|
Sometimes you have to be a bigot to fight bigger bigots.
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 12:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 04:26 |
|
|
I voted for Perriello in the primary and I'm upset with Northam's comments but I'm still going to vote for him this Tuesday. There's too much at stake, especially with a likely republican controlled general assembly, for a poo poo like Gillespie to win and wreak havoc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 14:28
|
|
|
Majorian posted:This is some really spurious logic for why people shouldn't care about a major statewide race, particularly as it demonstrates how little the Democratic Party has learned from 2016. Also, I used to live in Virginia, and a lot of people who are very dear to me still live there. Your whole assumption that people can't be doing productive poo poo and criticizing the Democratic Party at the same time is really insulting. That's not really what I wanted to convey but I see that now. If it helps, my original comment is essentially directed entirely at Kilroy. Though I do admit that I'm frustrated with USPOL basically being Dems Bad thread 2.0 which was unreadable in its unrelenting cynicism and edginess. The facts are the race is between two people. It sucks that Northam turned out the way he did, but that doesn't mean people have the luxury to just not vote for him because the alternative is just that much worse. For someone like Kilroy to denigrate Your Fancy Boy for internalizing the fact and then working to get him elected anyway because of the reality is just infuriating. Boon fucked around with this message at 14:34 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
Whooping Crabs posted:I voted for Perriello in the primary and I'm upset with Northam's comments but I'm still going to vote for him this Tuesday. There's too much at stake, especially with a likely republican controlled general assembly, for a poo poo like Gillespie to win and wreak havoc. I did as well and this is where I'm at. It's loving depressing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
Dems are never going to learn that they need to stop playing politics on the GOP’s terms. It’s embarrassing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
Radish posted:I did as well and this is where I'm at. It's loving depressing. Do it for the delegates and dream of Danica Roem 2021. If nothing else, picking up seats will add some really progressive people to the bench for the future.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Dems are never going to learn that they need to stop playing politics on the GOP’s terms. It’s embarrassing. While this is true, losing (and the accompanying pain it'd cause the people who get hosed over by yet another Trumpist) wouldn't teach them that lesson either. I can't go in for accelerationism, so the school of thought that says the Democratic Party should just collapse to nothing so a new party can take its place really doesn't appeal to me. The decades of nearly-unchallenged Trump/GOP rule that would cause just aren't worth it for the vague hope that maybe a true labor party would rise from the ashes some day. I'm also pretty pessimistic about the US in general, though, and I'm pretty sure whatever rose to replace a destroyed Democratic Party would just be further to the right in some very key ways than the party we already have. Nothing I've ever seen convinces me that we wouldn't just be trading down.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 14:46
|
|
|
Boon posted:but that doesn't mean people have the luxury to just not vote for him because the alternative is just that much worse. We literally do. I didn't vote for HRC and I'm super glad now! I wish I'd stuck to my guns on Northam and absolutely will next time around. You can call it luxury, I'll call it my democratic right. The LOTE strategy is an abysmal failure from where I'm sitting. *ninja edit* and yes I voted for Periello in the primary
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:If a candidate sends a signal to racists and isn't punished for it, instead receiving support anyway, what is the mechanism for removing racists from the gov again? Well, if the other candidate is more consistently racist and wins, the usual lesson almost everyone takes from this is “well, I guess we can’t count on more ideological liberals. We have to be more racist.” You can rag on evangelicals all you want for voting for people like Trump and Hastert, but those voters are getting what they want because they hold their nose and vote. What have they gotten in return? Control of the White House for 12 of the past 22 years. Control of the House for 18 out of the last 22 years and most of the presidential terms since 1980. They have had a long-lasting majority block of justices in the Supreme Court to support their anti-abortion crusade and many years in control of the Justice Department to prioritize what discrimnation, if any, gets punished. I’ve found that you get more accountability when you can point out that “you have this because of me” rather than saying “you would have had this if I showed up.”
