|
VitalSigns posted:
they still serve a role as theoretical tiebreakers AND it's a nice perk to give VIP's or party veterans so they feel important .
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 14:33 |
|
|
it's easier to say "abolish ice" than "abolish ice and then give the responsibilities of the 'good' aspects to other agencies". it'd probably poll better if fully explained.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:01
|
|
|
Feldegast42 posted:I'm sure the establishment hopes that the 2020 primaries are so chaotic that nobody will get the delegates needed and they can then coronate their handpicked successor (probably Booker, Biden or Harris), which to be honest isn't that far out of line (even though it hasn't happened in the last 50 years or so) yeah I think it is more this: Hieronymous Alloy posted:it's a nice perk to give VIP's or party veterans so they feel important . never underestimate how much the powerful enjoy their creature comforts and whine if you take them away
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:04
|
|
|
flashman posted:Heaven forbid someones politics being based on values and morals rather than focus groups and polling There is a big difference between recognizing reality and liking it. This is the way politics works, in particular for the left. Liberalism/progressivism/leftism what ever you want to call it is at it's core anti-authoritarian, it's about distributed power. Bottom up democracy. The answer to the Right isn't to emulate them, liberals don't think the same way, they don't fall in line the same way, We're stubborn, cantankerous and suspicious of arguments from "authority" so you can't motivate the left the same way that the Right is motivated. Yeah it would be great if you got a complete crop of lefty candidates all on the same page about priorities and policy agendas that all of the diverse interests groups that make up the left agreed on. But you are working in an environment where the Right has spent 4 decades and literally billions if not trillions of dollars building the propaganda and misinformation engines. Engines that have been so effective that even liberals are ashamed to wear the label. You can't counter something like that in one election cycle, you can't undo that much programing that quickly. You have to work from the bottom up. Build a coalition, find like minded individuals even if they don't agree on the specifics as long as they recognize the same problems. Form common cause, work on educating your immediate circuit of friends and family. This poo poo isn't going to get fixed over night, in the mean time we all do what ever we can to slow the regression down, educate ourselves and others and as far as electoral strategy goes, Vote your conscience and ideals in the primary, but vote party in the general. Because a bad Democrats is still better than the best Republican if for no other reason than to deny the regressives control of the legislative agenda. Cause frankly the problem that has always been the weakness of the left is that we don't do a good job of follow through. Think about how everyone wants to blame Obama for where we are now, because what he "sold out" or some bullshit. He told us, make him do it. Stay loving engaged and keep pushing him. but what happened in 2010? the loving left stayed home and the Regressives swept the house and put a kibosh on any further actions that Obama could have taken. What do you think might have happened if the left had got up off collective their asses and voted for in the same numbers they did in 2008? If rather than lose seats in the house and senate they had gained seats ideally more progressive seats. if the failure of the "public option" had motivated more of it's supporters to get out and redouble their efforts to demonstrate support for it, if the electorate had demonstrated approval of the direction things were going rather than getting apathetic because they didn't get exactly what they wanted instantly, like a bunch of whiny children who only got a single scoop of vanilla ice-cream when they wanted a triple scoop of chocolate. Change requires consistent, pressure and action we didn't get into this mess over night or even over one presidential term and we're not going to fix it overnight or even one presidential term, hell it's going to take decades unfuck this mess, decades of consistent actions. That means that the left needs to have the same staying power and stamina as the Right has demonstrated not the same strategies and tactics.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:11
|
|
|
blaming voters for not being motivated to vote for democrats is useful for one purpose, and one purpose alone. it's a great way to excuse any democratic failures. when you have the power to roll out Voters 2.0, the Sequel To Voters, that whole screed will become something more than masturbation. until then, if you're going to jerk off, could you please do so more quietly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
"this is how politics works," i say, in defense of a political strategy that lost a thousand seats in eight years and ceded every level of American power to a senile fox news grandpa.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
It's also stupid since unless you plan on spending time personally shaming each non-voter into getting out there it's a lot easier to just have the actual leaders not be poo poo and do what they are supposed to do (represent the voters) instead of just set up their lucrative private sector jobs via connections and totally not hand outs, or just sit and do nothing for decades while getting paid all the same. The old white guy that Alexandria beat didn't even bother trying to learn Spanish, what X in latinx meant, or even lived in his district. That doesn't even get into the human element that if rich assholes are sneering at you for not voting correctly while your family is suffering people are going to be turned off and maybe be even less inclined to vote. For all their MANY faults how many times do you see Republicans or their media mouthpieces calling their base stupid, lazy, and traitorous?
Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 22:24 on Jul 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
Skex posted:This is the way politics works, in particular for the left. Liberalism/progressivism/leftism what ever you want to call it is at it's core anti-authoritarian, it's about distributed power. Bottom up democracy. Holy hell
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
Liberalism as practiced by the democrat party is a top down Leninist style affair with a paid and highly controlled activist vanguard
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1017106469244809216 unsurprisingly, a centrist is refusing to support a lesser evil in the general, and is instead opting to split the vote
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:34
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:blaming voters for not being motivated to vote for democrats is useful for one purpose, and one purpose alone. it's a great way to excuse any democratic failures. No it's not, it's placing responsibility where responsibility belongs. This is a democracy, that means that the electorate (aka the voters) decide policy. They elect the leaders and they drive policy, every positive advance that has ever come in this country came from the bottom up. We voters are collectively responsible for the actions of our government. If you can get the electorate motivated about a subject sufficiently politicians will move. Understand there is a difference between a Charismatic Leader and a politician. Politicians in a democracy are accountable to their constituency. Popular public opinion matters, in fact if a politician ignores popular public opinion they are not doing their job. Our job as citizens and activists is to hold them accountable for their actions. And the United States winner take all first past the post electoral system that means you hold them accountable in the primary. You can complain all you want about money in politics, the media, whatever in the end it's who gets the most votes. Particularly in smaller profile local elections. See what AOC did in New York, She got up , did the work, walked the miles talked to the people and won her district over an entrenched career democrat who up until the moment of her victory was seen as a probably successor to Pelosi as speaker. She did such an effective job of advocating for her ideas and connecting to her constituency that she won on a write in for a complete different district. Imagine if some bright lefty had did that same work in that other district and had unseated another incumbent. That's how you change things. That woman is exactly what the left needs, someone willing to do the work and not just complain all of the time. What do you think is going to happen when you have more upsets like that one? And Yes blame the voters, because they are the ones who get the final say. Trump isn't president because Democrats suck, or because Clinton was a bad candidate or frankly even because of Russian interference (which yes was loving real) Trump is president because of those who voted for him, those who either didn't vote and those who voted for a third party (effectively the same thing). You loving knew what was at stake, you knew what those regressive fucks wanted and you could have done your part to prevent it but you didn't because a symbolic victory meant more to you than the harm these fuckers are causing to real people. If you were eligible and either didn't vote, voted 3rd party or were actually stupid enough to vote for Trump then you are just as responsible for kiddie concentration camps as Trump and the Chuds are. Skex fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Jul 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:43
|
|
|
That's an impressive amount of words to blame everybody but the people who have all the power.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
voters elected a majority of democrats to the house and senate and also elected a democratic president and it's somehow entirely their fault that the pols sat around with their thumbs up their asses for two years until they got voted out. you have no idea how politics works and are just using voters as a scapegoat for lovely politicians not enacting policies that would hurt their corporate donors.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
Here's a bad analogy. It's like a relay race except the voters have the shortest leg. The politicians are all like "why didn't you run those final few meters?" And the voters are like "you never passed us the baton"
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:52
|
|
|
Blaming voters is the most rear end-backwards reasoning possible, and it only gets dumber when people like Skex simultaneously try to blame some random schmoe for kiddie concentration camps while letting his political idols entirely off the hook for literally setting them up and running them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
Skex posted:You loving knew what was at stake, you knew what those regressive fucks wanted and you could have done your part to prevent it but you didn't because a symbolic victory meant more to you than the harm these fuckers are causing to real people. If you were eligible and either didn't vote, voted 3rd party or were actually stupid enough to vote for Trump then you are just as responsible for kiddie concentration camps as Trump and the Chuds are. indeed. you did know what was at stake. and you chose to run a candidate on record as saying child concentration camps, a wall across the mexican border, and enslaving black people for the crime of having lesser emotional intelligence than right-thinking americans were all good, actually. perhaps, if you wanted the vote of the people who thought those things were bad, a candidate who was willing to say those things were not good would have been a good choice. or, alternately, you can blame the people who care about those things for not voting for people who'd actively told them to gently caress off, on grounds failing to build a border wall wasn't politically realistic. after all, it's like our buddy Chuck Schumer said: for every one of them we lose, we'll pick up two suburban republicans. remind me, how'd that strategy pan out again
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
