|
Roland Jones posted:To elaborate, DSA members and people with similar politics sometimes put a rose emoji in their Twitter name. We have a severe problem with online sockpuppets, sadly For a time this summer, there was even a verified dsa account that was openly a parody account The criticism was aimed at the concept of consuming fake lefty media that's actually crypro fascist concern trolling and wedge setting, which as you explain may not be something you're exposed to Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 13:19 on Dec 13, 2017 |
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 13:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 10:58 |
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:Really hope the lesson from VA and AL sneaks up the chain that ground games and getting the vote out and helping people make it through voter suppression is the name of the game in 2016. Someone needs to be shouting this in the ear of everyone at DNC headquarters until november. Also get rid of those loving consultants, they all suck and lost GA. This. God drat, it's all so clear now that GA06 was ours to lose and they loving lost it for us. unwantedplatypus posted:It also helps immensely that Roy Moore was a horrible candidate. Any half decent republican probably would have won. True, but these are the types of candidates that the majority of the politically active right is putting forward. This poo poo isn't going to change anytime soon. The alt-right really is destroying the Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 13:52
|
|
|
Nice to see that the decent guy won, and hopefully the Dems won't forget to keep and expand the organization that was built for the race to parlay into future wins.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
What’s the jist of the Democrats unity conference? Is it a neoliberal co-opting/suppression of left wing elements within the party? I’m happy Jones won if only to deny the republican agenda somewhat. But I hope this victory doesn’t vindicate the milquetoast establishment democrats and continues to advance the agenda of the left wing side.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
If nothing else, this here election is the final nail in the coffin of the garbage-rear end idea that you have to run garbage-rear end blue dog candidates in traditionally conservative states in order to be competitive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:34
|
|
|
gowb posted:No he wasn't and only coincidentally Jesus Christ, how can a person be this retarded and still form sentences? This was not Virginia, a swing-leaning-blue state. This was Alabama. A blood-red hellhole that Trump won by 28 points. THEY DO NOT ELECT DEMOCRATS TO STATEWIDE OFFICES. PERIOD. Doug Jones was not supposed to win last night; he was barely expected to come close. It was never in a million years "Doug Jones' race to lose", it was ALWAYS Roy Moore's race to lose, even though he was a kiddy rapist who thinks Muslims shouldn't be allowed to serve in politics. You are a loving idiot for thinking otherwise. This was, on all fronts, a victory for the Democrats and a loving catastrophe for Republicans. There is no downside.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
Fluffdaddy posted:I think the narrative about black turnout has been scapegoating from the jump. I think that it was less that Moore was an obvious awful person than Alabaman black folks have 16th Street Baptist Church seered into our brains like white folks have 9/11. Jones is a hero for a lot of us. Do you have any good sources for this stuff Fluffdaddy? This is not a "prove it" post, I'm genuinely asking if you have sources that are better than the crap that was obviously wrong about black voter enthusiasm. Is there even a good source available to those of us not on the ground? It's basically impossible to know what's really going on in southern black communities with generic national or international sources it seems to me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:46
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:
I agree that awful loving decisions made at the top and with consultants could have cost a few more points, and I know that to your eyes the media campaign for Ossoff was a loving train wreck, but I need to convey to you just how loving rich and educated this district is. It's an entirely different beast. Things that should matter don't. What people say matters to them feels like parody concern trolling until, after a few of your first doors once you figure out how not to get the cold shoulder, you realize that they're sincere. The good folks of GA06 are, uh, very picky about the good treatment of their wage slave underclass. Yay, Democrats  based on how loving amazing turnout for Ossoff was, its debatable whether the bodies exist to pull off winning the Price / Gingrich district. My pessimistic opinion is that Ossoff's numbers represent the high water mark for a midterm here. I know that doesn't fit into how you want to frame Ossoff the Establishment Centrist, so take it or leave it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:48
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:If nothing else, this here election is the final nail in the coffin of the garbage-rear end idea that you have to run garbage-rear end blue dog candidates in traditionally conservative states in order to be competitive. People itt, I think you included, have been berating Jones for being a garbage blue dog not worth voting for. For weeks. Why are you changing your story now, donald?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:50
|
|
|
Futuresight posted:Do you have any good sources for this stuff Fluffdaddy? This is not a "prove it" post, I'm genuinely asking if you have sources that are better than the crap that was obviously wrong about black voter enthusiasm. Is there even a good source available to those of us not on the ground? It's basically impossible to know what's really going on in southern black communities with generic national or international sources it seems to me. I only rely on the people around me and the communities I am a part of. The media doesn't give a poo poo about us. Black Twitter is a good place to start though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:56
