|
Nanomashoes posted:https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/927407322300846080 No don't worry, I posted it in the Trump thread and they very assuredly told mean it means that the Dems can just relax and change nothing and called me dumb for implying otherwise.
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 15:14 |
|
|
WampaLord posted:No don't worry, I posted it in the Trump thread and they very assuredly told mean it means that the Dems can just relax and change nothing and called me dumb for implying otherwise. No one said the first bit and yes, not understanding the point of a voter turnout model is a factual misunderstanding of what that poll is trying to say and falling for their click-bait headline in the tweet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/yashar/status/927575299059003392 Brazile is a cartoon character and it is spectacular.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:No don't worry, I posted it in the Trump thread and they very assuredly told mean it means that the Dems can just relax and change nothing and called me dumb for implying otherwise. That isn't what happened everyone called you an idiot bitch for being an idiot, and then a bitch, in that order
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Nah, Campaign Obama made a lot of promises that were starkly left wing and that he failed to deliver. He tried but he had a congress that existed entirely to prevent him from doing anything he wanted, sure he could of tried a harder negotiation but if he gave anything up in exchange for closing gitmo people would just be made at him about that instead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:He tried but he had a congress that existed entirely to prevent him from doing anything he wanted, sure he could of tried a harder negotiation but if he gave anything up in exchange for closing gitmo people would just be made at him about that instead. Sitting from the lofty vantage point of 2017, Obama should've immediately had them kill the filibuster and rammed New Deal 2.0. and a public option through Congress before 2010. From the perspective of 2008, that would've been incredibly extreme, unfortunately. I do kind of want to go back in time and hand him a piece of paper that says "do not hire Rahm, DWS, or Comey, thanks in advance Mr. President" though. Edit: alternatively it could say "don't let Hillary use private email and for gently caress's sake, don't intervene in Libya," but that might be too cryptic. Lightning Knight fucked around with this message at 17:57 on Nov 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:He tried but he had a congress that existed entirely to prevent him from doing anything he wanted, sure he could of tried a harder negotiation but if he gave anything up in exchange for closing gitmo people would just be made at him about that instead. Sure, but we don't give Presidents an E for Effort. End of the day, long eye of history, etc., whether Obama tried or not, Obama came in on a wave of left-wing populist anger, and eight years later people were still angry and Donald Trump got elected as a result. If Obama had implemented more left wing policy goals, would that have sufficiently ameliorated all that anger so as to prevent Trump's presidency? Arguable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
EDIT: I misremembered some articles I had read previously about the DNC. Ignore this.
Brony Car fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Nov 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:From what I remember, DWS taking over as DNC char was part of the grand bargain for HRC not to go drag out the primary fight any longer back in 2008. Is this someone that can get verified, or at least backed with evidence?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:From what I remember, DWS taking over as DNC char was part of the grand bargain for HRC not to go drag out the primary fight any longer back in 2008. As horrific as she was, I'm wondering how avoidable that trade-off was. This is what happens when people ignore the part about time travel. Office Pig posted:Is this someone that can get verified, or at least backed with evidence? I remember reading about this during the 2012 election, there was a big piece about the Obama-Clinton agreements to make peace after 2008 and Obama accepting some Clinton loyalists was definitely part of it. DWS just turned out to be exceptionally terrible at administrative work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:From what I remember, DWS taking over as DNC char was part of the grand bargain for HRC not to go drag out the primary fight any longer back in 2008. As horrific as she was, I'm wondering how avoidable that trade-off was. That doesn't make too much sense because DWS became DNC chair after the 2010 midterms. Tim Kaine was the one who replaced Dean in 2009.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/yashar/status/927575299059003392 Sounds like she was channeling the spirit of LBJ.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:That doesn't make too much sense because DWS became DNC chair after the 2010 midterms. Tim Kaine was the one who replaced Dean in 2009. The deal was that Obama would accept Clinton loyalists into his fold and back Hillary in 2016 in exchange for Bill helping out in 2012, iirc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:That doesn't make too much sense because DWS became DNC chair after the 2010 midterms. Tim Kaine was the one who replaced Dean in 2009. I've been scrambling a bit to find an article backing it up and it turns out I was very wrong. Sorry. https://www.snopes.com/tim-kaine-dnc-deal/
