|
Flavahbeast posted:Bernie pledged to continue the drone program and has voiced support for Mueller's red scare witch hunt: yes. what you guys don't seem to get is that we're not advocating voting only for the purest, most lenin-like dems in existence. we're advocating for drawing lines in the sand. racism is a limit. when a "lesser evil" candidate goes past that limit, he's just evil, and not worth support.
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 22:16 |
|
|
I don't think the people who refuse to vote for Bernie because he's not pure enough are a large enough voting group to ever matter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
Condiv posted:yes. what you guys don't seem to get is that we're not advocating voting only for the purest, most lenin-like dems in existence. we're advocating for drawing lines in the sand. racism is a limit. when a "lesser evil" candidate goes past that limit, he's just evil, and not worth support. It's good to know that women's health is NOT a limit then ffs
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
Flavahbeast posted:Sure, Bernie might be better than the GOP but it's it really defensible to vote for him? It's all about compromise in the end. What are you willing to give for what you get? Bernie offered enough to attract people outside of the mainstream, particularly left leaning independents. You may want to pretend like leftists on this board hold Bernie up as perfect and quite frankly it's simply not true. That being said, he offered enough (and in the right way) to make people believe he was going to challenge the corporate vultures destroying American society (which is a much bigger issue than most centrists want to admit). If Hillary had done the same, she would have won. I would have voted for Hillary if she had actually made an effort to convince me she would challenge the economic dogma that has our country paralyzed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
Flavahbeast posted:Bernie pledged to continue the drone program and has voiced support for Mueller's red scare witch hunt: This stands up if you see the Mueller investigation as a red scare as opposed to an investigation frequently vindicated through information available in the public record My dope-ler radar is picking up waaaaaaay to much nose in this thread to work correctly, so if this post was sarcastic, I apologise.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:It's good to know that women's health is NOT a limit then i don't think you actually believe that about perriello tbh you're just bullshitting cause you think i'm arguing for full-communism now or no votes or something
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:It's all about compromise in the end. What are you willing to give for what you get? Bernie offered enough to attract people outside of the mainstream, particularly left leaning independents. You may want to pretend like leftists on this board hold Bernie up as perfect and quite frankly it's simply not true. That being said, he offered enough (and in the right way) to make people believe he was going to challenge the corporate vultures destroying American society (which is a much bigger issue than most centrists want to admit). If Hillary had done the same, she would have won. I would have voted for Hillary if she had actually made an effort to convince me she would challenge the economic dogma that has our country paralyzed. Wait hold on That sounds an awful lot like you’re compromising your beliefs to vote for the lesser of two evils
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:I wasn't clear then. VA going blue is a reason for the HRC parade to mellow on the bullying. I'd still have zero regrets if VA had gone Trump and I'd blame the same people I do in this reality, and that's Trump voters first and foremost, and next those who pushed HRC and fell for her as a candidate over Sanders. I see. Would you say, then, that the layers of abstraction between your vote and the outcome are irrelevant, and that if someone came to you and said you are the electoral college this year and we're installing Donald Trump unless you tell us to install <centrist Democrat of your choice>, you'd not make that substitution? I think that's a principled enough stand, even if I personally abhor the principles. What I can't stand is when people use the layers of abstraction to wimp out on making a tough choice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
That's a good NewForumSoftware post.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i don't think you actually believe that about perriello tbh Naw I believe Perriello is on the record voting for a horrifically regressive anti-choice amendment
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:Wait hold on yes. i get this might shock you, but the backlash against the lesser evil strategy isn't specifically that people ever vote the lesser evil, but that there are people saying there is no situation where you shouldn't vote for the lesser evil. for example, when the lesser evil is a racist shitstain, he doesn't deserve your vote.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:Naw I believe Perriello is on the record voting for a horrifically regressive anti-choice amendment yes, and he's also on the record saying he hosed up and wouldn't do that again, and that he'd work to counteract that kind of pro-life bullshit as governor. meanwhile, we have northam saying he'll implement racist policy if he's made governor. the situations aren't very similar at all despite you trying to force them to be, and that's why i think you're bullshitting Condiv fucked around with this message at 17:36 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:Wait hold on I don't consider Bernie to be an evil? Now if Bernie got into office and gave up fighting sure, I'd abandon him quickly. But really all I'm looking for is a politician who will fight the abuses of the corporations and ultrarich.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
The problem is that the lesser evils are usually way too close in degree of evil, sanders had some bad opinions but he was still vastly better than the alternatives.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
It's literally the day after we found out that the Democratic Party nearly grifted itself out of existence, and yet this thread is full of dunderheads who think that yelling about an individual vote is relevant in any way. The lack of perspective boggles the mind.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
Look, for those actually in Virginia and voting there, I just want to wish you good luck. Virginia must stand as if she alone were America still.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
Grammarchist posted:Look, for those actually in Virginia and voting there, I just want to wish you good luck. Virginia must stand as if she alone were America still. "and the winner of the 2017 Virginia governor race is in a surprise upset....re-establishing the confederacy???"
