and underdiscussed political issues of the day was Maggie Haberman's brief post about how when Ossoff was losing democrats' main concern was that it would embolden the left wing of the party.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:That is a massive part of my frustration with the democrats. Single payer or a medicare for all are widely popular. Raising the minimum wage to 12 to 15 dollars an hour is widely popular. Bernie Sanders is widely popular. Free college is widely popular. Virtually all policies that tend to be more closely linked with democrats are more popular. And instead the democratic establishment decided on punching left and resisting any efforts at leadership change. It has to be a historical low for a party leadership to have both the most popular policies and most popular figures at least in theory on their side and still manage to be as unpopular than the republicans. I still think that one of the most underreported and underdiscussed political issues of the day was Maggie Haberman's brief post about how when Ossoff was losing democrats' main concern was that it would embolden the left wing of the party. This is exactly how I feel, perfectly summarized. This is the central thesis of the thread, to me. Taking these popular ideas and loving running with them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
you edit my post and then thunk them, thunk indeed NewForumSoftware posted:lmao holy poo poo that people actually believe this loving exactly, Obama was hot garbage, that rear end in a top hat presided over the worst part of my life (graduating into the new depression) and he laughed as he bailed out bankers while my fellow new grads and my homeowning parents struggled. gently caress Obama and the people who like him for doing nothing but bombing brown people and bailing out Wall Street. Also, gently caress people who don't remember how desperately he tried to slash Social Security and Medicare. call to action fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Aug 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:That is a massive part of my frustration with the democrats. Single payer or a medicare for all are widely popular. Raising the minimum wage to 12 to 15 dollars an hour is widely popular. Bernie Sanders is widely popular. Free college is widely popular. Virtually all policies that tend to be more closely linked with democrats are more popular. And instead the democratic establishment decided on punching left and resisting any efforts at leadership change. It has to be a historical low for a party leadership to have both the most popular policies and most popular figures at least in theory on their side and still manage to be as unpopular than the republicans. I still think that one of the most underreported and underdiscussed political issues of the day was Maggie Haberman's brief post about how when Ossoff was losing democrats' main concern was that it would embolden the left wing of the party. It's odd that you get "the Waltons own as much as the bottom half of America" and also "we need a bunch of policies that won't address this fact at all" on the same page Like fine, incrementalism, but your "grand vision" sucks a bit imho
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Where's the Maggie haberman thing about Ossoff, that sounds awful and typical of the Democrats, I'd like to read it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:the problem with accelerationism as an ideology, beyond its status as the galaxy brain after conservatism and libertarianism, is that it ends up the idiot mirror of liberalism. "the arc of history inevitably bends towards perfection" vs. "the arc of history inevitably bends towards armageddon." But Obama literally did tax cuts (maintaining them anyways, and really wanting to slash SS/Medicare), union busting, and homophobia until SCOTUS forced his hand. I guess you're right he wasn't white supremacist though (he just happened to make black people far poorer at the hands of rich white bankers)
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:But that was in the past, NewForumSoftware is angry now you're delusional if you think the scope of the aids crisis compares to the scope of poverty and inequality in the US. sorry man, there's just way more desperately poor people than there are folks at risk of HIV.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:It's odd that you get "the Waltons own as much as the bottom half of America" and also "we need a bunch of policies that won't address this fact at all" on the same page http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/resurrecting-estate-tax-shadow-its-former-self I try not to link think tanks, but I was looking for a graph of estate tax levels and this just mentions every news article I remember reading back when it was a topic. Democrats should be mentioning raising the estate tax. Democrats seem deathly afraid of being called "socialist", but if that made any sense we'd have already been "socialist" in 1965. A CNN article titled "Will Republicans kill the estate tax?" was published two hours ago. It just highlights that whatever Democrats do to the estate tax, they're just going to lie about it as long as it's higher than 0%, so they might as well raise it sky high and make it affect more people. quote:"You work your whole life to build up a nest egg or a family-owned business or family farm. Then you pass away. ... Uncle Sam can swoop in and take over 40% of everything you've earned over a certain amount. It's just wrong," Brady said last week at an event promoting tax reform. Aside from the lies about what is affected, Democrats are letting them co-opt the language of what's an "American" policy. Dynastic, monarchy-like wealth isn't American either. galenanorth fucked around with this message at 20:02 on Aug 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:It's odd that you get "the Waltons own as much as the bottom half of America" and also "we need a bunch of policies that won't address this fact at all" on the same page Where the gently caress do you get an endorsement of incrementalism from my post?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Hillary's New Book posted:Donald Trump's attempts to "intimidate" her during the presidential debates made her "skin crawl" and that she wanted to tell him to "back up, you creep."
