|
A big reason the Democrats lost so many white voters in the midwest was because they took their environmental promises so seriously, the Clean Power Plan was electoral poison here. Obama's NLRB was easily the best in my lifetime as well in terms of working with unions as well. Martha Coakley's failure and Lieberman's shitheadery kinda dicked over the legislative possibilities, but there is a very clear line between good and bad when it comes to Obama->Republican.
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:10 |
|
|
WampaLord posted:Sorry, I'm not going to trust goon consensus over a professional polling firm. It's not goon consensus, it's basic common sense. You learn this poo poo in a stat 100 class
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted: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. You're treating the Democrats as monolithic. That's your first mistake. You're also assuming malice, where stupidity and cowardice suffices. That's your second, and even bigger, mistake. quote:Why doesn't California have single payer healthcare? It was an incompetently-drafted piece of legislation that didn't take into account a terrible ballot referendum that our state instituted years ago that would inevitably gently caress everything up. Majorian fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Nov 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It was an incompetently-drafted piece of legislation that didn't take into account a terrible ballot referendum that our state instituted years ago that would inevitably gently caress everything up. Wait, which one, Prop 98?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
Luna Was Here posted:It's not goon consensus, it's basic common sense. You learn this poo poo in a stat 100 class Feel free to quote me where I showed my ignorance of statistics. All I said was that one poll is a fine thing to bring up for discussion and I was told to wait until multiple polls came in until it was statistically significant before we could possibly discuss the topic. And quite frankly I think that's really stupid reasoning to not discuss something
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
Instant Sunrise posted:Wait, which one, Prop 98? Yup. California really hosed itself with that stupid prop.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted: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. The reason I don't vote for Democrats isn't because I think things need to get worse to get better. It's because I simply refuse to vote for someone who advocates things like lowering taxes on the wealthy, bombing brown children, offshore drilling, etc. While I do think it's undeniable that it's easier to make radical changes in times of hardship/crisis it has nothing to do with a voting strategy. I just really feel like we've gone 50 years down the path of lesser of two evils for the left and we're now left with candidates that are distinctly not left, and do not represent my views in any way. Even on social justice issues the Democrats main strategy is to let the courts decide and honor/respect that decision. Majorian posted:It was an incompetently-drafted piece of legislation that didn't take into account a terrible ballot referendum that our state instituted years ago that would inevitably gently caress everything up. Do you really believe this is why California doesn't have single payer? It has nothing to do with opposition from party leadership? Majorian posted:You're treating the Democrats as monolithic. That's your first mistake. Well I'm not talking about every politician that runs with a D next to their name, obviously there are better and worse Democrats. I'm speaking specifically to the Northram/Clinton types that we're badgered into voting for because, and only because, they are the "lesser evil". Letting these people poison the discourse of the party is killing our ability to progress leftward. It's simply not going to matter if the GOP never wins an election if the Democrats do nothing when they win. NewForumSoftware fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Nov 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:27
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:The reason I don't vote for Democrats isn't because I think things need to get worse to get better. It's because I simply refuse to vote for someone who advocates things like lowering taxes on the wealthy, bombing brown children, offshore drilling, etc. So you think voting inherently holds some kind of moral significance in the way you use it, or are you concerned about the strategy of withholding votes to make the Democrats shift left? This also doesn't address the problem of inaction resulting in increased destitution for marginalized groups, and subsequently causes them to feel alienated from leftists who overtly advocate for disengagement from the system. Nor does it deal with the reality that, when things get truly bad, it's much more likely we go full fascist than reenact the Russian Revolution.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted: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. I'm sorry, I missed the part where the democratic party is destroying the republicans.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
