|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:What happened to people power to fund elections man, gotta get those birdies out there collecting money right. Why even rely on the dnc? So now you're criticizing the thing you just told me you're for? Are you just hosed in the head or what?
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
white sauce posted:Taking your sick dog to the vet to get healed isn't "hostile" You keep saying that but I don't see any signs of a revolution 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:i think it also has to do with people genuinely not liking hillary clinton and her inability to make herself sound appealing to anyone who isn't a lanyard wearing dipshit Ah yes, I heard she did that thing with the Benghazi.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:do you even know what you're arguing for anymore beyond being mad people to your left exist Answer the question. Why didn't a Bernie like structure raise money for these special elections if they thought they could be converted? Where was the progressive tide in replacing the likes of Price? Or the failing was only the DNC?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:Regardless of whatever problem you might have with Hillary Clinton, talking about how smug she was in comparison to Donald Trump is still a sexist sentiment that should be spread in progressive spaces. Good thing we've got a gender swap study that shows that no, people hate Hillary Clinton's attitude even when she's a man.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Kokoro Wish posted:Good thing we've got a gender swap study that shows that no, people hate Hillary Clinton's attitude even when she's a man. He still managed to become president though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Post moved down by accident
Shammypants fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:You keep saying that but I don't see any signs of a revolution Then you're not paying close attention Vladimir Lenin is polling at higher numbers than any republican with people younger than 40, iirc Change will come slowly, my centrist conservative friend
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:He still managed to become president though. And everyone who isn't enormously wealthy is worse off than before, especially if you have a lot of melanin in your skin, woopsie daisy!
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:Answer the question. Why didn't a Bernie like structure raise money for these special elections if they thought they could be converted? Where was the progressive tide in replacing the likes of Price? Or the failing was only the DNC? they did. for example, in montana, Quist managed to come up with a couple million on the backs of progressives. for some reason, though the DNC decided that they'd prefer to dump five million on Ossoff, rather than spread the wealth. does that concern you, strategically particularly given their stated rationale: "we're worried Ossoff losing will be spun as a rejection of centrism."
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
white sauce posted:Then you're not paying close attention I've never voted before and if I did so during an American election it would be illegal. I'm not that into politics, I'm merely fascinated about broken things. Whenever change might come, it had better come while we still have a planet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:they did. for example, in montana, Quist managed to come up with a couple million on the backs of progressives. Yes, that would be the DNC the progressives are trying and failing to take over, citing a lack of monetary funding.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:Yes because as I said, it will be slow and will be most successful in places like NY or New Mexico/Arizona urban areas where republicans are more vulnerable and progressive candidates have a chance. Nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong with there not being a progressive challenger in GA06 this year with a fat pot of money to support them because it would have failed. if dems are gonna take dirty money they might as well spend it wisely instead of throwing it away on people who've hobnobbed with them in d.c. before, but have no political skills at all
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Yes, that would be the DNC the progressives are trying and failing to take over, citing a lack of monetary funding. the group ostensibly tasked with winning more seats for democrats, refusing to back democrats, on the grounds that they're worried they won't be ideologically pure. fascinating stuff, eh, friends?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:I've never voted before and if I did so during an American election it would be illegal. If you're fascinated with broken things why don't you start with your own brain
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:I'm not that into politics Wow what a shock.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
I answered two posts at once and it didn't make sense In the end Quist was massively outspent by the major political PACs and lobby groups on the right. The support of progressives was tepid at best because the candidate had to go full guns among other things in that region of the country Shammypants fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:Wow what a shock. I'm not alone. 445 pages in and no one has managed to solve the conundrum that is the Democratic party.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:I answered two posts at once and it didn't make sense You wrote something incredibly stupid and wrong to argue against small-donor funding of candidates, something you're supposedly for. Just go the gently caress away.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
white sauce posted:If you're fascinated with broken things why don't you start with your own brain Lmao
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