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:Where the gently caress do you get an endorsement of incrementalism from my post? WJ is a "full communist revolution now" type when he wants to attack this thread from the left, pay him no mind.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
InnercityGriot posted:Where's the Maggie haberman thing about Ossoff, that sounds awful and typical of the Democrats, I'd like to read it. It was a one liner comment in the coverage of the GA06 special election, which is why I said it was under covered and under discussed: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/20/us/politics/georgia-special-election-live.html?mcubz=0 scroll down to 9:23pm quote:Alex Burns WampaLord posted:WJ is a "full communist revolution now" type when he wants to attack this thread from the left, pay him no mind. I am pretty far to the left of Sanders and most of the DSA. My entire point was pretty clearly that democrats refuse to move even slightly left even when that is by far a more popular opinion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
At this point in my life I talk to a lot of people whose parents are retired or co-workers approaching retirement. You just put the money in a trust, and now you qualify for medicare like a homeless person and the trust pays for all your expenses. The estate tax isn't even on the radar, because "your" estate is now tiny and the trust passes the wealth to the next in line as you laid out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
It's odd to see people complaining about comparisons to Reagan when Obama compared himself to Reagan and sung his praises.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Dr. Angela Ziegler posted:Curious if "Back up, you creep" would have played well to Peoria? On her way home from the debate, as she was thinking back to some of the most heated moments, Hillary came up with a number of clever and assertive retorts she could have used to diminish Trump's bravado. It was then she realized she was the winner of the night, if not in public mind, then in her own, which is the only mind that matters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:It's odd to see people complaining about comparisons to Reagan when Obama compared himself to Reagan and sung his praises. Thanks for this scorching hot take on what you think that derail was about. It wasn't about "comparisons" it was people claiming Obama was equally as bad, if not worse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
"I'm rubber, you are glue," Hillary mumbled as she woke up from her post-debate coma. Unfortunately there were no cameras to capture her rhetorical reversal, but at that moment she was most assured of her razor-sharp wit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
its not her fault. she couldnt overcome the reptilian instinct telling her to freeze when she sensed a large predator nearby
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Now, with regards to incrementalism, I always think of Marx's "Political Indifferentism" https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1873/01/indifferentism.htm
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:It's odd to see people complaining about comparisons to Reagan when Obama compared himself to Reagan and sung his praises. What if I told you...that one can compare different aspects of people? For example: my hair color is the same as Trump's. But that is about the only valid comparison between him and me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
frest posted:At this point in my life I talk to a lot of people whose parents are retired or co-workers approaching retirement. You just put the money in a trust, and now you qualify for medicare like a homeless person and the trust pays for all your expenses. The estate tax isn't even on the radar, because "your" estate is now tiny and the trust passes the wealth to the next in line as you laid out. Yeah, I'm not sure policy-wise how legislation would get past that technicality. I expect what will happen in perpetuity regarding the estate tax is Democrats putting off addressing this, only wanting to come up with plans to implement policies when they hold power, and then if they ever get a supermajority again, they'll say they didn't have enough time. I think that as long as these bills have to be passed with a "majority of a majority", there's no reason Democrats can't be crafting legislation and voting on it separately amongst themselves. Then hopefully by the time the Democrats get back into power, not enough time will have passed for the composition of Congress to have changed much from the set of people who wrote the bills. Then all they have to do is revise, with most of the work already done. Maybe there's more to it than that and I'm missing something, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
I think the US is only a "center-right country" in the context of our options, our political structure it entirely geared to provide a center-right/right-wing result more or less with little regard to the actual interest of the population. When you actually get into what the public actually wants (especially in neutral language) it starts to look quite different especially regarding social security/medicare/healthcare in general. You can certainly argue that the US if anything a "near-managed" democracy at this point where elections happen but the results will only push in one direction. We will see how many Democrats cooperate with the other side on tax reform. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Aug 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Does anybody in this thread recall an article that was posted a month or two ago about the Florida Democratic Party? It was mostly a transcript of some party staffer spewing worthless and dismissive opinions while arguing for not having any policy for maximum triangulation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:you should read more about his handling of the financial crisis if you think he just "sat on his hands" because that's not actually what happened Reagan would have done the same thing as Obama in that position, though. If you somehow transported the person who was President Ronald Reagan (and all his values, etc) to the present era, he would be worse than Obama.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