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
Condiv posted:yes, and he's also on the record saying he hosed up and wouldn't do that again, and that he'd work to counteract that kind of pro-life bullshit as governor. meanwhile, we have northam saying he'll implement racist policy if he's made governor. the situations aren't very similar at all despite you trying to force them to be, and that's why i think you're bullshitting my bony fealty posted:You're not gonna get an explanation for this one and if you are it will be tantamount to "well Tom said he was sorry about that
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:38
|
|
"
|
Regarding Virginia, if you are concerned about race issues, you should ask Virginia PoC political advocacy groups who you should cast your vote for, who they think you should vote for. They can give you an explanation if they want, but if they urge you to vote strategically for the lesser evil because they feel like it is the best possible option at this current point in time for them, respect and acknowledge that. If they say that they do not want to risk the consequences of idealistic voting versus strategic voting because they do not want to live in a state governed by a republican, respect and acknowledge that. If you're white and abstain or vote third party anyway even when PoC caucuses and political groups are largely requesting strategic votes against a Republican who is boldly testing identitarian white messaging, then there's a problem and you're doing something not too good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
and? are you saying i shouldn't believe perriello or are you saying i shouldn't ever think people change? if it's the latter, well, sorry that's not how i work, even on these forums Condiv fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:No, bad, stop. Most lefties irl and itt are fine, don't let armchair "progressive"-but-actually-divisive sockpuppets skew your judgement. The people attacking the Democrats from the left in this thread, even if they sometimes say something dumb, are still far better than people like you. You claim to want the Democrats to move to the left, but I don't think I've ever seen you say a single thing condemning the Democrats in a context that wasn't trying to prove that you're totally left-wing despite the vast majority of your posts in this context being attacks on leftists. If the Democratic Party was entirely made up of people like you and Ogmius, we would never see positive change. Like, in the context of this discussion I actually agree that people should still vote for Northram, but I can't understand the mindset that would lead to someone's main response being irritation towards the people condemning him (or rather I can understand it, but the results don't paint a pretty picture of the people in question). A reasonable person would think "if a lot of people are responding this way, clearly the Democrats/Democratic politicians should change their approach to make people more enthusiastic towards voting for them." This is also the more pragmatic choice* - when significant numbers of people think or act a certain way, you can't change their behavior on any sort of scale through making an argument about why they're wrong; you have to change the conditions that lead to their actions. But, for some reason, your main response is just irritation towards these people, rather than irritation towards the politicians who acted in a way that made people less enthusiastic, if not outright disgusted, towards them. I wonder why this might be? * This is the part that really gets me; you claim to care about results, but what you're doing won't accomplish anything at all. The only solution to lower voter enthusiasm is to change the behavior of politicians. You're not going to get unenthusiastic voters to go to the polls by making an argument about why it's more logical to vote for the lesser evil (even if that's an argument I agree with). I mean, seriously, take a moment and think about things logically instead of acting on your bizarre knee-jerk distaste for the left. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Condiv posted:and? are you saying i shouldn't believe perriello or are you saying i shouldn't ever think people change? Nah, just saying your hypothetical gets the benefit of the doubt while another guy doesn’t and you’ve jumped straight to “he’s a racist and always was.” You’ve made it clear that you have no insight to impart other than shouting The Democrats Are A Waste, as is your caricature. Your narrative is based on false assumptions and bad data.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:Nah, just saying your hypothetical gets the benefit of the doubt while another guy doesn’t and you’ve jumped straight to “he’s a racist and always was.” You don't see any difference between someone who held a bad position and recanted versus someone who just adopted a plank from Trump's platform? I don't know about "and always was" but I mean, he just said some pretty racist poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Condiv posted:yes, and he's also on the record saying he hosed up and wouldn't do that again, and that he'd work to counteract that kind of pro-life bullshit as governor. meanwhile, we have northam saying he'll implement racist policy if he's made governor. the situations aren't very similar at all despite you trying to force them to be, and that's why i think you're bullshitting They're plenty similar because they are both examples of politicians buckling to the pressure of their political situation. Maybe you'd like to defend Perriello's strong pro-Second Amendment, anti-assault weapons ban stance? Northam's a goddamn idiot who fell for the racist bait but he has been consistently progressive as a Virginia legislator. Perriello can't say the same. And I'd vote for either of them over any Republican!