white sauce posted:If you're fascinated with broken things why don't you start with your own brain Nah, too close for comfort.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:You wrote something incredibly stupid and wrong to argue against small-donor funding of candidates, something you're supposedly for. Just go the gently caress away. I did, and I will admit the error (although my point was those donations were ineffective in Missouri, not that they shouldn't be the strategy going forward), but I won't be run out like everyone else who may disagree in this thread. Not like the time I dared to disagree about global conspiracies in the Bernie thread and got probated for being "unchill" Shammypants fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:I did, and I will admit the error, but I won't be run out like everyone else who may disagree in this thread. Not like the time I dared to disagree about global conspiracies in the Bernie thread and got probated for being "unchill" If you're going to stay, at least be honest. If you actually supported the democrats going left like you claim, you wouldn't be making up poo poo to prove that it won't work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:I'm not alone. 445 pages in and no one has managed to solve the conundrum that is the Democratic party. We actually do have a pretty good solution. It's the Sanders/Warren/Ellison wing of the party's solution. The problem, of course, is that centrist pearl-clutchers won't hand over the reins of power over the party's direction, because they're too egotistical to acknowledge how bad they are at winning elections.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:If you're going to stay, at least be honest. If you actually supported the democrats going left like you claim, you wouldn't be making up poo poo to prove that it won't work. I didn't make anything up in that post. All things considered Missouri was unwinnable and despite the opponent literally attacking a reporter, it was lost. Progressive micro funding to make inroads into congress will happen but not in Missouri and not in Georgia specials. Again, there's nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean absolute failure. The dnc couldn't help there and the progressive tide wasn't going to do it either
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:I didn't make anything up in that post. All things considered Missouri was unwinnable and despite the opponent literally attacking a reporter, it was lost. Progressive micro funding to make inroads into congress will happen but not in Missouri and not in Georgia specials. Again, there's nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean absolute failure. The dnc couldn't help there and the progressive tide wasn't going to do it either  Unfortunately nobody can see the post to see what bullshit this is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
Avirosb posted:Ah yes, I heard she did that thing with the Benghazi. Pretty sure that isn't what I said
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:The context was a conversation where you were asking "where were the small donations from the people during these elections?" They were there, the infrastructure of the democrat party wasn't. You tried to claim the reverse in that post and now you're walking it back because it reveals what you actually think about everything that is going on. Just go away if you can't even be honest. So let's get back on track. Mainly small donations went to an election that was expected to be a loss and ended up a loss. Meanwhile in Georgia the dnc spent a bunch on an election that was supposed to be a loss ended up a loss. Are we seeing a pattern? I don't have any problems with the outcomes in general because so many congressional seats fall within 7% margin of victory from the previous elections and can be won. Others seem to look at these events as massive failures. Shammypants fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
missouri. yes. xyrloc you might want to take a break here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:I'll tell them, I mixed up in a spreadsheet of funding the names of DNC and GOP congressional campaign groups. Am I supposed to be embarrassed that I am human and made a mistake? The idea that most funding came from the dnc was wrong due to the error but that the spending for his opponent was vastly superior and reached a broadly conservative audience better was not. The context was a conversation where you were asking "where were the small donations from the people during these elections?" They were there in montana, the infrastructure of the democrat party wasn't. You tried to claim the reverse in that post and now you're walking it back because it reveals what you actually think about everything that is going on. Just go away if you can't even be honest.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:I didn't make anything up in that post. All things considered Missouri was unwinnable and despite the opponent literally attacking a reporter, it was lost. Progressive micro funding to make inroads into congress will happen but not in Missouri and not in Georgia specials. Again, there's nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean absolute failure. The dnc couldn't help there and the progressive tide wasn't going to do it either Montana. The state was Montana. Please get it right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
Lol somehow I didn't even notice that until now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:Advocate for violent revolution, stay and chat. Mix up two numbers, gotta go! :p you are repeatedly getting the most basic facts possible under discussion wrong, friend. maybe take a breather, come back when you've learned the first thing about the subjects of conversation?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:you are repeatedly getting the most basic facts possible under discussion wrong, friend. maybe take a breather, come back when you've learned the first thing about the subjects of conversation? I'll continue posting thanks. Triangle Shirt Factotum posted:Montana. The state was Montana. Please get it right. Yep that one. Gods country. City of brotherly love. Shammypants fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
montsouri was unwinnable. you idiots prove me wrong 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Stop editing your posts a hundred times. Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
"I'll continue posting thanks" is what jeffersonclay used to say  RIP
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
the one that earlier you insisted did not exist, yes
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:Stop editing your posts a hundred times. Jesus. I'm on mobile. You should appreciate the effort with the bad connection and all. Ze Pollack posted:the one that earlier you insisted did not exist, yes Well the progressive effort failed so can we address that or do we want to create distractions? It clearly doesn't mean progressive fundraising and campaigning won't work just because that campaign failed? So how is that the message from Georgia for the DNC? Some elections are just not winnable in a given context but you lick your chops and move on Shammypants fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:Stop editing your posts a hundred times. Jesus. Why do you re-read old posts tho?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:44
|
|
