|
https://twitter.com/fightfortheftr/status/951954240234287105
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 07:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 15:08 |
|
|
 Why is it advertising election day, though? Is it already too late for a primary?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 07:20
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:
ca's a jungle primary state so it's possible schiff draws another dem in the general fortunately for him the two declared dems are a complete nobody and the author of books like misery loves cabernet and love the wine you're with whose main issue is expanding california's prop system to the federal government for things like gun control and abortion rights
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 07:32
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:ca's a jungle primary state so it's possible schiff draws another dem in the general Oh I didn't know he was CA, that makes sense then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 07:33
|
|
|
And you're not allowed to keep up a billboard saying Trump is a Nazi: quote:A billboard in Chico stirred up some controversy as it depicted Donald Trump dressed in a Nazi uniform, standing alongside the swastika-inspired anti-45 logo that became popular shortly after the election.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 07:41
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:And you're not allowed to keep up a billboard saying Trump is a Nazi: sucks that a privately held ad company can silence the truth like that. hopefully the same doesn't happen to the schiff billboard
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 07:43
|
|
|
Condiv posted:sucks that a privately held ad company can silence the truth like that. hopefully the same doesn't happen to the schiff billboard They have to make room for more billboards advertising Evangelical hotlines and crisis pregnancy centers. It honestly perplexes me why billboard advertising still exists tbh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 08:01
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:So what would you do to specifically cater to white working class people, over the broader working class? Possibly culturally-targeted messaging or something. Like ads targeted at a region in the mid-west (or whatever) that reference issues specific to that area or include people voters in that area could relate to. You're right that the actual policy wouldn't change at all, though. But it's not inconceivable that regionally targeted messaging could vary in some way. I can't think of any interpretation of "appealing to the white working class" that makes sense on a national level, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 08:16
|
|
|
Just like the Grand Bargain, it takes the GOP being frothing mad to keep the Democrats to not sell the country for a handful of magic beans. Heck, even an IOU promising magic beans at an unfixed date in the future. Why don't I ever meet these types across a poker table? Sephyr fucked around with this message at 15:11 on Jan 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 15:02
|
|
|
republicans dont actually need democrats. They control all 3 branches of government. The deal was to try to preserve elements of DACA. If you look at the linked article you'll note that the white houses remarks derailed the talks because rhetorical cover from Trump was necessary for the republicans to consider replacing Teahadist votes with Democrat votes - not because Democrats were selling out until personally insulted. so now we're left gambling that the republicans will be unable to come to an agreement among themselves to screw daca over sounds great
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 15:09
|
|
|
please continue to argue in favor of enabling trump while proclaiming he is the worst thing to ever happen, it’s quite funny
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 16:39
|
|
|
edit: feh
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
lol yes let’s sell sanctuary cities down the river instead of fighting for a clean DACA bill, this is totally not enabling trump and the neo-gestapo that is ICE
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 16:46
|
|
|
Yardbomb posted:All I've heard to this degree is she's doing a thing about sexual assault and economic injustice or something like that, so I don't know what I'm supposed to consider about that other than "It's good regardless"? Like yeah big surprise it's a white lady and all, but whoever gets to do it - I want to do it, because knowing this shithole country it just as easily could've gotten smothered instead, I dunno. Yeah that's the typical defense of whiteness from white liberals who steal the thunder from poc
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 16:57
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Yeah that's the typical defense of whiteness from white liberals who steal the thunder from poc Didn’t she go talk to those women after the fact and bring them in when she found out about them/got caught? What is their reaction to it?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 18:17
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Yeah that's the typical defense of whiteness from white liberals who steal the thunder from poc The problem is POC all too often get ignored until a white person boosts their signal. You can say "people should pay more attention to POC voices" and that is true but also just a "should" not an "are" and "should" only takes us so far in the present. The big problem seems to be when (as is, unfortunately, usually the case) the white person doesn't point credit back where credit is due. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Jan 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 18:28
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The problem is POC all too often get ignored until a white person boosts their signal. You can say "people should pay more attention to POC voices" and that is true but also just a "should" not an "are" and "should" only takes us so far in the present. And we've been doing it for centuries. Everything they do is cool enough to steal but we can't stop being lovely to them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:For what it's worth, the women of color I follow online drag white feminists because they make a big performative show about solidarity with women of color/poc in general while action-wise their main goals seem to be clawing some social power away from white men for themselves. Alyssa Milano. Yeesh, lot of millennials not watching TnT Charmed reruns.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 19:09
