|
That's a terrible argument, JC, even for you. "General elections aren't democratic; therefore, the Democrats need to make primary elections undemocratic as well!"
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:02 |
|
|
that would be a terrible argument but thankfully i am not making it
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:the electoral college is a structural barrier, genius Not reaally. I mean if one actually bothered to campaign in those smaller states rater then going to fundraisers in Martha's Vineyard, Brooklyn, and LA, I bet one could flip some of them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 01:37
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:the electoral college gives disproportionate weight to votes in low population states, which tend to be white and republican. it’s also inherently gerrymandered, because democrats are concentrated in states like New York and California. if those aren’t structural barriers then nothing is it clearly isn't a structural barrier as hillary would've won if she were competent and hadn't ignored important states like a fool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 01:38
|
|
|
Ahahaha, oh my God, JeffClay:JeffersonClay posted:The FL 76 results are real good news. Turnout heavily favored republicans—45.7 R to 40 D and 13.8 NPA. The democrat won 52 to 45 with 3 for the libertarian. So the Republican actually got a lower share of the vote than republicans represented in the electorate, and the democrat got 12 points higher than democrats in the electorate. So either the democrat swept like 90% of the independents or she was able to peel off some Republican voters. Both are excellent news, and tend to indicate the Chapo wisdom that there are no moderate voters to appeal to did not hold here. "THE CHAPO WISDOM"
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 01:57
|
|
|
structural barriers don’t need to be insurmountable to qualify. like Bernie won Michigan I guess there weren’t any structural barriers to his success there. are y’all arguing that leftist candidates have zero chance to ever win primaries?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 01:59
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:structural barriers don’t need to be insurmountable to qualify. "Oh okay, well I guess I can't keep arguing that the structural barriers don't exist - but they're not THAT bad! " -the retrenchment of a horrible JC argument
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:03
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:structural barriers don’t need to be insurmountable to qualify. like Bernie won Michigan I guess there weren’t any structural barriers to his success there. are y’all arguing that leftist candidates have zero chance to ever win primaries? there has to be some kind of barrier to qualify. and that hillary got as close as she did while being laughably incompetent, and failing to even campaign in some states, indicates the ec was not a structural barrier of any kind. hth jc also, i'm glad you admit that the dem party was trying to freeze bernie out during the primary. nice that we agree on something for once
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:09
|
|
|
Majorian posted:"Oh okay, well I guess I can't keep arguing that the structural barriers don't exist - but they're not THAT bad! are you mistakenly responding to me instead of Condiv because this is literally his argument and not at all mine like the EC has elected a Republican president over the popular will of the country twice in as many decades if you’re not willing to consider that a structural barrier to democrats winning then I’m not going to try to disabuse you of your idiocy JeffersonClay fucked around with this message at 02:13 on Feb 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:11
|
|
|
Condiv posted:What propaganda was that specifically? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:16
|
|
|
SaTaMaS posted:RIGGED RIGGED RIGGED except, that was true? hth satamas, try reading the news sometime oh wait, i guess news articles you don't like are russian propaganda
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:20
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:like the EC has elected a Republican president over the popular will of the country twice in as many decades Once was actually the US Supreme Court electing Bush.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:29
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:are you mistakenly responding to me instead of Condiv because this is literally his argument and not at all mine Mmmm, nope. Your argument a couple posts ago was, "Well it doesn't matter that the Democratic primary has structural barriers, because the general does too." Which doesn't make sense, and is a horrible argument for a party that aspires to be, ya know, "democratic."