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:People itt, I think you included, have been berating Jones for being a garbage blue dog not worth voting for. For weeks. I've literally been saying that this election was perfectly winnable and that the Dems needed to back Jones seriously from the get-go at least since spring this year, when your lot were writing it off completely while masturbating yourself raw over noted failure Jon Ossoff, which makes your attempted rationalizations of the Dems blowing the budget by picking the absolute wrong target all the more funny. Though since you're literally incapable of accepting honest criticism of your political party and its obvious failings, I suppose this is to be expected.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:What’s the jist of the Democrats unity conference? Is it a neoliberal co-opting/suppression of left wing elements within the party? The unity reform conference was a deal struck at the convention last year in exchange of Bernie making Hillary the candidate by acclamation. It includes 9 members recommended by the Hillary campaign, 7 members recommended by the Bernie campaign, and 3 by Perez, plus a chair selected by Clinton and a vice chair selected by Sanders. It is supposed to promote more transparency and primary reform. Their proposals are fairly modest, but generally pretty good, but have to be passed by the rules committee and then the DNC as a whole. It includes a push for more transparency in the DNC (even members of the DNC executive council last year couldn't see the budget, which apparently spent close to 800 million dollars in five consultants alone) It also pushes for primaries with same day registration, plus caucuses that can operate in a similar way to primaries. I.e., to please the left wing of the party, it tries to do away with "you have to register 6 months ahead of time to vote in the primary" type of stuff, and to please the Hillary camp it makes it so caucuses don't require someone to stay and debate for hours, by allowing absentee ballots and paper ballots. It doesn't eliminate caucuses completely because primaries are necessarily operated by the state and the party wants to have the flexibility to run its own process in states where states are dominated by republicans (like when republicans hosed with primaries in FL an MI in 08) Now those proposals have to pass the rules committee (where Perez purged all Bernie supporters, so who knows) and then the DNC as a whole. These proposals are fairly uncontroversial, but some people are arguing against it in supremely bad faith.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:The unity reform conference was a deal struck at the convention last year in exchange of Bernie making Hillary the candidate by acclamation. It includes 9 members recommended by the Hillary campaign, 7 members recommended by the Bernie campaign, and 3 by Perez, plus a chair selected by Clinton and a vice chair selected by Sanders. Isn't it also reducing superdelegate numbers by more than half? I'd like to see them gone completely but this is a step in the right direction. Tired of the "favorites" getting a leg up before votes are even cast because they walk into the Iowa caucuses 100 delegates up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:Isn't it also reducing superdelegate numbers by more than half? I'd like to see them gone completely but this is a step in the right direction. Tired of the "favorites" getting a leg up before votes are even cast because they walk into the Iowa caucuses 100 delegates up. Yes, that is the headline grabbing part of the reform proposals, though likely the one that would have less of an impact.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:01
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:What’s the jist of the Democrats unity conference? Is it a neoliberal co-opting/suppression of left wing elements within the party? This looks like a victory for multidunious DIY GOTV efforts cumulatively giving live birth to a surprisingly capable party engine babby. That's good, that's the same involvement that can shuttle in socialists that nobody in the DCCC realized could actually be fantastically popular in areas that went Trump for populism, as evidenced by Virginia. but yes there's already a lot of very proud centrists already crowing about this victory, and as of this morning not just on neolib twitter. "Thank you AA!" is tripping a lot of dog whistle alarms I've installed since ramping up my local involvement in the Deep South
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:01
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:Now those proposals have to pass the rules committee (where Perez purged all Bernie supporters, so who knows) and then the DNC as a whole. More specifically, the rules committee has 6 months to amend the recommendations from the unity committee and it won't be put up for a vote for close to a year. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dnc-unity-reform-commission-2016-presidential-primary_us_5a2c59fbe4b0a290f05145d2 quote:The reforms are not yet a done deal, however. The commission’s report now heads to the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee, which will have a 6-month period to amend party rules to enact the reforms, and could theoretically try to dilute the commission’s recommendations (though they would have to run any changes by the commission). The roster of over 400 voting DNC members will also get to vote on the proposals at the full DNC meeting in the fall of 2018.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