|
|
|
On thing that I would like to bring to the table is how all this talking to lower class Trump supporters leaves out who were the min people who put him into office. Middle Class, racist, suburbanites. Now why is this not talked about? Because the people who run the shity magazine and lovely newspapers doing this live with these creatures as their neighbors. They don't want to confront the fact that money doesn't "civilize" someone. In fact it tends to make them worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
ya these white sex crime victims should really keep it down, this isn't about them #metoo
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Anyway, it has mentioned many many times before, but the issue isn't the general election pool of voters as a whole (which is generally ingrained Republicans) but the shift in voting trends from Romney to Trump, especially in the Midwest. Saying most Trump voters were "poor whites" is true, but it doesn't actually say anything meaningful. I think the actual issue here is that the same stories keep on coming out and no one calls them out on it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Saying most Trump voters were "poor whites" is true, but it doesn't actually say anything meaningful. I mean, that actually isn't true. What is true is that Trump's support leaned lower income relative to the support of other candidates in the Republican primary and lower income support made a significant difference in certain regions, but generally speaking higher income whites still made up a larger portion of Trump's total support. I agree that it's dumb to focus so much on the "white working class," though I think that goes both directions. The media shouldn't act like working class whites are super important and need to be specifically appealed to, but liberals also shouldn't treat working class whites like a uniquely Trump-supporting demographic relative to whites as a whole.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 21:40
|
|
|
I hate to be Mondale Guy but I'll note the laser focus on the middle class probably also dates to that election, when the CW and the DNC both determined that losing them is why Mondale crashed. "Reagan Democrats" and all that *spits* Naturally it was implicit racism all along. Focusing on the Racist Working Class is yet another means by which the media denies this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
Chelsea Manning is going to run for the Senate in Maryland.  Edit: note, she is attempting to primary a sitting Democratic senator, as far as I can tell, not running for an open seat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
yeah she's primarying ben cardin, who happens to be the ranking member of the senate foreign relations committee
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
Boon posted:For instance, "border security" might mean money for a wall, increased agents and equipment, etc... and it might stem from racism. But if additional money for border technology is the price for DACA and not kicking people out of the country, then I would expect the Dems to make that deal. As the GOP adds more poison, that calculus changes. Just want to note that this smacks of the same calculus that allowed the Fugitive Slave Act to become actual law. "But at least we were able to preserve the union." *civil war happens anyway*
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:yeah she's primarying ben cardin, who happens to be the ranking member of the senate foreign relations committee Why do people never run for state seats or the house? Why do they always jump to a senate seat?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:44
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:Why do people never run for state seats or the house? Why do they always jump to a senate seat? People so all the time. If you have national presence, its easier to unseat a dem in a national seat because you will receive national support they might not have. It makes some sense.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
SlipUp posted:ya these white sex crime victims should really keep it down, this isn't about them #metoo Not really from here but yeah I get this creepy feeling sometimes when people get on about "Fuckin Rose McGowan stealing our thunder" or whoever else, like was she just not supposed to speak out as another victim? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 01:38
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:Why do people never run for state seats or the house? Why do they always jump to a senate seat? Most people do, objectively, empirically?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 01:42
|
|
|
Also if you're going to run a protest campaign with little chance of winning it is all about finding the sweet spot between an office that will garner little earned media and an office where you're gimmick gets crowded out (president). Mayor works for local issues but for something like foriegn policy the senate is the lowest office you can run for that influences the issue.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 01:48
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:Why do people never run for state seats or the house? Why do they always jump to a senate seat? In her case it's understandable given that it was the federal government which tortured her and a Senator has more power to do something about the federal government's war crimes, coverups, illegal retaliation against whistleblowers, inhumane treatment of prisoners etc
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 01:51