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
Luna Was Here posted:That isn't what happened everyone called you an idiot bitch for being an idiot, and then a bitch, in that order Fantastic stuff. Continue to shoot the messenger.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Sure, but we don't give Presidents an E for Effort. End of the day, long eye of history, etc., whether Obama tried or not, Obama came in on a wave of left-wing populist anger, and eight years later people were still angry and Donald Trump got elected as a result. If Obama had implemented more left wing policy goals, would that have sufficiently ameliorated all that anger so as to prevent Trump's presidency? Arguable. Also, I don't see any benefit to assuming good will from politicians like that. It's basically a recipe for being taken advantage of. If you assume that politicians always have a good excuse for not accomplishing good/important things, the downside is pretty tremendous, but there isn't much of a downside to continuing to apply pressure and criticism to politicians that fail to deliver (or to at least make a strong, visible effort at delivering*), regardless of the reason. This isn't to say you shouldn't still vote for Democrats in the general election (you should), but criticism is a different issue entirely, and there's no downside to politicians thinking "oh poo poo, people are going to be really upset if I don't at least make a strong attempt at accomplishing this stuff." *I feel like people would have interpreted Obama's actions different if he still continuing to fight for and be a visible proponent for certain ideas. The problem is that stuff like appointing Geithner Secretary of Treasury made people (correctly) lose their trust that he actually genuinely intended to do that sort of stuff in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:This isn't to say you shouldn't still vote for Democrats in the general election (you should) How many times do the Democrats need to lie to your face during a campaign then proceed to sell out American citizens to the highest bidder before you stop voting for them? Instead of screeching about how Republicans are going to open muslim internment camps if we don't pull the lever for our oligarch puppet?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Fantastic stuff. Continue to shoot the messenger. You took a single, non national poll with a cherry picked statistic and extrapolated it to say "the sky is falling the sky is falling!". I'm not shooting a messenger I'm putting down a sickly arzy
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
It didn't get a lot of coverage because, well, Democratic legislative proposals are worth less than the paper they're printed on at the current moment, but last week Schumer and Pelosi rolled out a package of legislative proposals to bolster the power of organized labor in America, including increasing the NLRB's enforcement authority, banning right to work laws, and penalizing companies for union busting or anti-union coercive activity, like threatening to close factories if they unionize. Obviously completely pie in the sky at the moment, but it's all good stuff from a cursory read through.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:How many times do the Democrats need to lie to your face during a campaign then proceed to sell out American citizens to the highest bidder before you stop voting for them? When Republicans stop denying global warming, stop trying to cut taxes for billionaires and secularize their politics maybe I'll think about abstaining. In the meantime I will always vote in the general for the least evil candidate that can win, even if they suck
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Luna Was Here posted:You took a single, non national poll with a cherry picked statistic and extrapolated it to say "the sky is falling the sky is falling!". I'm not shooting a messenger I'm putting down a sickly arzy I didn't claim the sky was falling, that's your own made-up interpretation of what you think I said. All I did was post the poll and I got attacked for it. I'm not going to lie that I think the poll means that the Democrats need to shape up, but literally I got called an idiot because I should have guessed that this poll that was conducted by professional pollsters was an outlier and had bad methodology. WampaLord fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Nov 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I didn't claim the sky was falling, that's your own made-up interpretation of what you think I said. All I did was post the poll and I got attacked for it. You got called an idiot because you doubled and tripled down and still can't let it go. At that point you aren't just "the messenger".
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:You got called an idiot because you doubled and tripled down and still can't let it go. At that point you aren't just "the messenger". That's because no one's actually proving me wrong yet they just decide to attack my behavior
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
That poll is not good but the fact that it's only Virginia makes it less impactful than I thought after reading through it imo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Keep in mind that this is "Generic D", which rarely matches up to the real deal. Especially depending on what they consider to be "Generic D". I recall that during the run-up to the 2004 elections, Generic Democrat was projected to absolutely crush George Bush in the presidential. Then Generic Democrat became John Kerry, and welp...