Fluffdaddy posted:Not with the turnout like it was. A traditional republican would have gotten trounced even harder because they wouldn't have been able to dogwhistle loud enough. Moore was bullhorning his racism and thats the only reason the race was close. It is going to be a rough 2018 I really hope your read here is right. At first I assumed that Republican turnout was way down due to Moore only getting 40-something percent of Trump's vote totals, but then I remembered it's an off-year special election so naturally that number probably should be even lower, huh? I love the idea that if Democrats actually pay attention to black voters, listen to their needs, support black organizers, and, y'know, actually treat voters like more than a source of numbers, the South can slowly turn blue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:I've literally been saying that this election was perfectly winnable and that the Dems needed to back Jones seriously from the get-go at least since spring this year, when your lot were writing it off completely while masturbating yourself raw over noted failure Jon Ossoff, which makes your attempted rationalizations of the Dems blowing the budget by picking the absolute wrong target all the more funny. Not going to lie, outside takes on ga06 brighten my day a little Edit: to clarify, you and I agree that ga06 was the wrong appointment special election to blow the load on. That's not even hindsight talking. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 15:12 on Dec 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
gowb posted:Black women are badasses, news at eleven.  I swear if I ever see any of y'all (general y'all) ask why Dems should be reaching out to black people and giving a poo poo about our causes again, I'm gonna go awf We win elections. You need us. Your kinfolk can't be trusted 😂😂 Koalas March fucked around with this message at 15:10 on Dec 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
Harrow posted:I really hope your read here is right. At first I assumed that Republican turnout was way down due to Moore only getting 40-something percent of Trump's vote totals, but then I remembered it's an off-year special election so naturally that number probably should be even lower, huh? The turnout overall for an off-off year election was immense, with black folks turning out at Obama 2008 levels. This is AFTER the targeted efforts to suppress black voters. We want the country to get on track, we just need the ability to do so. Democrats at the local level did everything they could to help get those voting rights back for ex-felons and the community reciprocated. Mississippi, Georgia, Florida, etc should all be up for grabs if it is the right candidate. I have said it over and over again, the 16th Street Bombing is Alabama black people's 9/11. Going forward, candidates will have to have an incredible civil rights background (not hot sauce in bag or marched with MLK kinda sorta that one time) and the voters will show up. Equality, Social Justice, etc. That being said, it still should not be up to us for states to turn blue. People got to do something about their sexist and racist family members.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:20
|
|
|
'the dems ran a guy with a huge civil rights background in a state where they needed basically 100% of the black vote to win - clearly they only won because moore touched kids' - a smart person with good political opinions
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:24
|
|
|
Harrow posted:I really hope your read here is right. At first I assumed that Republican turnout was way down due to Moore only getting 40-something percent of Trump's vote totals, but then I remembered it's an off-year special election so naturally that number probably should be even lower, huh? I think it's pretty clear that GOP turnout was down, even accounting for the special election. Moore got about 150000 votes less than Sessions did in 2014 when Sessions was running unopposed, and I really don't see how a literal no contest could be anything but a massive demotivator to voters. So once again, turning out your base is how you win. The dems managed that, the GOP didn't. Potato Salad posted:Not going to lie, outside takes on ga06 brighten my day a little So if you accept that people can have legit criticism of the dems and their garbage-rear end assumptions about electability, why are you flying off the handle at people who bring them up?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:27
|
|
|
Endorph posted:'the dems ran a guy with a huge civil rights background in a state where they needed basically 100% of the black vote to win - clearly they only won because moore touched kids' - a smart person with good political opinions I think the numerous articles breathlessly talking about Jones' lack of black outreach is what got me the angriest. Seriously, the man on the street bullshit from Yankee white folks interviewing black folks on the street to try to make it sound like we are low information was some of the most racist poo poo from liberals to come from this election.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
it feels like people are just incapable of understanding things can happen for multiple reasons. the race was tighter than usual in the polls even before the accusations. trump got more unpopular, the accusations landed, jones redoubled his efforts when it looked like a win was in reach. jones fought tooth and nail for this win. obviously he's not full communism now if that's what you're looking for but acting like he's a bland centrist who only won because his opponent was a pedophile is literally ignoring reality. he has things that appealed to the people he needed to win and he took advantage of that. moore's turnout was way down, but his turnout was way up. If any one of those things hadn't been there, including the accusations, he probably wouldn't have won, but he wouldn't have even gotten close with just the accusations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:35
|
|
|
Is there anyone who actually thinks Jones would have won if he was running against Strange?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:35
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Is there anyone who actually thinks Jones would have won if he was running against Strange? No, but now I wonder if it would only have been because we would never have made the attempt.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Is there anyone who actually thinks Jones would have won if he was running against Strange? I do. People don't like Luther Strange in Alabama. He was part of the Gov. Bentley fuckery, which also hurt the turnout of repubs in Alabama. That motherfucker should be in jail
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:39
|
|
|