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:A lot of people on the left are too goddamn cool to actually be part of the Democrat coalition/party; they just prefer snippy fuckin comments that reliably leads to someone bitching to burn the whole system down. IMO this sort of cynical nihilism is part of what brought us fuckin trump, cuz 'gently caress em all' has remained a perfectly safe position to take socially no matter what fuckin persuasion or ideology you have. Maybe if you don't want a cynical mistrustful voting base, don't represent yourselves as powerlusting nihilists? TheDeadlyShoe posted:The left has fuckin abdicated attempts at any sort of moral leadership. The rise of Third-Wayism among the Democrats is entirely due to electoral collapse of running to the left. Cuz the left of the time stopped caring, and stopped making their case, and stopped voting. Then retroactively blamed everyone else for it.  "Maybe you should think about this cycle of "we can gently caress you over because we can win without you", "why didn't you vote for us you ingrates, we were right to gently caress you over!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 02:03
|
|
|
I like how every single person who gets into this thread punching left just focuses on tone or meta arguments. There's never an actual policy argument.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 03:13
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:I like how every single person who gets into this thread punching left just focuses on tone or meta arguments. There's never an actual policy argument. https://www.vox.com/2018/1/4/16842458/jon-favreau-pod-save-america
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 03:20
|
|
|
Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that the entire thrust of the anti-left argument, built over years, has been that it's all straight white men, and yet Obama's inner circle of advisors, at least the ones employed by this dude's podcast empire, are apparently 100% white dudebros?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 03:25
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that the entire thrust of the anti-left argument, built over years, has been that it's all straight white men, and yet Obama's inner circle of advisors, at least the ones employed by this dude's podcast empire, are apparently 100% white dudebros? You just realised? Projection has been the hallmark of the anti-left for years. Eventually they end up going down the rabbit hole of literal neonazi propaganda to own the leftists.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 03:28
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:I like how every single person who gets into this thread punching left just focuses on tone or meta arguments. There's never an actual policy argument. Yeah, I've pointed this out many times. You can tell that they feel sort of irritated/annoyed and then go searching for a way to justify their emotional reaction. Since they're usually not willing to actually argue against leftist ideology (which they often support on paper, even if they don't feel the same sort of urgency about implementing it) they're forced to come up with some other justification that allows their gut feelings to make sense without implying anything bad about themselves. Usually this takes the form of one of two things: either implying that attacks on Democrats are the same thing as claiming there's no difference between Republicans and Democrats (and often spinning this into an accusation of racism by going "are you saying the millions of people hurt by a Republican being elected don't matter?!"), or conflating attacks on Democrats with a decision to not vote. But at the end of the day, there's no evidence that this criticism aimed at Democrats actually causes any harm, or at least any more harm than the alternative of silencing all criticism. The main reason they feel this way is usually related to them having a strawman stereotype in their heads of a "typical radical leftist." And center-left liberals are hardly the only ones guilty of this; it's the same thing as when leftists assume the liberals they're arguing with are lanyards who make six figures or whatever. It's also possible that in many cases they conflate any attacks on Democrats with Republicans, since they're used to a political climate where that's usually the case. While the far left has always existed, they rarely received any focus until fairly recently (maybe starting with OWS and reaching its current point in the 2016 primary). I actually think this specific brand of policy-less objection to leftists is fairly unique to this forum, though. If you go elsewhere, there are a lot of liberals who have no problem actively being against leftist ideology and being directly opposed to socialism. The people who argue on these forums are actually usually significantly more left-wing than your average liberal. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 03:40 on Jan 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 03:35
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I actually think this specific brand of policy-less objection to leftists is fairly unique to this forum, though. If you go elsewhere, there are a lot of liberals who have no problem actively being against leftist ideology and being directly opposed to socialism. The people who argue on these forums are actually usually significantly more left-wing than your average liberal. One day soon my plan to destroy America with Autonomic Government will see me slain by an angry mob of 110 year old GOP voters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 03:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 15:08 |
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that the entire thrust of the anti-left argument, built over years, has been that it's all straight white men, and yet Obama's inner circle of advisors, at least the ones employed by this dude's podcast empire, are apparently 100% white dudebros? I'd hardly call a couple of speechwriters and a spokesman an "inner circle of advisors". Like, if you really want his actual inner circle it would be like, Valerie Jarrett, Axelrod, his wife, and Biden. Plus, you can tell these guys actually take that criticism to heart because the people they've brought on since they founded Crooked have been a lot more diverse. only about half of their shows are hosted by white guys (PSA, PStW, Lovett, and Majority54), the other half are hosted by Deray, Ira Madison, and Ana Marie Cox, with the last one being a rotating conversation between different people each week. Plus their network of contributors only has two white guys, Ben Rhodes and a token anti-Trump Republican.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 03:50
|
|