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:Well, if the other candidate is more consistently racist and wins, the usual lesson almost everyone takes from this is “well, I guess we can’t count on more ideological liberals. We have to be more racist.” And what has LOTE gotten leftists in the USA? A crooked HRC who is further right than most Rs of 20 years ago. Truly a winning strategy for moving the overton window leftward. *MAYBE* and you'll have to bear with me because I realize this is a massive stretch... the centrists should have believed the polls showing HRC's chances, believed the meteoric rise of Sanders (and seen it wasn't working because of a rockin bod or charisma as a dump stat) and stop making decisions based on what corporate donors and the wealthy want? I know it's outrageous but it just might work. We have a plethora of input data to figure out what the populace wants in a candidate beyond just "oops our slightly less racist centrist lost to a right wing ultra racist, better get even more racist!" poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 14:57 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 14:53
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:*MAYBE* and you'll have to bear with me because I realize this is a massive stretch... the centrists should have believed the polls showing HRC's chances, believed the meteoric rise of Sanders (and seen it wasn't working because of a rockin bod or charisma as a dump stat) and stop making decisions based on what corporate donors and the wealthy want? I know it's outrageous but it just might work. I don't think anyone in this thread is going to argue that the Democrats are doing the right thing right now. All we're saying is that the alternative to voting for Democrats right now is ceding even more power to the GOP, and a lot of us don't think that's worth it for the vague hope that either the Democrats are going to magically reconfigure themselves into a leftist party, or that they'll crumble and be replaced by one, especially given the real world horrors that would happen in the mean time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:And what has LOTE gotten leftists in the USA? A crooked HRC who is further right than most Rs of 20 years ago. Truly a winning strategy for moving the overton window leftward. I mean, start the revolution or don’t, right? What the left wants requires a new party or a takeover of the current one. Both options will take years/decades to come to fruition, and it’s a worthwhile cause. Both outcomes lead to better candidates more aligned with working people. That said, the polls open in 91 hours. Insisting Dems Bad neither invalidates GOP Worse nor advances Left Good. So you play the hand you’re dealt or you help life get tangibly worse for millions of people. When the election ends, we build new candidates. Better ones. Hopefully from progressives on a winning streak. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:Well, if the other candidate is more consistently racist and wins, the usual lesson almost everyone takes from this is “well, I guess we can’t count on more ideological liberals. We have to be more racist.” Fundamentalist dingbats started flocking to the Republican party only when the Republicans start appealing to segregationists and not before. Abortion is the public-facing evangelical issue but they were always motivated by racism and they couldn't care less about politics until 1972 when Republicans deliberately went out and appealed to them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
Harrow posted:I don't think anyone in this thread is going to argue that the Democrats are doing the right thing right now. All we're saying is that the alternative to voting for Democrats right now is ceding even more power to the GOP, and a lot of us don't think that's worth it for the vague hope that either the Democrats are going to magically reconfigure themselves into a leftist party, or that they'll crumble and be replaced by one, especially given the real world horrors that would happen in the mean time. I agree. I don’t like what Northam just did and it shows a lack of good political instincts, but I don’t see how Virginia under Gillespie for the next 4 years helps anyone.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:03
|
|
|
Harrow posted:I don't think anyone in this thread is going to argue that the Democrats are doing the right thing right now. All we're saying is that the alternative to voting for Democrats right now is ceding even more power to the GOP, and a lot of us don't think that's worth it for the vague hope that either the Democrats are going to magically reconfigure themselves into a leftist party, or that they'll crumble and be replaced by one, especially given the real world horrors that would happen in the mean time. Do you (or anyone) honestly believe there is a single argument or logic chain that hasn't been used like a baseball bat to hate-bash any leftist who dares to appose the DNC as king/queen maker? I don't give a poo poo. I won't vote for a war hawk, I won't vote for a racist, full stop. You can keep trying in futility to bully pacifists into accepting these turd sandwiches, or you can maybe try to convince some of your centrist friends they aren't nearly radical enough. Only one of the two groups is actually dragging their knuckles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
