|
Condiv posted:are people really still trying to defend clinton's iraq war vote? hopefully not? i'm just saying that "yeah i voted for this lovely unjust thing but i swear it was because of a compromise" is something that the left should be against, whether it's sanders or clinton or anyone else.
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 12:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:39 |
|
|
botany posted:hopefully not? i'm just saying that "yeah i voted for this lovely unjust thing but i swear it was because of a compromise" is something that the left should be against, whether it's sanders or clinton or anyone else. but clinton's compromise was really idiotic and never bore fruit? like i can understand being bipartisan if you actually get something out of it, but p much every time the dems have tried it with repubs in recent memory they don't actually get what they want. one of the most recent examples being voting for russian and iran sanctions, with trump refusing to implement the russian sanctions. at least sanders got vawa out of his compromise...
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 12:51
|
|
|
botany posted:yes, and the recommendation following the report was to lower sentencing for crack cocaine users. cue sanders: Yes, and as I said: He voted against overturning the recommendation, most Democrats voted alongside Republicans who introduced a bill to dismiss it. No need to make things up when his record isn't perfect. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 12:57 on Oct 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 12:52
|
|
|
Condiv posted:but clinton's compromise was really idiotic and never bore fruit? like i can understand being bipartisan if you actually get something out of it, but p much every time the dems have tried it with repubs in recent memory they don't actually get what they want. one of the most recent examples being voting for russian and iran sanctions, with trump refusing to implement the russian sanctions. at least sanders got vawa out of his compromise... he still voted for the tough-on-crime bill. he still wanted harsher sentences for powder cocaine users. i'm not making excuses for clinton here, i'm pointing out that sanders isn't the ideal politician either, yet i never see people here attack him for voting to put more black people in jail, or his lovely views on gun control, or any of the other things you can legitimately criticize him for. if you're going to attack politicians for their record, be intellectually consistent about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 12:59
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Yes, and as I said: He voted against overturning the recommendation, most Democrats voted alongside Republicans who introduced a bill to dismiss it. what am i making up? i've quoted the things i talked about.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:00
|
|
|
"He voted for the TOC bill!!" is always the funniest thing, just because it's always apparent to literally everyone that the person spouting it would instead be going on about how Bernie hates women and wants their husbands to be able to beat them with impunity if he'd voted against it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:03
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:"He voted for the TOC bill!!" is always the funniest thing, just because it's always apparent to literally everyone that the person spouting it would instead be going on about how Bernie hates women and wants their husbands to be able to beat them with impunity if he'd voted against it. uh, what no the crime bill was a bad bill. about a third of dems voted against it, and they were on the right side. that's pretty much it  like, do you think i'm accusing maxine waters of being a dirty woman hater or something?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:07
|
|
|
botany posted:he still voted for the tough-on-crime bill. he still wanted harsher sentences for powder cocaine users. i'm not making excuses for clinton here, i'm pointing out that sanders isn't the ideal politician either, yet i never see people here attack him for voting to put more black people in jail, or his lovely views on gun control, or any of the other things you can legitimately criticize him for. if you're going to attack politicians for their record, be intellectually consistent about it. of course he's not the ideal politician, such a thing doesn't exist. no politician is going to 100% agree with me, or you, or anyone. the attacks on sanders are less frequent because he's much closer to the ideal than hillary clinton, who's still a leading figure of our party despite being very far from ideal. we want the party to move away from the clinton side of things and towards (or even further left than) the sanders side of things. you guys pull your punches wrt hillary cause you want the national discourse to shift more towards hillary than trump. and that's somewhat understandable. but we had a person slightly to the left of hillary in office for 8 years and it did no good and people proceeded to pretend that was leftist enough. so we want the discourse to shift way further left than that, and that's why we're not pulling punches when it comes to "bad dems" anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:18
|
|
|
Condiv posted:of course he's not the ideal politician, such a thing doesn't exist. no politician is going to 100% agree with me, or you, or anyone. the attacks on sanders are less frequent because he's much closer to the ideal than hillary clinton, who's still a leading figure of our party despite being very far from ideal. we want the party to move away from the clinton side of things and towards (or even further left than) the sanders side of things. i can't speak for anyone else, but that's not what i'm doing. i'm posting here because, as i've said before, i'm not convinced you're genuine about policy. people who are trying to push policy generally are speaking about issues rather than people. the amount of poo poo clinton receives is disproportionate to how much she still matters. (it's also disproportionate to how bad her policies are in comparison to other influential dems.) when i'm mad about the prison system, or worker's rights, or anything else, i post about those things. it's people like majorian or that absolute loving moron newforumssoftware who can't talk about politics without getting a dig at clinton in. as i've said before, it stops looking genuine after a while.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:33
|
|
|
I think that if there is a law that makes cocaine illegal, the version that is used by rich and white people should be just as illegal as the one used by poor and black people If only because then it's more likely to get repealed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:37
|
|
|
"This person who has spread abject misery to all corners of the globe, ending and ruining the lives of millions, is definitely receiving a disproportionate amount of criticism over her terrible character and politics."
