|
viral spiral posted:It's pretty funny to watch Jaxyon and botany insist that neoliberal dems are owed our votes viral spiral posted:botany and Jaxyon telling us the party of superdelegates cares about democracy now Watching you repeatedly strawman because you can't argue honestly is pretty funny
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 13:22 |
|
|
botany posted:it is amazing you can look at GOP policies and dem policies on, e.g., gay people I mean that's the reason that even if every single Dem up and down the ballot came to my house, shat on my rug, rubbed it in, and then kicked the family dog and said "heh you're going to vote for us anyway because Republicans want to lynch you" I would just say "yep you've got my vote". However, I'm tired of those Dems losing anyway and delivering me and my loved ones into Republican control because they can't stop grifting and fellating the 1% for two seconds and expect that using me as a prop will let them continue to get away with loving the poor and non-rich minorities as hard as possible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
Also don't lump me with Botany
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Also don't lump me with Botany yeah please dont
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
i mean, i am aware that the GOP's policies on gay people are horrific. reagan let hiv gently caress people over cause he viewed it as a gay disease after all. republicans would love to make any homosexuality illegal too. they would love to allow gay people to be killed in cold blood with no consequences. so yeah, of course there's a difference. but the current trajectory of the dem party doesn't mean much to me as an lgbtq person if i die because i can't get healthcare. or i'm worked into an early grave by increasingly lax regulation of employers while dems help cut the legs out from underneath labor. and that trajectory doesn't change if the dems crush democracy whereever they can. so again, why should i vote for them?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
Maybe LGBT people might be better served trying to ensure the possibility that one day there will be a place on the electoral landscape for the big flaming gay parade party instead of saying "well pack it up folks we've got the LGBT people might be human if it helps us beat the republicans party and that's good enough forever" Maybe at least that's a legitimate view that LGBT people might hold with good reason.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
I'd like to vote for single-payer and no more war in the primaries, but then I realized my vote will be nullified by some rear end in a top hat bought off by google at the conventions But yeah this party still deserves my vote
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
botany posted:again: i do not give a poo poo why they do it as long as they do it That's pretty loving stupid and half the problem, tbh, that people see "Dems supported gay marriage" and not their reasons for doing it ie being forced to despite not actually wanting to
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:05
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Watching you repeatedly strawman because you can't argue honestly is pretty funny Says man who didn't bother to tell me why I was wrong, just that I was
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:05
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i mean, i am aware that the GOP's policies on gay people are horrific. reagan let hiv gently caress people over cause he viewed it as a gay disease after all. republicans would love to make any homosexuality illegal too. so yeah, of course there's a difference. but the current trajectory of the dem party doesn't mean much to me as an lgbtq person if i die because i can't get healthcare. or i'm worked into an early grave by increasingly lax regulation of employers while dems help cut the legs out from underneath labor. and that trajectory doesn't change if the dems crush democracy whereever they can. so again, why should i vote for them? i'm sure if you re-read this post you can figure out the answer yourself since it's really not that difficult to do and you're clearly not as stupid as NFS
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:05
|
|
|
botany posted:i'm sure if you re-read this post you can figure out the answer yourself since it's really not that difficult to do and you're clearly not as stupid as NFS i already did botany. my answer is to not vote for them. yeah, that puts me in more danger, but it also has a better chance of changing things than continuing to support the status quo. quote:because, you incorrigible moron, the party that was dragged kicking and screaming into supporting a good policy is still better than the party that wasn't and isn't. and i'm trying to drag them kicking and screaming to other good policies by only voting for dems that aren't terrible and poo poo (and aren't oligarchs). do you get it now?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:07
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:That's pretty loving stupid and half the problem, tbh, that people see "Dems supported gay marriage" and not their reasons for doing it ie being forced to despite not actually wanting to is this the first time that you thought about politics? have you never bothered to actually read any books? politics has always been the history of reluctant assholes being pushed to support policies by a large enough mass of people here's the thing: courts don't give a poo poo if your health care benefits are the result of politicians afraid of not being re-elected. you think it matters if the people who voted for the civil rights act of '64 were reluctant? you think a woman suing for fair pay under the lily ledbetter act cares what was in obama's heart when he signed it? none of this poo poo matters, outcomes matter
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:12
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i already did botany. my answer is to not vote for them. yeah, that puts me in more danger, but it also has a better chance of changing things than continuing to support the status quo. no but as i said you're a lost cause
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
botany posted:here's the thing: courts don't give a poo poo if your health care benefits are the result of politicians afraid of not being re-elected. you think it matters if the people who voted for the civil rights act of '64 were reluctant? Well, yes it might go some way to explain why America is the way it is in terms of racial inequality in tyool 2018.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
botany posted:is this the first time that you thought about politics? have you never bothered to actually read any books? Nah it actually does matter if their goal is to do the bare minimum possible while portraying themselves as the good progressive one's