Here's another thing: there is no candidate to Northam's left currently in the race. There's no alternate person to vote for to "send a message." If there was, and a ton of people voted for that candidate and Northam lost, maybe that'd be a message to the Democrats that there's a real desire for more leftist candidates. But as it is now, there's no real way to send that message in this particular election. I should clarify that I still don't think I'd want to cast that vote--for now, when a general election rolls around, I'm going to vote for the candidate most likely to beat the Trumpist candidate, even if there's another candidate I'd rather see win. Stemming the GOP tide is more important to me right now. I hope that won't always have to be the case.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:A crooked HRC who is further right than most Rs of 20 years ago. This is why I can't take your post seriously. If your fundamental argumeent is wrong on it's premise (24 years ago Hillary was leading a federal push for UHC) then what are the chances your conclusions are worth a drat? I get that you're mad that Dems don't represent you but at least argue in the facts. The mechanism for moving the party is the primary, not the general. If you're finding yourself all sour grapes in the general then you're complicit in the misery the GOP unleashes. Boon fucked around with this message at 15:08 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
Power_of_the_glory posted:Sometimes you have to be a bigot to fight bigger bigots. No. gently caress off Mr Spencer and take your "peaceful ethnic cleansing" with you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:09
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Do you (or anyone) honestly believe there is a single argument or logic chain that hasn't been used like a baseball bat to hate-bash any leftist who dares to appose the DNC as king/queen maker? You're right. You didn't logic yourself into the position you're in, and you won't logic yourself out. Trying to argue against emotionally charged positions merely entrenches them. And I'm guilty of this as well; I've got plenty of logical arguments for my position but at heart it's a deeply emotional one based on my total abhorrence of the idea of being governed by a member, any member, of the modern republican party. That's why even though it's important to clear the air and have those arguments, I'm afraid that we aren't capable of having them in a way that will actually help.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:I mean, start the revolution or don’t, right? Ok, so a racist R winning tells the DNC that their candidate wasn't racist enough. BUT ALSO A racist light winning under the D party is in no way a message that that's a winning strategy that can be continued forward with. These don't seem like contradictory points? Also I can just as easily posit that centrists and compromising leftists are why life is tangibly worse for millions of people. With a bit more conviction we could have had a Sander's presidency or something even better even earlier. Instead the Northam race could easily be a repeat of HRC's loss despite a massively stacked deck in her favor. But nice to know the game is still "blame leftists for the wins of the right", that worked a treat in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Do you (or anyone) honestly believe there is a single argument or logic chain that hasn't been used like a baseball bat to hate-bash any leftist who dares to appose the DNC as king/queen maker? No, I don't, but I also don't intend to "hate-bash" any leftists because, in general, I agree with leftists on policy. Ultimately I think we want the same thing for the country in the long term and what we disagree on is what to do in the short term. poopinmymouth posted:I don't give a poo poo. I won't vote for a war hawk, I won't vote for a racist, full stop. You can keep trying in futility to bully pacifists into accepting these turd sandwiches, or you can maybe try to convince some of your centrist friends they aren't nearly radical enough. Only one of the two groups is actually dragging their knuckles. I do try. I campaigned for Bernie Sanders here in Wisconsin back in the primary and I fully intend to do the same for any leftist candidate who runs near me in the future. But I also think there's a lot of value in slowing the Trump tide, enough so that I'm willing to vote for candidates I'd never support in a primary if they're the best way to do that. I'm sorry if "please consider that elections have consequences to real people" comes across as bullying or hate-bashing, I truly don't intend it that way, but at the same time, I am an extremely firm believer in the idea that the "lesser evil" really is better than the greater one. Every time. Let's say Wisconsin ends up in this same position in 2018: Scott Walker versus a centrist Democrat who makes one too many lurches to the right. And let's say that, for some reason, my choosing not to vote actually would send a clear message that the reason I'm not voting is because the Democratic candidate doesn't represent me or what I want for the country long-term. I still wouldn't do it, because I've seen what years of Scott Walker as governor (and total Republican control) have done to this state, and I'll take a lovely compromise if it means ending those years. That probably makes me a centrist of some variety or another, and while that's genuinely horrifying to consider, I've made my decision.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Here's a steaming hot take: it's a-okay to go murder brown people to pay for college, but woe betide the armchair leftist who wanders into USPOL and calls a racist rear end in a top hat candidate for governor a racist rear end in a top hat. No amount of activist street cred will save you from the shitstorm coming your way, should you dare speak your mind in an insufficiently deferential tone. Could you maybe avoid spitting on veterans when they get off the bus, please?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