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:32
|
|
|
Condiv posted:except, that was true? hth satamas, try reading the news sometime LOL. The entire idea was absurd and demonstrably false from the beginning. The fact anyone still believes it just demonstrates how effective the Russian interference effort was and how susceptible Americans were to it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:35
|
|
|
Here’s the argument i’ve madeJeffersonClay posted:leftist candidates face structural barriers in primary elections. democrats face structural barriers in general elections. it is dishonest to assert structural barriers excuse leftist failures but not democratic failures can you quote me making the dumb argument you keep insisting I made?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:36
|
|
|
I mean, look at this! Look at what a dumb post you made:JeffersonClay posted:leftist candidates face structural barriers in primary elections. democrats face structural barriers in general elections. it is dishonest to assert structural barriers excuse leftist failures but not democratic failures You didn't even stop to think for a second, "Well gee, this probably doesn't help my argument, since the structural barriers in the general election don't favor Democrats, while the structural barriers in the Democratic primary do favor establishment candidates."
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:37
|
|
|
SaTaMaS posted:LOL. The entire idea was absurd and demonstrably false from the beginning. The fact anyone still believes it just demonstrates how effective the Russian interference effort was and how susceptible Americans were to it. i can't believe donna brazile was a russian agent!
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
or maybe donna brazile was a bernout tricked by russian propaganda like dem party memos? in any case, it's obvious that russia is behind all of this!
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:50
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I mean, look at this! Look at what a dumb post you made: you quoted the argument, in full. "it's dishonest to claim structural barriers prevent leftists from winning primaries and then ignore the structural barriers that prevent democrats from winning general elections" is the argument how is this too hard for you to understand?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 02:55
|
|
|
Condiv posted:or maybe donna brazile was a bernout tricked by russian propaganda like dem party memos? in any case, it's obvious that russia is behind all of this! http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044 quote:According to a Western European intelligence source, Russian hackers, using a series of go-betweens, transmitted the DNC emails to WikiLeaks with the intent of having them released on the verge of the Democratic Convention in hopes of sowing chaos. And that’s what happened—just a couple of days before Democrats gathered in Philadelphia, the emails came out, and suddenly the media was loaded with stories about trauma in the party. Crews of Russian propagandists—working through an array of Twitter accounts and websites, started spreading the story that the DNC had stolen the election from Sanders. (An analysis provided to Newsweek by independent internet and computer specialists using a series of algorithms show that this kind of propaganda, using the same words, went from Russian disinformation sources to comment sections on more than 200 sites catering to liberals, conservatives, white supremacists, nutritionists and an amazing assortment of other interest groups.) The fact that the dates of the most controversial emails—May 3, May 4, May 5, May 9, May 16, May 17, May 18, May 21—were after it was impossible for Sanders to win was almost never mentioned, and was certainly ignored by the propagandists trying to sell the “primaries were rigged” narrative. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 03:06
|
|
|
nice really old new you got there https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774 try keeping up with the news some time satamas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 03:08
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:you quoted the argument, in full. "it's dishonest to claim structural barriers prevent leftists from winning primaries and then ignore the structural barriers that prevent democrats from winning general elections" is the argument No one is ignoring the structural barriers against the Dems in the general, you dunce.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 03:13
|
|
|
Majorian posted:No one is ignoring the structural barriers against the Dems in the general, you dunce. JeffersonClay posted:when leftists lose, it’s all due to the structural barriers. when democrats lose, it’s because they’re bad and everyone hates them. that’s pretty convenient Majorian posted:Given how rarely leftists run in the U.S., thanks in part to the shifting of the Overton Window, yes - this is 100% correct, unironically. good lord you are dumb
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 03:24
|
|
|
Condiv posted:nice really old new you got there She herself says that she has no evidence that the the agreement had any effect at all on the primary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 03:25
|
|
|
SaTaMaS posted:She herself says that she has no evidence that the the agreement had any effect at all on the primary. quote:Right around the time of the convention, the leaked emails revealed Hillary’s campaign was grabbing money from the state parties for its own purposes, leaving the states with very little to support down-ballot races. A Politico story published on May 2, 2016, described the big fund-raising vehicle she had launched through the states the summer before, quoting a vow she had made to rebuild “the party from the ground up … when our state parties are strong, we win. That’s what will happen.” sorry about your lack of reading comprehension satamas. hillary was using the DNC to secure funds she shouldn't have had access to during the primary, rigging the primary for her.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 03:35