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
Also a good way to push people to do a thing is to vote for them when they don't support policies you like, says noted good thought haver botany
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
botany posted:no but as i said you're a lost cause can't believe that "not willing to support oligarchy" == "lost cause" to a supposed socialist. how does someone who supposedly votes for die linke come to thinking that supporting the destruction of democracy is good for democracy?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:Also a good way to push people to do a thing is to vote for them when they don't support policies you like, says noted good thought haver botany i mean not to repeat all my ~good thoughts~ but my stance has been pretty clear: you push as hard as you can to primary fuckers from the left and then you pull the lever for any garbage can with a "D"-label. the primary part does the pushing, the garbage can part makes sure republicans don't get into power in your incredibly bad two party political system. that is the correct approach, and it's the only correct approach. that said i think we've been over poo poo and it's past midnight so i'm out for the day. peace
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
botany posted:i mean not to repeat all my ~good thoughts~ but my stance has been pretty clear: you push as hard as you can to primary fuckers from the left and then you pull the lever for any garbage can with a "D"-label. the primary part does the pushing, the garbage can part makes sure republicans don't get into power in your incredibly bad two party political system. that is the correct approach, and it's the only correct approach. but you already know the dems are rigging their primaries so why would you keep claiming this? unless you're being disingenuous and arguing for never pushing left?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:21
|
|
|
botany posted:is this the first time that you thought about politics? have you never bothered to actually read any books? OK well tens of thousands of Americans die needlessly from lack of access to health care in the richest country in the world while the superrich hoover up more and more money and crush the livelihood of everyone else, and if you run a bank you literally cannot be convicted of a crime because it's bad for shareholder confidence, meanwhile trillions of dollars are funneled to war profiteers to pay for bombing foreign children who don't even know who we are and this despite people electing a Democratic supermajority in 2008 so it appears the outcomes are not that great no matter how much power Dems have, which might explain why people stopped voting for them after that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
botany posted:i mean not to repeat all my ~good thoughts~ but my stance has been pretty clear: you push as hard as you can to primary fuckers from the left and then you pull the lever for any garbage can with a "D"-label. the primary part does the pushing, the garbage can part makes sure republicans don't get into power in your incredibly bad two party political system. that is the correct approach, and it's the only correct approach. Youre not even from here you condescending moron
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
Do you think perhaps that maybe the democrats might peg your brilliant strategy of voting for anything with a D on it and just ignore or get rid of the first part? That perhaps voting for any democrat is pushing the other way?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
If any garbage D is guaranteed every non-Republican vote if they get through the primaries, the obvious 🎵game theory🎵 optimal strategy for the Democratic party is to rig every primary in favor of oligarchy because that's the most lucrative outcome for them personally.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
i guess botany is just gonna run off without ever explaining how i'm terrible and fygm for being upset about macron stealing my raise how odd that a supposed leftist would get mad about a lower class worker wanting a well-earned raise... 
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
botany posted:i mean not to repeat all my ~good thoughts~ but my stance has been pretty clear: you push as hard as you can to primary fuckers from the left and then you pull the lever for any garbage can with a "D"-label. the primary part does the pushing, the garbage can part makes sure republicans don't get into power in your incredibly bad two party political system. that is the correct approach, and it's the only correct approach. This is the right strategy, but the Condivs of the world can't adopt it because it would provide fewer opportunities for jacking off about how righteous they are. You're operating in this debate on totally false premises: you're opponents are genuine dead-enders. They don't care at all about consequences so making arguments about what actually happens in the world is pointless. It's all about feeling morally superior.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i guess botany is just gonna run off without ever explaining how i'm terrible and fygm for being upset about macron stealing my raise It's only socialism if you don't benefit from it, hence the only true socialists are actually capitalists. Vote democrat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
botany posted:here's the thing: courts don't give a poo poo if your health care benefits are the result of politicians afraid of not being re-elected. you think it matters if the people who voted for the civil rights act of '64 were reluctant? you think a woman suing for fair pay under the lily ledbetter act cares what was in obama's heart when he signed it? none of this poo poo matters, outcomes matter I don't understand how people don't get this. You want some or do you want none...and, if you're actually one of the outgroups that is punished by the other side's platform do you want to be hurt? . Voting 3rd party essentially takes you out of the game in our society. The only way that it doesn't is if one party gets an unassailable super-majority and changes the fundamental rules about how this whole game show goes down. I really don't get it. I guess its because I'm both a minority, part of labor and not rich that I would rather have some than none or, worse, be hurt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:This is the right strategy, but the Condivs of the world can't adopt it because it would provide fewer opportunities for jacking off about how righteous they are. You're operating in this debate on totally false premises: you're opponents are genuine dead-enders. They don't care at all about consequences so making arguments about what actually happens in the world is pointless. it's a strategy that cannot work because the primaries are being rigged. so why would i adopt a doomed strategy? quote:It's all about feeling morally superior. i agree. all this huffing and puffing about people not voting correctly is about feeling morally superior. hell, botany even admitted that he feels morally superior to non-voters