Part of me wants to nominate the kind of candidate that people like poopinmymouth want (which means ignoring what we have assumed about what makes a winning candidate). If the person wins, that’d be awesome. If they lose, at least we’d know what works, right? More data for the data set would be the silver lining. That assumes that people wouldn’t just chalk failures up to the system being “rigged,” which might be a terrible assumption to make. Brony Car fucked around with this message at 15:16 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
As someone who doesn't live in VA, I am very well aware that my calculus is different from goons who live there. But I sincerely don't know what is the worst outcome from a national perspective: the full trumpist republican candidate winning, or the trump light version of the democrat winning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:16
|
|
|
We have talked about this before, Northram is pretty much the perfect example of what's wrong with the Democratic party right now as far as I can determine. The thing is the Dems have coasted on keeping the outright evil out of office for 40 years now, but for many people they don't have the luxury of withdrawing support; their lives are on the line. We have ways to change this, I have come around personally to thinking that Justice Democrats are a good lever to start pulling on hard, as well as supporting the ESA, and if the AFLCIO does as that article indicates theyre considering I'll support that effort too. Our Revolution seems to be taking correct actions as well. I know it's frustrating and after so many years of watching the unjust and corporatist members of the party rule everything for so long its easy to give into nihlism and say to yourself "At least I maintained my principles even if these slimebags can't" but it doesn't help. Your actions need to be singularly for everyone, you must be willing to consider the possibility that you cannot be perfect in this life, no one is going to examine your principles closely enough and then declare out that sorry you haven't stored enough political capital to pass this karma check, you can't have a more just world. Northram is a microcosm of the 2016 national election all over again, he never should have been the nominee from the party of the people and justice. The party is not those things yet but we can make it so. From what I understand VA is a single term governor anyway? So we don't get a chance to primary him as we should. Look, I'm not trying to say anyone is without cause or right to withdraw their support of Northram, just to consider for the future what your 10, 20 and 30 year political goals are and how do we get there? Make sure before this election goes down just how badly Northram has screwed up because if that message isn't sent first the establishment reaction will be, as it always has," we didn't convince enough republicans to appeal to their better angels and vote for us!" with a side portion of "This is the left's fault for being unreasonable!" The scorpion is capitalism and the frog keeps blaming the water for hurting it. Brony Car posted:Part of me wants to nominate the kind of candidate that people like poopinmymouth want (which means ignoring what we have assumed about what makes a winning candidate). If the person wins, that’d be awesome. If they lose, at least we’d know what works, right? We have 40 years of "centrist" triangulation data. The dems have decided that if labor and equality voters don't automatically donate their votes theyre traitors to the cause, ironically. Because they seem to think the cause is don't disrupt Martha's Vineyard. RuanGacho fucked around with this message at 15:20 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
How many states have a Working Families Party-like option in the US? That’s how I have been trying to show where I want mainstream Democrats to go during elections.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