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:Yeah but that's not what you're doing. You're pissing on each other on a dead gay forum and no one who has this debate listens at all to anyone but the voice in their own head, and you've all been doing it for almost a loving year now. I think these people are my favorite. So offended by arguments that they sniff around in D&D like a badger looking for anyone who cares too much about anything swinging in to remind everyone that there posts could be doing more if only they were as wise as forums user LITERALLY MY FETISH
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
botany posted:i can't speak for anyone else, but that's not what i'm doing. i'm posting here because, as i've said before, i'm not convinced you're genuine about policy. people who are trying to push policy generally are speaking about issues rather than people. the amount of poo poo clinton receives is disproportionate to how much she still matters. (it's also disproportionate to how bad her policies are in comparison to other influential dems.) when i'm mad about the prison system, or worker's rights, or anything else, i post about those things. it's people like majorian or that absolute loving moron newforumssoftware who can't talk about politics without getting a dig at clinton in. as i've said before, it stops looking genuine after a while. we speak about people because there's a wing of the democratic party that is a major roadblock on these issues and more, and we can't make any progress on these issues until people who pretend to care about them have much less influence in the party. there's a constant assumption that the dems are good or even passable on these issues and discussion of people who are not is to point out that, no, there are a lot of dems that are bad on these issues. i've railed against rahm emmanuel in the past because he's poo poo on social justice, and you guys don't seem to whine about or disagree with that. but when it comes to the clintons you reflexively complain that we're being too harsh for some reason. edit: i've also brought up how anti-homeless "democrats" in the city leadership in texas are, and nobody cried tears about that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
botany posted:it's people like majorian or that absolute loving moron newforumssoftware who can't talk about politics without getting a dig at clinton in. as i've said before, it stops looking genuine after a while. you know what else isn't geniune? liberals hand-wringing about actually doing anything for the poor. if only we were wise enough to spend our posts writing subpar bernie fanfiction
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
as a representative of the clan bernie, we are willing to decrease our hillary shitposts by up to 10% over a period of two weeks, in exchange for an equivalent decrease in whataboutism, pearl-clutching, ~purity test~ whining and other such emissions
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
botany posted:i can't speak for anyone else, but that's not what i'm doing. i'm posting here because, as i've said before, i'm not convinced you're genuine about policy. Who the gently caress are you to question someone's motives likes this? Are you psychic now?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 15:23
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:as a representative of the clan bernie, we are willing to decrease our hillary shitposts by up to 10% over a period of two weeks, in exchange for an equivalent decrease in whataboutism, pearl-clutching, ~purity test~ whining and other such emissions Make it 60% and we will come to the table to negotiate. We also want a clause statng that Bernie would have lost. Our Union rep will be waiting for your response.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Who the gently caress are you to question someone's motives likes this? Are you psychic now? You guys question my motivation on a weekly basis.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:You guys question my motivation on a weekly basis. 11 months of communal fart huffing opens your third eye.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 15:27