Argas posted:Here's a bad analogy. That was time to pass the baton back. There were real structural reasons that the Democrats weren't able to do more after the 2008 election not the least of which was the fact that they never really had the 60 seats necessary to soundly overcome Republican obstruction. And believe me I get your argument. I made the same ones in 2008, and in 2010 and 2012 and 2014 but the reality is, there wasn't enough political support for the kinds of policies that were really needed. There wasn't the political will and as much as we needed those new new deal policies to fix the mess that the nation was in. The political will just wasn't there. And the reason it wasn't there was that we on the left haven't managed to make the case to voters in a way that resonates. I totally get that we're not working in a fair system. But complaining about it being unfair isn't going to change poo poo. Yes politicians do what their donors want, so when they do that rather than look out for the interests of their constituency call them out on it, write them, storm offices, primary them, You don't just say "gently caress it" and abstain from exercising the one real power you have. Because yeah it would be great if the Democratic establishment pulled their collective heads our of their collective asses and started working for the people rather than for their contributors. But that's not how things work and complaining about how unfair it is or how it should be different isn't going to accomplish any more than it did all of the times people have tried it in the past. And it would be wonderful if the American public were to find their souls and vote the GOP out forever and punish every lovely corrupt politician currently in office. But that's not going to happen. The oldest saw in democratic politics remains. Victory goes to those who show up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
Skex posted:What do you think the 2010 elections were? Just keep voting for people who won't make things change for the better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:11
|
|
|
golly gosh we just don't have the power to pass bills because of those mean republicans. what's that? abolish the filibuster? well, uh, gee, hmm, but NORMS they didn't care about/want to actually pass any reforms or they would have ditched the filibuster day 1. the republicans were just a convenient excuse.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:11
|
|
|
Please do not compare what AOC did to Hillary's campaign. They're nothing alike. At all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:12
|
|
|
Victory does indeed goes to those that show up as can be noted from Michigan and now President Donald J Trump.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:14
|
|
|
Stexils posted:golly gosh we just don't have the power to pass bills because of those mean republicans. what's that? abolish the filibuster? well, uh, gee, hmm, but NORMS How is abolishing the judicial filibuster working out?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:15
|
|
|
E: N/m
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
Matt Zerella posted:Please do not compare what AOC did to Hillary's campaign. They're nothing alike. At all. for one thing, one of them went to the places she needed to vote for her, and said if elected she would do things the people who voted for her wanted remains my single favorite bit of the Hillary campaigns stupidity, that. they made an active effort to not promise people things, for fear going back on those promises would make her look bad. in retrospect probably not the best strategy
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:for one thing, one of them went to the places she needed to vote for her, and said if elected she would do things the people who voted for her wanted My other favorite thing was actively insulting the electorate. But this is all best reserved for the Succ Zone. Blaming voters or insulting them is dumb as hell, full stop.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
Wxhode posted:How is abolishing the judicial filibuster working out? lol if you think the republicans wouldnt do that in a heartbeat if dems hadn't and tried using it against republicans
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
Shaming individual voters is pointless, even if you're able to browbeat people one by one to go vote, you'll never be able to Jedi mind-meld millions of voters to excite them to turn out for the racist slaveowner bribe-taking nominee running on "better ideas will never happen" and "sensible amount of kiddie concentration camps" on the ticket of a lame-rear end party more interested in finding excuses not to act than they are in using the supermajority they pissed away to enact positive change. The only sensible expression of any anger over electoral outcomes is to direct it at the politicians who hold all the power to campaign and act to excite voters, getting mad at powerless individuals is a waste of time and worse it lets those who have the power and responsibility to be a force for good off the hook for putting donor bribes over the good of the country.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:21
|
|
|
America Is Already Great Hat - 35$ Bottomless mimosa brunch - 70$ Limo rides - 200$ Healthcare - 60000$ Unions - n/a Someone who's good at the economy help, my vote is dying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
Skex posted:That was time to pass the baton back. There were real structural reasons that the Democrats weren't able to do more after the 2008 election not the least of which was the fact that they never really had the 60 seats necessary to soundly overcome Republican obstruction. It takes 51 votes to abolish the filibuster, they had it, they didn't want to use it, there were no real structural reasons, it was a deliberate choice on their part, they thought the filibuster would be an effective excuse for passing nothing but watered down bullshit, they were wrong, they paid the consequences. If Democrats are waiting until they 'really' have 60 Senate seats (ie no independent industry stooges elected with Republican support like Lieberman, no corporate suits like Baucus, no red state dems like Manchin and Tester to vote against things like DREAM) then they're saying they'll never do anything because a 60-seat supermajority is so rare it only happened like 4 times in a century and it's impossible to get there without some red state seats period. Guess what happens when you tell voters you're never going to do anything: they don't show up because why should they? They have jobs and families and many of them are struggling, they're not going to make the time to brave Republican voter suppression when the response is "thanks and also gently caress you, we can't pass anything because ~*~X~*✨senate norms~*~X~*✨" VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 23:34 on Jul 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:27
|
|
|