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
Because endlessly vacillating between some and none for the rest of time seems like a pretty poo poo option, and some people are willing to stake their wellbeings and, if it comes to it, the wellbeing of their fellows on trying for something better than that. I'm not going to have a go at you for not being comfortable making that decision personally because you may rightly feel bad about inflicting your convictions on others, a striker rightly fears the cost of losing their job to their family if they fail, and Capital has always preyed on that abundance of compassion to shield themselves. But it becomes objectionable when people try to paint the some/none false dichotomy as the only true and right path. What are they going to take from you, your life? They're going to take that from you anyway right now, just piece by piece, and the same from your children and family and everyone else, because it's worth more to them that way. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Apr 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:33
|
|
|
TyroneGoldstein posted:I don't understand how people don't get this. because that some is getting to be less and less year over year. and minorities and outgroups are already being hurt by dems policies and lack of a spine. what you're describing is already a game theory principle, and oddly enough people will choose none when they are getting a terrible deal. and oddly enough, that's actually a good choice to avoid terrible deals.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:34
|
|
|
TyroneGoldstein posted:I don't understand how people don't get this. Reminder in 2009 the Democrats voted against drug reimportation from Canada even though a majority of Republicans supported it because Obama has already made a deal with the drug companies to kill it in exchange for them publicly supporting PPACA. Literally it had enough votes to pass into law in an up-or-down vote but Democrats filibustered it anyway, purposely killing poor people in exchange for donations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:35
|
|
|
hell, obama set dreamers up and dems abandoned them to the whims of republicans. you can't claim dems are defending minorities when they support rahm emmanuels, massive deportations, and lipinski of all loving people
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:37
|
|
|
Condiv posted:hell, obama set dreamers up and dems abandoned them to the whims of republicans. you can't claim dems are defending minorities when they support rahm emmanuels, massive deportations, and lipinski of all loving people Oh yea that too, the DREAM Act had three Republicans crossing the aisle to support it, failed anyway because 5 Democrats voted against cloture (and the party is still supporting the 2 of 5 who remain against primary challengers from pro-immigrant leftists)
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:38
|
|
|
i'm gonna go ahead and assume that everyone who's waddling into the thread to say "push left in the primary, that's the right place for it!" is a centrist that doesn't want any progress cause every single one of them so far completely ignore when it's brought up that the dems are rigging the primaries. i mean, they wouldn't run and hide from that truth if they actually wanted to push the party left right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:52
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i'm gonna go ahead and assume that everyone who's waddling into the thread to say "push left in the primary, that's the right place for it!" is a centrist that doesn't want any progress cause every single one of them so far completely ignore when it's brought up that the dems are rigging the primaries. i mean, they wouldn't run and hide from that truth if they actually wanted to push the party left right? Assume whatever you want, you're a moron who doesn't follow politics. What, did you think Dems are going to let you push your candidates with no resistance? Dumbass.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2018 23:55
|
|
|
This thread is largely a waste because it's just people poo poo posting strawmen, but here's my view: 1. In close elections, you vote the lesser evil. Even if they're not great, one or the other will win. It makes obvious sense to choose the least worst option. 2. In slam-dunk elections, vote whomever you want. Send a message, whatever, by definition your vote doesn't affect the outcome. While doing 1 & 2: a. Work on reforming the election system to kill FPTP b. Work on reforming the election system to allow 3rd parties a real chance c. Work on other reforms(voter suppression, fighting ID, felony disenfrachisement etc) d. primary insufficiently left Dems from the left to while we're still in a 2 party system to try and influence the main party e. get involved in local politics, to try and gain influence None of this will be easy, or without effort, and some of it may not even be possible. I know it sucks. That's why a lot of us drink. or Z. Explain on the internet how you'd like it to be, and how unfair it is and claim to be the wokest.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 00:00
|
|
|
"Push left in the primary, dumbass." "The party is literally forcing leftists out of primaries." "Oh, did you think they wouldn't resist, you dumbass?" Great talk here.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 00:03
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:"Push left in the primary, dumbass." Yeah it's pretty dumb. "Lets primary from the left" "but it's haaaaaard"
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 00:08
|
|
|
Primary pushing and voting strait down the party line no matter the cost never got anybody anything except the Republican party control of almost every state and the entire federal government including the most fascist president in modern history, amirite?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 00:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 13:22 |
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Assume whatever you want, you're a moron who doesn't follow politics. i expect them to not be putting their thumbs on the scale during primaries yes. i'm not a dumbass for expecting them to follow democratic principles lots of people were surprised to find out the dems were doing this, and the dems don't seem to be particularly open about it either considering they claimed discussing the fact would hurt minorities
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2018 00:10
|
|