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:You guys question my motivation on a weekly basis. No, there's a difference, we believe that you truly do believe what you're saying, we just disagree with you on a fundamental level and are trying to get you to change. ETA: I have no idea what made you switch from "someone I had a productive discussion with and agree on 99% of our political goals" to "I'm going to compare Internet Leftists I don't like to Nazis." but holy gently caress is it not a good look my dude. WampaLord fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Oct 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
6...60%!? *throws blackberry* YOU'RE INSANE
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 15:34
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Make it 60% and we will come to the table to negotiate. We also want a clause statng that Bernie would have lost. Our Union rep will be waiting for your response. It's a trick, there is no way bad dems would ever permit a union to exist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:You guys question my motivation on a weekly basis. Who's questioning your motivation? It's well understood that you'll value protecting your low tax rates above all else, to the point where you'll unironically talk about "communist nazis"
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
botany posted:it's people like majorian or that absolute loving moron newforumssoftware who can't talk about politics without getting a dig at clinton in. That's just complete horseshit. I do criticize her remaining diehard supporters fairly often, but that's because they still hold a disproportionate degree of power in the Democratic Party leadership. But I've laid off of Clinton personally quite a bit over the past month or so, and even before that, I steered clear of using sexist language or engaging in conspiracy theorizing. If you can find a recent example of me making an unfair criticism of her personally, show it to me, because at this moment, you just seem to be blatantly projecting. Heck Yes! Loam! posted:You guys question my motivation on a weekly basis. We would probably wouldn't do it if you didn't so frequently question our motivations and declare that you hate the left/are the left's enemy/whatever. Majorian fucked around with this message at 16:53 on Oct 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 16:47
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Who the gently caress are you to question someone's motives likes this? Are you psychic now? Majorian posted:We would probably wouldn't do it if you didn't so frequently question our motivations and declare that you hate the left/are the left's enemy/whatever. WampaLord posted:No, there's a difference, we believe that you truly do believe what you're saying, we just disagree with you on a fundamental level and are trying to get you to change.  WampaLord posted:ETA: I have no idea what made you switch from "someone I had a productive discussion with and agree on 99% of our political goals" to "I'm going to compare Internet Leftists I don't like to Nazis." but holy gently caress is it not a good look my dude. This was in direct reference to a leftist poster that advocated for the "kristallnachting" of the DNC, so yes, a nazi comparison is totally legitimate. Maybe don't align yourself with people who advocate for such things, and don't react so negatively when things like it are called out?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:This was in direct reference to a leftist poster that advocated for the "kristallnachting" of the DNC, so yes, a nazi comparison is totally legitimate. Maybe don't align yourself with people who advocate for such things, and don't react so negatively when things like it are called out? Feel free to find a quote of me defending the edited post in question. Oh wait, you won't find that, because I never did. poo poo, I don't even read the Trump thread anymore because what's the loving point? "Trump did bad thing" is all it is now. And by the way, you're the one bitching anytime we criticize a centrist, I don't give a gently caress that a dumb leftist said a dumb thing, it's not going to make me suddenly care about people less. I can readily admit that many leftists are dumb, but at least their dumb heart is in the right place. Y'all centrists constantly are asking "Why are you yelling at us, when the GOP is the bad guy?" but the GOP ain't here and it's much much much more frustrating to see so called "Democrats" have a startling lack of empathy. E: VVV I honestly thought you and I had a productive discussion at one point that made you realize the error of some of your ways, but you've fully dug in now to "I'm a centrist and I oppose leftists" as your main belief and literally nothing will snap you out of it. 