Majorian posted:You're also assuming malice, where stupidity and cowardice suffices. It can be all three. Anyone who's even passingly familiar with the federal Dems' relationship with labor over the past 40+ years should quickly come to the understanding that, yes, malice is absolutely at play here. When a group keeps doing the same thing over and over again, sooner or later you need to accept the fact that they're not making an "oops" mistake, they're actively choosing to do that thing because they feel it will lead to the outcome they desire.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Feel free to quote me where I showed my ignorance of statistics. All I said was that one poll is a fine thing to bring up for discussion and I was told to wait until multiple polls came in until it was statistically significant before we could possibly discuss the topic. It's perfectly valid to ignore a cherry picked poll that's taking non national polling and trying to extrapolate that result to a nationwide scale. THIS was explained to you, THIS is basic statistics, THIS is why your insistence that we arzy over this poll is stupid, hope this helps
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Luna Was Here posted:It's perfectly valid to ignore a cherry picked poll that's taking non national polling and trying to extrapolate that result to a nationwide scale. THIS was explained to you, THIS is basic statistics, THIS is why your insistence that we arzy over this poll is stupid, hope this helps I'm not insisting we Arzy, stop implying that I am. Jesus gently caress you're taking the least charitable interpretation of my posts. I was rude to theflyingorc's immediate dismissal of my post and lashed back at him, but all I wanted was a discussion of the poll and instead I got attacked.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/927604378013503493 Finally accepting new members into the Mickey Mouse Club.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
so, more proof the dnc was acting against bernie sanders during the primary: https://twitter.com/GeoffMiami/status/927541838189297664 jon reinish of SKDKnickerBocker, a consultancy firm on the DNC payroll during the primaries, was writing smear pieces on bernie and his "bros" on may 18th of 2016 and june 6th, a month or two before the convention another piece by him before the primary was over: http://observer.com/2016/05/bernie-sanders-only-cares-about-bernie-sanders/ quote:Each election has what become its accepted narratives: themes that, over time, gel into what are considered reliable facts that are no longer vetted or questioned. As the Democratic campaign finally wraps up, it’s time to put two persistent ones to bed: Hillary Clinton is unpopular and limping to a finish, and Bernie Sanders is a progressive from way outside the system. it's p hosed up the DNC was paying the wages of a guy acting as an evangelist for hillary clinton
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:So you think voting inherently holds some kind of moral significance in the way you use it, or are you concerned about the strategy of withholding votes to make the Democrats shift left? Both. I do think people seriously underplay the ability of voting blocs to hold groups hostage in order to enact their agenda. The ultrawealthy didn't get to where they are voting for the lesser evil. You have to use leverage to get what you want, not cross your fingers and pray they'll do the right thing. Hell, the Tea Party largely just did this over the past decade and yet you'll hear hordes of people claiming it's impossible. quote:This also doesn't address the problem of inaction resulting in increased destitution for marginalized groups, and subsequently causes them to feel alienated from leftists who overtly advocate for disengagement from the system. Nor does it deal with the reality that, when things get truly bad, it's much more likely we go full fascist than reenact the Russian Revolution. Well yes, I don't think we should do nothing. Organizations like the DSA, Our Revolution, etc are still good. I'm not advocating to disengage from "the system" but to focus on changing from the outside as opposed to doing it via voting for centrists and writing them letters or whatever. In other words, disengage only if the Democrat running is pursuing policies like those I mentioned above (murdering children, lowering taxes, sanctuary city bans, anti-lgbt bills, exploitative trade deals) that have no moral argument. But yes, I do think it's more likely we'll go full facist than reenact the Russian Revolution but honestly it's also more likely that climate change will throw all geopolitics we know and care about out of the window over the next 100 years. I think we have to at least hope for a better vision of the future. WampaLord posted:I'm not insisting we Arzy, stop implying that I am. Jesus gently caress you're taking the least charitable interpretation of my posts. Serious request please stop posting about the Trump thread and attracting those idiots here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Both. I do think people seriously underplay the ability of voting blocs to hold groups hostage in order to enact their agenda. The ultrawealthy didn't get to where they are voting for the lesser evil. You have to use leverage to get what you want, not cross your fingers and pray they'll do the right thing. I'm not sure I agree with comparing Democratic constituencies to the Republican donor class and Tea Party astroturfers, because they have the inherent institutional advantage of shitloads of money and being white and suburban so that the media will pay attention to them. Advocating for only engaging with the DSA and Our Revolution is fine with me on an individual level, but to be clear, you aren't actually advocating for voting for Republicans, correct? I still don't agree with the proposition that Democrats are as bad or worse than Republicans, because I think the material protection and marginal progress they offer on certain issues is more important than the perception issue. The idea that Democrats are bad but Republicans are worse is defensible to me, but I don't think that "Democrats hide behind social justice and then don't fulfill" makes them worse or as bad as actual fascists. If global warming reaches a point where it is overthrowing the current geopolitical order we're probably looking at a world war. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:If global warming reaches a point where it is overthrowing the current geopolitical order we're probably looking at a world war. For what it's worth my big, fat gut tells me we're heading towards a world war even without the influence of that creeping dread we all now know as climate change.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I'm not insisting we Arzy, stop implying that I am. Jesus gently caress you're taking the least charitable interpretation of my posts. So then you didn't post this? WampaLord posted:No, not really. This was the Hillary campaign's argument, that turnout would be huge because people would vote to avoid disaster, but they didn't turn out. I'm not taking the least charitable interpretation, I'm just reading your posts about how the Democrats are failures and will continue to be failures, among your failure to grasp basic stats
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
Luna Was Here posted:I'm not taking the least charitable interpretation, I'm just reading your posts about how the Democrats are failures and will continue to be failures, among your failure to grasp basic stats Look, it's clear at this point you're not willing to engage with me honestly and have written me off as "dumb leftist who doesn't know statistics" so why should I bother. Posting a poll showing that the Dems may have midterm problems is hardly "Arzying"
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
Luna Was Here posted:So then you didn't post this? the second one is a thing he does not say, there. he is proposing a way in which the democrats can cease to be failures. have you put any thought into what the democratic party should change, in order to not be as embarrassed on every level as it was in 2016?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:
Oh absolutely. quote:I still don't agree with the proposition that Democrats are as bad or worse than Republicans, because I think the material protection and marginal progress they offer on certain issues is more important than the perception issue. The idea that Democrats are bad but Republicans are worse is defensible to me, but I don't think that "Democrats hide behind social justice and then don't fulfill" makes them worse or as bad as actual fascists. Yeah I've tried to explain this a few times but I realize it's pretty nuanced and doesn't really mesh with some singular "better" or "worse" declaration. The Democrats simply do more harm to the left and our countries ability to deal with issues like income inequality than the GOP does imo. I get that the GOP pursues policies which exacerbate these issues much more than the Democrats, but what good does it do for society to have Democrats run opposing these things and then do a complete about face? If anything this is what is solidifying corporatist policies as "normal", which is simply devastating to the country. Normalizing the horrors of latestage capitalism is essentially the Democratic party's mission at this point. quote:If global warming reaches a point where it is overthrowing the current geopolitical order we're probably looking at a world war. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Do you really believe this is why California doesn't have single payer? It has nothing to do with opposition from party leadership? It has to do with both, but the larger issue is that the legislation carried the seeds of its own destruction. Rendon's a neoliberal shill, no question, but he's also a spineless coward, not an ideologue. If the legislation hadn't carried a self-inflicted mortal wound from the get-go, and had more popular support behind it, Rendon wouldn't have been able to stand in its way. quote:Well I'm not talking about every politician that runs with a D next to their name, obviously there are better and worse Democrats. Then specify that. Luna Was Here posted:So then you didn't post this? What you're actually doing is ignoring his broader point, which is salient: Northam may or may not win this election (my money's on "no," but only slightly), but the reason why it's so close is because he is making the same mistakes that the Clinton campaign did, and that centrist Democrats have been making, for years. Northam is better than Gillespie, but boy, he has done everything in his power to obscure that fact during this campaign. This type of horseshit needs to stop now, or the Democrats may not take back the House next year, and that would be a shame. Majorian fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Nov 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Then specify that. Should I have to? There are also better and worse Republicans. I'm speaking about a specific type of politician, the conservative run as a Democrat in order to appeal to "moderates" who immediately starts compromising any and all leftist views on their platform once elected. These are the only people who get sold as the "lesser of two evils" and quite frankly the only people I don't think leftists should be voting for after a 50 year slide to the right.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Oh absolutely. lol unfortunately that didn't answer my question, absolutely you are or you aren't advocating we vote for Republicans?  I will agree to disagree about normalization, I just am glad you have a more complex opinion than initially presented.