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:Nah, just saying your hypothetical gets the benefit of the doubt while another guy doesn’t and you’ve jumped straight to “he’s a racist and always was.” You’ve made it clear that you have no insight to impart other than shouting The Democrats Are A Waste, as is your caricature. uh, why should northam get the benefit of the doubt when he's saying racist poo poo right now? i mean, i'd get you saying this if northam had, for instance, voted for some anti-sanctuary city legislation in the past and then said he regretted it and would fight that as governor. then you'd have some kind of equality between the two, and perhaps northam would deserve the benefit of the doubt. but he's, right now saying he'd support anti-sanctuary city legislation in VA as governor. why should i doubt what he's saying right now your boy fancy? that doesn't make a single bit of sense! my bony fealty posted:They're plenty similar because they are both examples of politicians buckling to the pressure of their political situation. they're not for the reasons i just listed. happy to help. quote:Maybe you'd like to defend Perriello's strong pro-Second Amendment, anti-assault weapons ban stance? what's there to defend? i think gun control should be stronger, but it's not a huge issue for me Condiv fucked around with this message at 17:51 on Nov 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:You don't see any difference between someone who held a bad position and recanted versus someone who just adopted a plank from Trump's platform? Considering one guy had time to be yelled at and recant, and the other happened yesterday? Yes. I see a difference.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:Considering one guy had time to be yelled at and recant, and the other happened yesterday? Yes. I see a difference. well, stop supporting him until he recants. this is pretty easy ybf. in fact, it's literally the carrot and stick approach you supposedly support
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:Considering one guy had time to be yelled at and recant, and the other happened yesterday? Yes. I see a difference. So you're saying we should be forgiving of politicians who turn racist because they could recant in the future? Sounds like a Trump voter's argument.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
Flavahbeast posted:Bernie pledged to continue the drone program and has voiced support for Mueller's red scare witch hunt: LOL, wtf?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:LOL, wtf? uh, what about this is sending up alarms for you?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
Condiv posted:uh, what about this is sending up alarms for you? The part I bolded.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
Condiv posted:what's there to defend? i think gun control should be stronger, but it's not a huge issue for me No purity but my purity I guess? Like I said earlier, people are entirely within their rights and justified in withdrawing support from Northram if that's what they want to do. But don't pretend flawless positions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:But don't pretend flawless positions. Who's pretending someone has flawless positions?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
Condiv posted:uh, why should northam get the benefit of the doubt when he's saying racist poo poo right now? Oh, you mean like in February? http://www.richmond.com/news/virgin...7d994dc5d6.html The whole thing is based on a show vote in the first place, and you don’t know what you’re talking about.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:No purity but my purity I guess? pro-gun dems exist and aren't terrible. pro-racist dems shouldn't exist and are extremely terrible. i don't think that's a controversial statement tbh
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Carrot and stick is a good way to put it. If he's weak-willed enough to fold over a non-existent sanctuary city issue, he should be easy to bully into doing the right thing when he's in office. Lefties should remember that the leftist solution to a coward isn't to just abandon him as he flees, as simple as that may be. It's blocking detachments. Tankies know what I'm talking about - back in line, shtrafniki scum! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:The part I bolded. I think the original comment was sarcasm but yeah there are a number of people who believe that because American history glosses over the Red Scare and blacklists so completely that they confuse Mueller for HUAC.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:Oh, you mean like in February? he reversed himself and said he'd support this legislation as governor ybf. why should he deserve the benefit of the doubt on his words as of yesterday? what are you even trying to argue here, other than it should be ok for you to vote for the guy who's decided to side with racists against his own party?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
New VA GOV poll: Gillespie +3  Don't get too excited though; it's from The Polling Company (R) and the sample seems to have a disproportionate amount of old people. And half of it was conducted online, 1/4 cell, 1/4 landline, which seems goofy to me, who knows little about polling.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 22:16 |
|
|
Kavros posted:Regarding Virginia, if you are concerned about race issues, you should ask Virginia PoC political advocacy groups who you should cast your vote for, who they think you should vote for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 18:11
|
|