WampaLord fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Oct 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Feel free to find a quote of me defending the edited post in question. Oh wait, you won't find that, because I never did. poo poo, I don't even read the Trump thread anymore because what's the loving point? "Trump did bad thing" is all it is now. Oh god you're so close to understanding something. WampaLord posted:Y'all centrists constantly are asking "Why are you yelling at us, when the GOP is the bad guy?" but the GOP ain't here and it's much much much more frustrating to see so called "Democrats" have a startling lack of empathy. and you lost it. We have had productive discussions in the past, but you haven't changed my opinion of your peers. I have totally been corrected on some things that are important by leftist in other threads and this one, but you have yet to examine your end of the discussion and how it may be part of the problem. I do not oppose leftist goals, i oppose people on the internet spouting pointless venom, who also have literally no self awareness. Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Oct 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Oh god you're so close to understanding something. you have no ideology, only a tribal affiliation this is unfortunate
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:you have no ideology, only a tribal affiliation 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:We have had productive discussions in the past, but you haven't changed my opinion of your peers. This is an impossible task. How can I possibly change your opinion of people I have no control over? It's also not my goal in any way. I just want you to realize that your line of thinking led you to doing dumb poo poo like defending Jeff Bezos because you snapped at seeing a Condiv post and lost all rational thought, then you have the nerve to call out other people for "spitting venom"
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:We have had productive discussions in the past, but you haven't changed my opinion of your peers. I have totally been corrected on some things that are important by leftist in other threads and this one, but you have yet to examine your end of the discussion and how it may be part of the problem. I do not oppose leftist goals, i oppose people on the internet spouting pointless venom, who also have literally no self awareness. are these the aforementioned fake leftist nazis?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:This is an impossible task. How can I possibly change your opinion of people I have no control over? I've never claimed to not be rolling around in the mud with you guys. I generally also try to admit my mistakes when i make them. All I ask is the same in return. I've even admitted to poor knee-jerk response like the one you are referring to. ALso, if changing people's opinions or informing your own isn't your goal here, what is it? Condiv posted:are these the aforementioned fake leftist nazis? Yes, the people who unironically spout the same things as literal nazis are not actual leftists. They just play them on the internet. I have yet to meet someone that screamed about hillary as much as you people to at an actual DSA event.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Yes, the people who unironically spout the same things as literal nazis are not actual leftists. They just play them on the internet. I have yet to meet someone that screamed about hillary as much as you people to at an actual DSA event. oh? i scream the same things as nazis? i don't remember calling for black people to be purged from the USA... or is saying that bezos is going to turn wapo into a hellzone something a nazi would say?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:ALso, if changing people's opinions or informing your own isn't your goal here, what is it? I was trying to change your opinion, but not by defending any random leftist that you're mad at. It's literally an impossible task, I'm not going to speak for other people, I can only speak for myself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
maybe you think saying prison labor is slave labor is something a nazi would say? but i'm p sure this southern sheriff would sympathize with nazis and white supremacists, and he seems to think keeping people in prison needlessly to benefit from their labor is peachy! https://twitter.com/ShaunKing/status/918431668658212865
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Yes, the people who unironically spout the same things as literal nazis are not actual leftists. They just play them on the internet. I have yet to meet someone that screamed about hillary as much as you people to at an actual DSA event. the man denying tribalism starts screaming about "you people" delicious
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
Condiv posted:oh? i scream the same things as nazis? i don't remember calling for black people to be purged from the USA... You seem to be reacting harshly to my condemnation of nazis. WampaLord posted:I was trying to change your opinion, but not by defending any random leftist that you're mad at. It's literally an impossible task, I'm not going to speak for other people, I can only speak for myself. You seem to have no problem speaking for all "centrists"
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:You seem to be reacting harshly to my condemnation of nazis. am i one of the leftist nazis? who are these leftist nazis?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
there is no shortage of ostensible leftists who have confused a list of people they're allowed to hate for an ideology. fortunately, they can be taught to channel those energies in a useful direction- to advocate FOR things instead of being trapped in the endless, lovely cycle of only being against the hated other. the centrists whose pale simulacrum of an ideology consists, in its entirety, of "please don't hurt suburban republicans' feelings," on the other hand? you have seen where that road leads, friend, and his name is JeffersonClay. believe in something more than your petty hatreds. believe that Black Lives Matter exists as something more than something to photoshop Hillary Clinton's head onto. believe in trying to accomplish something, and seek out methods to accomplish that goal. it will dramatically reduce the amount of your time you are obliged to spend trying to explain why Hillary Clinton owning slaves is good, actually.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:39 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:This was in direct reference to a leftist poster that advocated for the "kristallnachting" of the DNC, so yes, a nazi comparison is totally legitimate. Of him personally? Sure, knock yourself out - call him a Nazi all you like. Of the left in general, though? That's not fair, and you know it. Yet that is the comparison you made. As someone who's the grandson of a concentration camp survivor, I take exception to that, and it makes me think of you as less of a good-faith participant in this conversation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:58
|
|