|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
Avirosb posted:I'm not calling you dumb, I am calling you stubborn. I mean I'm not even American, I'm just curious why you feel the need to repeat this belief again and again, apropos of nothing. Yes, Trump is the product of the electoral system, as well as, among other things, structural inequities that limit the number of options people have available based on preferences of groups disjointed from the electorate, and thus leave people with no way to act truly rationally. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 17:59 on Sep 5, 2017 |
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:56 |
|
|
Avirosb posted:
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
So-called pragmatism is no longer a useful cudgel if you spend most of the time in the last thirty years losing elections, finally culminating in an embarrassing loss to an illiterate racist boob. The pragmatic vote would have actually been Bernie, because as the phrase goes, he would have Won.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:If you look at Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton and say that Hillary Clinton's problem is that she is smug, that's pretty sexist. Hillary Clinton thinks she's better than the masses. Donald Trump thinks he's better than everyone. He's not looking down on you, he's just so far up his own rear end you can't see his eyes. It's a very big difference in the way people react to it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
Remember how smug the Hillaries were all throughout 2016? What you reap is what you sow
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:man, those goalposts moved in a hurry, didn't they You, and many other people said that Donald Trump's attacks against Hillary Clinton were right. Those were his attacks. They were sexist and wrong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:You, and many other people said that Donald Trump's attacks against Hillary Clinton were right. Those were his attacks. They were sexist and wrong. were they just as sexist and wrong when he first deployed them against JEB!, I wonder.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:You, and many other people said that Donald Trump's attacks against Hillary Clinton were right. Those were his attacks. They were sexist and wrong. No, he said they were effective, not that they were right. Learn to read. "Lying in politics worked????" - you
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
InnercityGriot posted:So-called pragmatism is no longer a useful cudgel if you spend most of the time in the last thirty years losing elections, finally culminating in an embarrassing loss to an illiterate racist boob. The pragmatic vote would have actually been Bernie, because as the phrase goes, he would have Won. Bernie not winning suggests he wasn't pragmatic enough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
(sexism of course played a role in how those same attacks were interpreted against Hillary, but the underlying thrust of them was unchanged: this smug, out-of-touch rich person does not care about you. sure is a shame her campaign decided the best rebuttal to that accusation was "well, Trump's an rear end in a top hat.")
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:You, and many other people said that Donald Trump's attacks against Hillary Clinton were right. Those were his attacks. They were sexist and wrong. lol at the logical contortions required to start posting things like this unironically
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:No, he said they were effective, not that they were right. Ze Pollack posted:were they just as sexist and wrong when he first deployed them against JEB!, I wonder. Original post: BENGHAZI 2 posted:Donald Trump was basically Rodney Dangerfield in Caddyshack and Hillary was the judge If you think that Donald Trump was right on Hillary Clinton, you are a misogynist. That was the original point. That Donald Trump was right on Hillary Clinton.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Bernie not winning suggests he wasn't pragmatic enough. correct, incidentally; he very clearly didn't realize he had a genuine shot at the nomination until about halfway through the process, by which point his window of opportunity had shrunk to almost nonexistent. a more pragmatic Bernie Sanders would have gone hard from the start, as opposed to playing The Token Left-Winger Hillary Dispatches for the first couple of months.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:Original post: you seem to have missed my question, friend. try answering it this time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:correct, incidentally; he very clearly didn't realize he had a genuine shot at the nomination until about halfway through the process, by which point his window of opportunity had shrunk to almost nonexistent. a more pragmatic Bernie Sanders would have gone hard from the start, as opposed to playing The Token Left-Winger Hillary Dispatches for the first couple of months. yep
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
are people still trying to defend the pathetic shadow of a person known as hillary? she's sad and can't help but blame everyone but herself for her loss
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Bernie not winning suggests he wasn't pragmatic enough. I'm saying, if pragmatism were actually a thing, people would have realized that Bernie had the best chance to win based on pre election polling and voted for the person who wasn't one of the most hated politicians in America. In fact, Democrats demonstrated a fanatical vote for Clinton despite her many issues as a candidate, an illogical vote, really. I voted for her in the general, but I recall raising the possibility that she was a bad candidate in the election thread and people reacted like I shitted on their dog.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
like i hated hillary during the election and now, when she's publishing a book whining about how every single person in the US failed her, i can't help but shake my head at how pathetic she's become
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:Original post: That's a really dumb take on your part. Trump said a lot of extremely misogynist, awful, unfair things about Hillary Clinton, but his saying that she is smug and arrogant is neither misogynist nor inaccurate. She absolutely is both of those things. Broken watch, twice a day, blah blah. Stop defending the terrible failed nominee please. Avirosb posted:Bernie not winning suggests he wasn't pragmatic enough. Bernie didn't set out to win the nomination, so his not being "pragmatic" enough doesn't really factor into it. Majorian fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:you seem to have missed my question, friend. try answering it this time. It's so obvious that the context of an attack on a man and an attack on a woman are different, I scarcely felt the need.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
hillary would've done better for her legacy if she had just hosed off to the woods like she was doing originally. having this whiny baby as one of the "leaders" of the dem party is p embarassing
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:lmao for having enough privilege to vote third party. That's called being eligible to vote
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:It's so obvious that the context of an attack on a man and an attack on a woman are different, I scarcely felt the need. you are comfortable determining that when Noted Brain Genious Donald Trump says the same thing a second time, the second time it must have been motivated by sexism. neat
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
Condiv posted:hillary would've done better for her legacy if she had just hosed off to the woods like she was doing originally. having this whiny baby as one of the "leaders" of the dem party is p embarassing Blame the Peter Daous of the world, who keep whispering into her ear that her comeback is just around the corner.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
Condiv posted:like i hated hillary during the election and now, when she's publishing a book whining about how every single person in the US failed her, You really dodged a bullet by her not becoming the 45th US president then. Congrats. And yes, writing books just to whine about perceived betrayals is a very silly thing, though most politicians seems to do it nowadays. Easy way to make money.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Blame the Peter Daous of the world, who keep whispering into her ear that her comeback is just around the corner. i really can't, cause she should have more humility than to pretend she ran a flawless campaign or to try to fob her loss off on someone who campaigned for her
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:It's so obvious that the context of an attack on a man and an attack on a woman are different, I scarcely felt the need. But we're not talking about whether or not Donald Trump's attacks on Clinton as arrogant or smug were partially motivated by sexism. Of course they were. It doesn't mean that the substance of those attacks were actually inaccurate. I'm sure sexism partially motivated his attacks on Clinton being too buddy-buddy with Wall Street as well. Doesn't mean those criticisms were actually inaccurate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
As a corollary to my previous post, if you agree with Donald Trump's views on Hillary Clinton, that is a misogynistic sentiment.