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Flavahbeast posted:When Republicans stop denying global warming, stop trying to cut taxes for billionaires and secularize their politics maybe I'll think about abstaining. In the meantime I will always vote in the general for the least evil candidate that can win, even if they suck It's interesting that people choose the word "least evil" because at least in my eyes, I don't really see how the GOP is any more evil than the Democrats. If anything, the GOP is much more up front about it's donors agenda and in general the desires of the base and the leadership align way more than that of Democrats. Whereas the Democrats pander to social/economic/environmental issues just to get your vote then immediately abandon those same "views" them upon winning. Democrats are actively using those issues people care about to bring them out to have them vote for a politician planning to enact an agenda that is absolutely at odds with the election rhetoric. It really can't be understated that the GOP/Republicans are not the group responsible for preventing any leftward movement in this country. It's the Democrats. The Democrats undermine labor movements, co-opt progressive causes, and sell out their constituents to the highest bidder. Look at the federal government 2008-2010. Look at California now. The idea that the GOP is preventing leftward progress in this country is laughable and yet it seems to be the conclusion most American voters come to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
Hey Wampa, I think your right. The dems are screwed because they cannot offer a compelling reason to vote for them. The only way to wake them up from their Sorkin fantasy is to not donate any money to the party, that means they cannot pay the consultants who feed them the fantasy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:That's because no one's actually proving me wrong yet they just decide to attack my behavior Multiple people told you how you were wrong. Just because you don't understand basic statistics doesn't mean they don't. And yes, you did come in spouting the sky is falling rhetoric or did you not post this WampaLord posted:Ah, the ignoring your problems strategy, how's that been working out so far? Among the other poo poo you spouted before you came running back here
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:It's interesting that people choose the word "least evil" because at least in my eyes, I don't really see how the GOP is any more evil than the Democrats. Then you're really, really not paying attention. Like, I know that's an easy, glib answer, but holy poo poo, dude. quote:Look at California now. California's labor movement and environmental regulations aren't doing amazingly under Brown, but as someone who lives there, I can guarantee you that they're healthier than they were under Schwarzenegger.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Then you're really, really not paying attention. Like, I know that's an easy, glib answer, but holy poo poo, dude. If you take a very ideological Marxist kind of view, he's not wrong. That's just also not useful in 2017 America so.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Then you're really, really not paying attention. Like, I know that's an easy, glib answer, but holy poo poo, dude. I understand that the policies/agencies we will get at the end of the day will be objectively worse than those of the Democrats. That's not what I mean by more evil and I said as much in the rest of my post, but it does make for quite a zinger to just snip out the part you don't like. Again, I say the Democrats are more evil because again, they are the ones co-opting progressive labor movements, not the GOP. They are the ones running on social justice and then doing nothing. They are the ones running on ending unjust wars/imprisonment and then not doing it. They are the ones that said they would march with unions to protect their right to organize and then sat and did nothing as states decimated unions. It's a massive blind spot for any lesser of two evils voter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:I understand that the policies/agencies we will get at the end of the day will be objectively worse than those of the Democrats. That's not what I mean by more evil and I said as much in the rest of my post, but it does make for quite a zinger to just snip out the part you don't like. The reason why I snipped the rest out is because your definition of "more evil" is just  Acquiescing to bad policies is evil, but it is not the same degree of evil as thinking up/pushing those same policies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Acquiescing to bad policies is evil, but it is not the same degree of evil as thinking up/pushing those same policies. Why not? At least the GOP is being (more) honest about what their agenda is. The Democrats are openly lying about their agenda (to make things worse, co-opting the left do so) and then pursuing the same billionaire donor-centric policy. Majorian posted:California's labor movement and environmental regulations aren't doing amazingly under Brown, but as someone who lives there, I can guarantee you that they're healthier than they were under Schwarzenegger. Why doesn't California have single payer healthcare?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
The greatest evil is that I, NewForumSoftware, go unrecognized by my contemporaries as the greatest moral giant of this or any age!
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
It's interesting to watch somebody talk themselves from leftism into de facto support for fascism via accelerationism in real time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
Luna Was Here posted:Multiple people told you how you were wrong. Just because you don't understand basic statistics doesn't mean they don't. Sorry, I'm not going to trust goon consensus over a professional polling firm.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/927596682178715653 No real commentary here, just wanted y'all to have fun with the amalgamation of all evil ever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:It's interesting to watch somebody talk themselves from leftism into de facto support for fascism via accelerationism in real time. Honestly this is how I feel when people start talking about how I should vote Democrat if I don't want muslim internment camps and Donald Trump invading Iran.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Honestly this is how I feel when people start talking about how I should vote Democrat if I don't want muslim internment camps and Donald Trump invading Iran. Now you see, I understand the argument you're making, and when I became really disenchanted with politics a few years ago I subscribed to a softer version of it. I legitimately, no joke, sympathize with your frustration. I just think the counter argument is that you now have to go tell the people who are going to bear the worst of it first, the minorities, the poor, the people we claim to protect, and tell them "well you know I just thought it needs to get worse before it gets better, I promise later we'll make it better" and then ask yourself if you're ok with that. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 15:14 |
|
|
Did you guys know that chemotherapy kills many of your own body's healthy cells? It makes you sick and makes your hair fall out. Don't settle for a lesser evil, reject the false choice between cancer and chemotherapy and support real, true health.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:17
|
|