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:good lord you are dumb I was making fun of you and your laughable strawman, idiot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 03:46
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I was making fun of you and your laughable strawman, idiot. you were making fun of my laughable strongman by saying it was "100% correct, unironically" uh huh
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 03:51
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:you were making fun of my laughable strongman by saying it was "100% correct, unironically" Oh my God you're literally too dumb to mock.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 03:53
|
|
|
Condiv posted:sorry about your lack of reading comprehension satamas. hillary was using the DNC to secure funds she shouldn't have had access to during the primary, rigging the primary for her. It actually says nothing of the sort. What it's saying is that she was using the DNC to secure funds for the general election, which are the funds that Bernie would have had access to if he hadn't lost the primary. Badly. By both the the delegate count and the popular vote.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 03:55
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Oh my God you're literally too dumb to mock. lol your backpedaling here is pathetic
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 04:10
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:lol your backpedaling here is pathetic Sarcasm is not backpedaling.  Do you have some form of autism that gets worse on the internet or something? Like, where you're even worse at social cues online than everyone else is on the internet?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
Hey guys, Jeff Clay totally listens to Chapo, and is totally not lying about listening to Chapo:JeffersonClay posted:I stopped listening when they started with "the bernie bros aren't real" and "Clinton's only talking about Russia because she's desperate to distract"
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 04:15
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Sarcasm is not backpedaling. you've posted before about having high functioning autism, so I ask this very honestly, is it possible that posting something like "this is 100% correct, unironically" might not come off as sarcastic over the internet? you literally said it wasn't ironic. maybe the person with a communication issue here is you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 04:17
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:you've posted before about having high functioning autism, so I ask this very honestly, is it possible that posting something like "this is 100% correct, unironically" might not come off as sarcastic over the internet? you literally said it wasn't ironic. maybe the person with a communication issue here is you? Nah, I can understand the concept of hyperbole. (unlike you, apparently)
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 04:18
|
|
|
Holy poo poo shut up Majorian. You are not covering yourself in glory here. You misread JC’s argument and now you’re both just in a pissing match over who can call each other autistic the hardest (it’s both of you). Not even the thunder dome deserves this poo poo.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 07:48
|
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:Holy poo poo shut up Majorian. You are not covering yourself in glory here. Hi, welcome to Thunderdome, the place where we cover ourselves in glory.  e: jfc, you sure do a lot of whining about other people's posting ITT. Majorian fucked around with this message at 07:58 on Feb 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 07:56
|
|
|
Two autists enter, and never, ever leave.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 08:14
|
|
|
Inescapable Duck posted:Two autists enter, and never, ever leave. LMF evidently never saw my throwdown with fishmech in the Eastern Europe thread. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 08:43
|
|
|
Majorian posted:LMF evidently never saw my throwdown with fishmech in the Eastern Europe thread. And I thought Chernobyl was a disaster.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 09:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:02 |
|
|
SaTaMaS posted:It actually says nothing of the sort. What it's saying is that she was using the DNC to secure funds for the general election, which are the funds that Bernie would have had access to if he hadn't lost the primary. Badly. By both the the delegate count and the popular vote. quote:Right around the time of the convention, the leaked emails revealed Hillary’s campaign was grabbing money from the state parties for its own purposes, literally the first sentence there satamas. she was doing this before the general, and had access to the money the whole time, as we learned from the released memos that gave hillary that kind of control over the DNC. also, glad you finally stopped pretending that this is russian propaganda. it was a pretty dumb thing for you to argue edit: here's more evidence she was dipping into the joint fundraising well before she was nominated https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...m=.5be4d51e9d36 quote:Several campaign finance attorneys said the fund’s early investments in small-donor recruitment for Clinton were unusual, noting that a joint fundraising committee’s resources are traditionally focused on boosting a party nominee, typically through events at upscale hotels for deep-pocketed contributors. Condiv fucked around with this message at 10:44 on Feb 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2018 10:33
|
|