Democrazy fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:You really dodged a bullet by her not becoming the 45th US president then. nah, it would've been better if she was just never nominated. she's clearly too incompetent to be president, or run for president even considering she lost to a reality tv show piss clown
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:Original post: Clinton is a smug, idiotic rich shill Nothing sexist about calling her out on what she truly is 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Hillary burning every bridge she can makes me at least somewhat hopeful that at least she specifically won't have as much pull over the Democratic party. I know there were some stories of her party friends getting really annoyed they were also getting thrown under the bus along with the Bernie, leftists, poor, etc that failed her after running her absurdly expensive campaign.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
The amount of dumbasses like Peter Daou and Mark Penn and Podesta she surrounded herself with doesn't speak well to her management skills anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i really can't, cause she should have more humility than to pretend she ran a flawless campaign Oh, I agree, but I also think she's just completely out-of-touch and surrounded by terrible yes-men morons who prevent her from developing even an inkling of that humility. Point is, mainstream Democratic political consultants need to be thrown into a volcano.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:You can not support Hillary Clinton and also not be a misogynist. Indeed, and a lot of folks here succeed in striking that balance.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
InnercityGriot posted:The amount of dumbasses like Peter Daou and Mark Penn and Podesta she surrounded herself with doesn't speak well to her management skills anyway. The Clintons have always surrounded themselves with incompetent yes men that have impressive resumes despite constantly being wrong. It's why I was super shocked that Mcauliffe turned out to be pretty decent despite me voting for him as a hate vote against the Cooch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Outside of the DC pundit class that stood to make money off of her eg Neera Tanden types, there was to me a noticeable drop in enthusiasm for her from the Wall Street/SV liberal types compared with Obama. They still voted for her in opposition to Trump but there was no groundswell of support that you could sense with the Obama campaign. Maybe it was lower than Obama, but it was absolutely there. I have a zillion six-figure earning professionals in my high school/college social network (people who went to elite colleges and then went to work for financial/consulting firms or went on to law school) and a bunch of them really liked Hillary*. There were also a couple people who worked at liberal non-profits who liked her a lot (these people weren't really wealthy or poor; they make like upper 5-figures or so). Like this one guy worked for some organization that seems focused on "making schools better" in some sort of vague, convoluted way (I don't think it's related to charter schools, though I could be wrong). *A number were also just politically apathetic. The vast majority could basically be divided between "enthusiastic for Hillary" and "completely disengaged from politics." The latter weren't disengaged due to cynicism/pessimism, though; it's just that they didn't really care because their lives were already good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:You can not support Hillary Clinton and also not be a misogynist. indeed. you can also support her and accept not visiting the state of Wisconsin at any point during the election was the act of someone who was out of touch, due to assuming victory was automatically hers by virtue of the nature of her opponent. the word "smug" is typically used to describe such an assumption.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Radish posted:The Clintons have always surrounded themselves with incompetent yes men that have impressive resumes despite constantly being wrong. It's why I was super shocked that Mcauliffe turned out to be pretty decent despite me voting for him as a hate vote against the Cooch. He still managed to kneecap Hillary's campaign by letting it slip that, "Oh, she's TOTALLY onboard with TPP, she's just PRETENDING that she isn't to placate the Bernie Bros!" Which was one of the best examples of how terribly-run her campaign was. Holy God, what a shitshow.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
InnercityGriot posted:So-called pragmatism is no longer a useful cudgel if you spend most of the time in the last thirty years losing elections, finally culminating in an embarrassing loss to an illiterate racist boob. The pragmatic vote would have actually been Bernie, because as the phrase goes, he would have Won. So now we're back to exaggeration. 30 years of losing! Can I get 50? 50 over here now 50 over here. Can I get 75? 100 to the poster in the 20 State Strategy hoody
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:56 |
|
|
Condiv posted:nah, it would've been better if she was just never nominated. she's clearly too incompetent to be president Isn't that one of the credentials? It seems like it is now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:27
|
|