Boon posted:That's not really what I wanted to convey but I see that now. If it helps, my original comment is essentially directed entirely at Kilroy. Though I do admit that I'm frustrated with USPOL basically being Dems Bad thread 2.0 which was unreadable in its unrelenting cynicism and edginess. Far-fetched, I know, but stay with me guys... maybe politicians lie to attract undecided voters in the center?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:It's also likely, and this is key, that Northam isn't as racist as he's letting on, this is campaign bullshit and when push comes to shove, won't sign a bill banning sanctuary cities. When you make a dumb racist lie that loses you voters and gains you no new ones, that's a loving stupid way to lie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:When you make a dumb racist lie that loses you voters and gains you no new ones, that's a loving stupid way to lie. I didn't accuse him of being GOOD at this. From the looks of it, he was confronted with some bullshit and wanted to appear "reasonable" to avoid a bad right-wing sound byte... when he should be ignoring right-wing bullshit entirely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:How many states have a Working Families Party-like option in the US? That’s how I have been trying to show where I want mainstream Democrats to go during elections. Consider the Justice Democrats, they seem to have the right of it. RuanGacho fucked around with this message at 15:24 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Ok, so a racist R winning tells the DNC that their candidate wasn't racist enough. I’m not playing that game, friend. I’m not a fan of non-voters is all. There’s plenty of progressive people to vote for that aren’t Northam, after all, and there seems to be this insistence on pulling the VA race into the macro Dems-are-a-waste narrative. We had a more leftist candidate, and he lost the primary by 60,000 votes. It wasn’t close. Perriello then turned around and endorsed Northam, because general elections work under the presumed question of the best available candidate. He didn’t run as an independent, but instead showed up at the very places that endorsed him and told them to fight for Northam. Again, what you want is going to take a very long time, and it’s a worthy undertaking. I want you to win. I want better candidates than I’ve got. If people put the work in, i think you’ll get those better candidates.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
My life will hopefully be one of no notoriety because the just world I devote my life to, that I crave to carve out in the future will be taken for granted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:27
|
|
|
So if I'm required to vote for the lesser evil, what about my time, what about my money? Campaigns need resources in order to succeed. If a terrible candidate, by virtue of being less terrible than the alternative, has a divine right to my vote, does that also entitle them to my labor and the contents of my wallet?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:We have 40 years of "centrist" triangulation data. The dems have decided that if labor and equality voters don't automatically donate their votes theyre traitors to the cause, ironically. Because they seem to think the cause is don't disrupt Martha's Vineyard. Why do you think triangulation happened in the first place, though? Why was the Clinton style popular? Why did Carter and McGovern and Mondale all get blown out? I agree that we have to move beyond the old Dick Morris way of thinking, but triangulation happened because of how Americans were thinking and voting and that’s always going to have to be taken into account when deciding on a new direction and making it a successful one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:Far-fetched, I know, but stay with me guys... maybe politicians lie to attract undecided voters in the center? Looks at over 1000 lost seats and a Presidency given over to an orange clown-shoe How's that tactic working out then?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
Kokoro Wish posted:Looks at over 1000 lost seats and a Presidency given over to an orange clown-shoe Great for Republicans...  Well, combined with the rampant voter suppression, and openly courting racism... God drat, man, I hate this country.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
WFP NY.RuanGacho posted:Consider the Justice Democrats, they seem to have the right of it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
Iron Twinkie posted:So if I'm required to vote for the lesser evil, what about my time, what about my money? Campaigns need resources in order to succeed. If a terrible candidate, by virtue of being less terrible than the alternative, has a divine right to my vote, does that also entitle them to my labor and the contents of my wallet? Yeah it's a real slippery slope, next thing you know the Dems'll be requiring you to sign an indentured servitude contract
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:How many states have a Working Families Party-like option in the US? That’s how I have been trying to show where I want mainstream Democrats to go during elections. quote:today, fusion as conventionally practiced remains legal in only eight states, namely:
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 04:26 |
|
|
Iron Twinkie posted:So if I'm required to vote for the lesser evil, what about my time, what about my money? Campaigns need resources in order to succeed. If a terrible candidate, by virtue of being less terrible than the alternative, has a divine right to my vote, does that also entitle them to my labor and the contents of my wallet? Downticket. I know a good chunk of people that stump for their delegate, or for the LG. I posted a bunch of House of Delegates candidates that you can donate time/money to back last week. And those are the people who get highways widened and such. Next year, let’s have a Downticket Derby thread. We’ll have lots to keep that thread no moving.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 15:32
|
|