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:lol unfortunately that didn't answer my question, absolutely you are or you aren't? oh sorry, yeah never vote for a Republican obviously this isn't about burning the Democratic party down for the good of the country, it's about choosing a line in the sand and actually standing behind it. because our failure to do so has allowed the conservative portions of the democratic party to co-opt leftist messaging to deliver low tax rates and a pro business environment to billionaires.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Should I have to? Yes, yes you should. As far as elected officials are concerned, that there are "better and worse Republicans" is a distinction between "really loving insanely evil," and "oh my God, they did the impossible and managed to be even more really loving insanely evil." Everyone here is agreed: all Republicans in government are evil. The same is not the case when it comes to the Democrats, and even you agree with this. Which is why you need to use more nuanced language: because it better represents your viewpoint.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:oh sorry, yeah never vote for a Republican obviously I'm not sure if I agree that mass disengagement with the party has been the most successful at shifting the party, considering we currently describe politics in relation to a successful insurgent primary challenger, but at least you are still engaging with the system via other organizations.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Yes, yes you should. As far as elected officials are concerned, that there are "better and worse Republicans" is a distinction between "really loving insanely evil," and "oh my God, they did the impossible and managed to be even more really loving insanely evil." Everyone here is agreed: all Republicans in government are evil. The same is not the case when it comes to the Democrats, and even you agree with this. Which is why you need to use more nuanced language: because it better represents your viewpoint. Yeah I guess I'm just not quite as partisan as most people because there are plenty of Republicans that are better than Democrats. I mean, you have people like Robert Byrd who had a historical record that would make most Republicans today blush. And I mean, this is my problem, by creating a "big tent" that allows in the ultrawealthy, corporations, racists, etc. it becomes very murky as to which party is the bad one pretty quickly, especially when those unsavory elements are the ones in control of the party at a national level. The Democrats should do better and actually create a platform their base believes in, even if that means pushing racists and corporate donors to the GOP.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I'm not sure if I agree that mass disengagement with the party has been the most successful at shifting the party, considering we currently describe politics in relation to a successful insurgent primary challenger, but at least you are still engaging with the system via other organizations. If you look at the way the power systems of the Democratic Party are structured it makes even less sense. If you're beholden to primary voters, county party chairs, donors, etc. then why would you weaken yourself to appease anyone who refuses to engage in the system in a way that supports you. To elect next time's Ellison it will need more engagement with party internal politics not less.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:11
|
|
WampaLord posted:I'm not insisting we Arzy, stop implying that I am. Jesus gently caress you're taking the least charitable interpretation of my posts. Hey there, Hi, I'm a leftist too. This poll is dumb and you're attaching way too much clout to what it's saying, and a basic knowledge of statistics should tell you why. Throwing a tantrum because the discussion didn't go the way you wanted it is childish because that's generally how discussions work because, get this, other people have input on what the conversation is about. It's not the evil centrists keeping you down when everyone doesn't immediately fall down to agree with you, especially when they give valid reasons for it. Just stop it. If you wanna have that separate slap fight about the evil dems, there's a thread for that, but trumping up (hur hur) a really narrow poll in order to have a conversation you want with the fig leaf of "but I have evidence this time!" isn't gonna fly here, and you should know better than to try.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:If you look at the way the power systems of the Democratic Party are structured it makes even less sense. If you're beholden to primary voters, county party chairs, donors, etc. then why would you weaken yourself to appease anyone who refuses to engage in the system in a way that supports you. To elect next time's Ellison it will need more engagement with party internal politics not less. I mean, here's the thing. I think there's value in having a left flank that is well-organized but separate from the main party apparatus, but I would also argue that it's important to have a strong left-flank within the party. The problem is that not nearly as many people are enthusiastic about being the latter than the former.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:If you're beholden to primary voters, county party chairs, donors, etc. then why would you weaken yourself to appease anyone who refuses to engage in the system in a way that supports you. Because you're also beholden to winning a general election, and losing that does nothing for primary voters, county party chairs and donors.