Patrick Spens posted:It Alabama you utter lunatic. yeah, every is absolutely a happy overstatement. My Opponent Is A Pedophile is still a really hard advantage to blow
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
As I've said before, the race was always winnable. The big reason why the dems haven't been doing well in traditionally red states is because they've been following the rear end-backwards electoral strategy of not even trying in places where they weren't ahead already for the past decade or so. E: I mean, not only will you lose if you don't even try, but you're also letting local organizations and enthusiasm wither away, which makes it so much harder if someone decides to make a serious effort in the future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:yeah, every is absolutely a happy overstatement. My Opponent Is A Pedophile is still a really hard advantage to blow the democrats figured out they need to get out their base to win, and this is fantastic loving news. now let's see that strategy reused.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
Happy to be wrong.  And while I'm excited that black people saved us from more I worry that they're now going to be scapegoated for every loss from now until forever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Happy to be wrong. Blaming black people has been the default for awhile.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
sirtommygunn posted:Blaming black people has been the default for awhile. But they turned out better than they did for Obama (per NPR this morning)! So this is the new location of the perpetually moving goal-post of What We Expect From The Blacks (WWEFTB, WeftB)
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:I’m happy Jones won if only to deny the republican agenda somewhat. But I hope this victory doesn’t vindicate the milquetoast establishment democrats and continues to advance the agenda of the left wing side. The issue with this logic is that Democratic Party leadership will interpret literally any result as vindication. If they lost, they would assume it was because they were too far left and need to move more "towards the center." So, given that they'll feel vindicated by literally anything, it's best to at least prevent the Republican from winning. No matter the result, they absolutely won't give the left any real power or influence. They could lose literally every election for 20 years straight and this would not change. It will require actual public backlash in order to force change, rather than a voluntary choice on the party of Democratic leadership. All this being said, I think the likely result in the medium-to-long term is that Democrats make gains until 2020 or so (due to Trump backlash, which seems like a quicker and somewhat stronger version of Bush's backlash), and then start losing again after they regain power (due to reminding everyone that they're not going to do anything substantial to change the status quo).
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
Now that we apparently are the saviors of the country, will democrats start helping us out or will we continue to be used and ignored?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:The issue with this logic is that Democratic Party leadership will interpret literally any result as vindication. If they lost, they would assume it was because they were too far left and need to move more "towards the center." So, given that they'll feel vindicated by literally anything, it's best to at least prevent the Republican from winning. No matter the result, they absolutely won't give the left any real power or influence. They could lose literally every election for 20 years straight and this would not change. It will require actual public backlash in order to force change, rather than a voluntary choice on the party of Democratic leadership. There's still time to change that if enough progressives can ride the wave and then get their feet in the door on policy negotiations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
Am I understanding that earlier post correctly that less than 50% of the people who voted for Trump turned out for Moore, while nearly 90% of those for Hillary showed up for Jones? Is that what it really takes? The other team just not participating? Those numbers on whites...god drat...
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:Now that we apparently are the saviors of the country, will democrats start helping us out or will we continue to be used and ignored? What does your heart tell you?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
Uroboros posted:Am I understanding that earlier post correctly that less than 50% of the people who voted for Trump turned out for Moore, while nearly 90% of those for Hillary showed up for Jones? Now you understand why the Republicans own the government
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 10:58 |
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:There's still time to change that if enough progressives can ride the wave and then get their feet in the door on policy negotiations. Yeah, and that would be good, but in the short term I wouldn't count on it happening to a large enough extent that it can allow significant positive legislation to be passed. My personal feeling is that it will probably be at least another 10-20 years until currently younger people are a large enough portion of the voting population to potentially have more influence than Boomer and Gen-Xers (who definitely aren't going to be good on these issues). And even then, I wouldn't really expect much. We might get expand social welfare some, but there's no way we'll make any significant progress towards addressing social/material inequality. The key problem is that the sort of people capable of going far in politics are usually people who are privileged and will be prosperous even in a lovely economy, and they're unlikely to ever truly act against the interests of their class. And that also doesn't bode well for meaningfully addressing the effects of bigotry, because truly addressing things like racial inequality would require significant wealth redistribution (reparations, in other words).
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 17:01
|
|