I think you could make the argument that while Reagan was more dangerous than Obama. That said, I think it should be recognized that the cynicism that was a part of Obama's campaign strategy and his status as generally a "care-taker" president has its own miserable legacy. In the end, though Reagan really started the ball rolling and Obama's presidency is arguably a direct result of that process.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
galenanorth posted:http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/resurrecting-estate-tax-shadow-its-former-self What we need isn't just raising the estate tax, but implementing an actual wealth tax. WampaLord posted:WJ is a "full communist revolution now" type when he wants to attack this thread from the left, pay him no mind. To be fair, he's right that having the sort of stuff mentioned (higher minimum wage, UHC, etC) as a "grand goal" is kinda lame. I mean, I don't disagree that the Democrats should focus on these things for pragmatic reasons, but if someone limits their long-term goals to stuff like that they aren't very leftist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:"I'm rubber, you are glue," Hillary mumbled as she woke up from her post-debate coma. Unfortunately there were no cameras to capture her rhetorical reversal, but at that moment she was most assured of her razor-sharp wit. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
"Back up, you creep." THE VERY NEXT DAY: [the sound of Limbaugh's glottal preparations fades as the bumper music ends] "WHY DIDN'T SHE SAY THAT TO BILL ABOUT 20 YEARS AGO?" There was no winning this one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
I think the point that was pitifully attempted to be made is that Obama is worse *particularly because* he was a Democrat, and the bad stuff he has done has the secondary effect of poisoning the Democratic party. I think this point fails to stand on its own legs given the fact that the Democratic party is, quite clearly, a waste.steinrokkan posted:"I'm rubber, you are glue," Hillary mumbled as she woke up from her post-debate coma. Unfortunately there were no cameras to capture her rhetorical reversal, but at that moment she was most assured of her razor-sharp wit. As fun as this is to joke, truthfully, she would only ever be able to direct people to her new book on her plans for engaging in heated political discourse, Stronger ^Retorts^ Together. Once you read the book, you will retroactively be aware of how the debate was over before it started - just like our democracy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:Does anybody in this thread recall an article that was posted a month or two ago about the Florida Democratic Party? It was mostly a transcript of some party staffer spewing worthless and dismissive opinions while arguing for not having any policy for maximum triangulation. This one?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:I think the US is only a "center-right country" in the context of our options, our political structure it entirely geared to provide a center-right/right-wing result more or less with little regard to the actual interest of the population. When you actually get into what the public actually wants (especially in neutral language) it starts to look quite different especially regarding social security/medicare/healthcare in general. This is 100% the case, I agree. It is difficult to overstate exactly how stacked things are in favor of the right wing on a structural level. AstheWorldWorlds fucked around with this message at 03:30 on Aug 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:This is 100% the case, I agree. It is difficult to understate exactly how stacked things are in favor of the right wing on a structural level. Of course, in our case, I think the right-wing is pretty much the structure of both parties, as well as the corporations and the media outlets they own to varying degrees. Any actual "left-wing" is down to individuals banding together, and maybe some commentators on youtube.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
Alot of US citizens self-identify as some for of Center/Center-Right position. However, when you go down the list issue by issue and ask their opinion, it turns out that most of the country is actually Progressive Left.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
Yes it is, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:Where the gently caress do you get an endorsement of incrementalism from my post? Your endorsement of socdem policy instead of socialism
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Your endorsement of socdem policy instead of socialism wj stop pretending you actually support socialism, no one's buying it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
Condiv posted:wj stop pretending you actually support socialism, no one's buying it. Maybe you could defend Obama some more to really burnish those socialist credentials
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 23:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 18:39 |
|
|
call to action posted:Maybe you could defend Obama some more to really burnish those socialist credentials Condiv did not defend Obama. It's not defending to say that someone else is worse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2017 23:21
|
|