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Look, it's clear at this point you're not willing to engage with me honestly and have written me off as "dumb leftist who doesn't know statistics" so why should I bother. Except when you ignore the hey factors that fault the poll and then proceed to just insult everyone rather than use your noggin. Ze Pollack posted:the second one is a thing he does not say, there. My immediate recommendation(read as: hot take) for the Democratic party is to excommunicate the Clintons from the party and to stop dealing with the bullshit the Republicans have been throwing their way the last 20 years. Majorian posted:What you're actually doing is ignoring his broader point, which is salient: Northam may or may not win this election (my money's on "no," but only slightly), but the reason why it's so close is because he is making the same mistakes that the Clinton campaign did, and that centrist Democrats have been making, for years. Northam is better than Gillespie, but boy, he has done everything in his power to obscure that fact during this campaign. This type of horseshit needs to stop now, or the Democrats may not take back the House next year, and that would be a shame. That was never his point, his point was originally showing up, stirring poo poo up, then running back here. If he was concerned about Northams election chances then he would've mentioned it, but he didn't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
The thing is, bad dems like Manchin or Donnelly are a big reason why my family still has healthcare. It's also frankly a miracle that those two are in the Senate AT ALL, and I really can't justify not voting to keep them around. Byrd is also an interesting case, in that he followed the Democrats' lead in reforming instead of bolting to the GOP like Helms and Thurmond. The NAACP actively mourned his loss because he had become a valuable ally, and his incumbency advantage kept a valuable senate seat out of GOP hands for a good long while. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/106189-naacp-mourns-byrds-death
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:If you wanna have that separate slap fight about the evil dems, there's a thread for that, but trumping up (hur hur) a really narrow poll in order to have a conversation you want with the fig leaf of "but I have evidence this time!" isn't gonna fly here, and you should know better than to try. You're ascribing malice where there was none. I wasn't trying to "pull one over" with an obviously bad poll, I actually BELIEVED the professional polling firm, heaven loving forbid I do that. Your larger point is taken, I won't post anything in the Trump thread again, they clearly just want to freak out over whatever PPJ posts in the daily 40 tweets. Luna Was Here posted:That was never his point, his point was originally showing up, stirring poo poo up, then running back here. If he was concerned about Northams election chances then he would've mentioned it, but he didn't. This wasn't at all what I was doing and I only "ran back here" because that other thread loving yells at anyone who dares bring up something that's not the daily Twitter outrage. Guess I should have posted about koi ponds.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Arzy was right lol, and y’all should have listened to them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Grammarchist posted:The NAACP actively mourned his loss because he had become a valuable ally, and his incumbency advantage kept a valuable senate seat out of GOP hands for a good long while. I'm gonna be that guy and argue that Byrd is the mythical unicorn that reformed from being an ideological racist to a productive ally and that while his record was in fact pretty grim in places, he doesn't deserve to get poo poo on as bad as someone like Rahm Emanuel. Byrd admitted what he'd done and repented. Emanuel continues to stand by his awfulness.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I'm gonna be that guy and argue that Byrd is the mythical unicorn that reformed from being an ideological racist to a productive ally and that while his record was in fact pretty grim in places, he doesn't deserve to get poo poo on as bad as someone like Rahm Emanuel. Byrd admitted what he'd done and repented. Emanuel continues to stand by his awfulness. twodot fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Nov 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I mean, here's the thing. I think there's value in having a left flank that is well-organized but separate from the main party apparatus, but I would also argue that it's important to have a strong left-flank within the party. The problem is that not nearly as many people are enthusiastic about being the latter than the former. Having the left flank that is well organized outside the party is essential. It's a requirement to the left being able to take over control of the Democratic Party.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:10 |
|
|
Luna Was Here posted:My immediate recommendation(read as: hot take) for the Democratic party is to excommunicate the Clintons from the party and to stop dealing with the bullshit the Republicans have been throwing their way the last 20 years. misses the point of the exercise, imo. there's nothing stopping them from revving up the machine and restarting the process for the next guy. you may recall the previous president dealt with a rather extensive degree of that poo poo. as ACORN, the ACA, and the most recent capitulation of the democratic party to put sanctions on Iran so they could get some sanctions on Russia painfully demonstrated, it turns out giving into republican yelling does not cause the yelling to cease this is a process known as seeking to accomplish political goals, or "politics" for short.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2017 20:25
|
|