Wxhode posted:How is abolishing the judicial filibuster working out? It worked out well, Democrats got hundreds of judges on the courts which didn't go to Republicans who would have immediately abolished it themselves had Dems been stupid enough to preserve it. If you think the GOP's endgame in blocking hundreds of seats for years was just to passively let the courts be filibustered forever until the entire judicial system ground to a halt then you're stupid. The only possible reason to filibuster everyone for years on end was if they planned to abolish the filibuster themselves the moment they got in power.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Blaming voters is the most rear end-backwards reasoning possible, and it only gets dumber when people like Skex simultaneously try to blame some random schmoe for kiddie concentration camps while letting his political idols entirely off the hook for literally setting them up and running them. That's not what I said and you know it. Don't be a disingenuous gently caress. I simply stated reality. I don't like that reality anymore than you do (unless you are one of those agent provacetuers just trying to sew division on the left.) Clinton wasn't the best candidate, but she wasn't as awful as her critics claim. And she was sure as gently caress better than Trump if for no other reason than there was no way that she'd be rubber stamping a fascist agenda. Yes things probably would have been different if the Democrats had been more courageous after the 2008 election. But they were still the ones who won their primaries and won their elections. And then for the most tentative steps they were punished. But this whole boycotting Democrats because they weren't brave enough to go for more controversial policies is about as bright and effective as the CHUDS boycotting Solo because they are pissed at Disney for making the other movies less white guy centric. What do you think the message that is sent to democratic strategist when Republicans are getting more votes? I'll tell you, they are hearing that the public favors Republican positions. So boycotting Democrats in order to push them to the left is the exact wrong loving strategy. It's as stupid as anything the elected democrats are doing. It's ineffective, counterproductive and an exercise in narcissism. Notice that the Right doesn't do this poo poo, even if their candidates are flawed they support them if they are on the ticket. Which is easier for them because conservatives by their very nature are followers and they are getting their orders and complying. Lefties on the other hand have to be convinced. And apparently many of us throw hissy fits if we don't get 100% of our way. You know who isn't responsible for current trashfire this administration is? Everyone who voted for Clinton, whether it was joyfully or holding our loving noses to vote for effectively a political coward who voted for the Iraq War. Because as bad as she may have been this is the alternative.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
Skex posted:What do you think the message that is sent to democratic strategist when Republicans are getting more votes? How is adopting Republican positions working out for dems electorally lmao You can blame voters all loving day, if the Democratic party is determined to learn the wrong lessons from people not showing up for their lovely Republican knockoff candidates and serve up even shittier candidates they are going to keep losing sorry that is just the way reality works. When you double down on terrible strategies you lose end of story. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 23:43 on Jul 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:41
|
|
|
Skex posted:That's not what I said and you know it. Don't be a disingenuous gently caress. that the strategists who managed to lose everything to Donald Trump by promising their base nothing have drawn the conclusion "we need to promise them less" is not particularly encouraging as an argument they deserve our support, tbh.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:55
|
|
|
Stexils posted:golly gosh we just don't have the power to pass bills because of those mean republicans. what's that? abolish the filibuster? well, uh, gee, hmm, but NORMS Also a Senate filibuster wouldn't have been able to do jack poo poo if Obama had unleashed the Justice Department to go after the loving banks. Maybe more people would have been excited to vote Democrat if there'd been news footage of rich assholes in suits going to prison. I will never forgive Barack Obama for the unbelievable amount of poo poo his goddamn attorneys general let slide.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Also a Senate filibuster wouldn't have been able to do jack poo poo if Obama had unleashed the Justice Department to go after the loving banks. Maybe more people would have been excited to vote Democrat if there'd been news footage of rich assholes in suits going to prison. The second he stacked his administration full of wall st types we should have loving rioted.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 23:58
|
|
|
Skex posted:But this whole boycotting Democrats He didn't say anything about boycotting Democrats. Democrats depress their own voter turnout by refusing to embrace the agenda of the voters they're asking to vote for them. Skex posted:Yes things probably would have been different if the Democrats had been more courageous after the 2008 election. But they were still the ones who won their primaries and won their elections. And then for the most tentative steps they were punished. You fundamentally misunderstand the grievances the left has against the 2008/2009 Democrats if you think we're mad that they weren't "courageous". The 2008 Democrats, possessing a mandate to make sweeping changes to our political and financial system, opted instead to fill their cabinets, departmental appointments, and advisory boards with the likes of Geithner, Summers, Bernanke, and Holder. 2008 is not a story of cowardice or weak will, it's a story of treachery. An act of betrayal Democrats committed against the very people who elected them. Taken in that context, the 2010 midterms seems less a case of whiny voters throwing a tantrum, and more a case of a crushingly demoralized base staying home because they saw no point in turning out for a party that chose not to represent them. capitalcomma fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Jul 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 00:01
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:It takes 51 votes to abolish the filibuster, they had it, they didn't want to use it, there were no real structural reasons, it was a deliberate choice on their part, they thought the filibuster would be an effective excuse for passing nothing but watered down bullshit, they were wrong, they paid the consequences. Once again, this is what primaries are for, that's when you go after lovely Democrats, you don't attack them in the general election and hand victory to the opposition. You say that they are imperfect, that you would prefer them be closer to your ideals but that they are still better than the Republicans. How old were you in 2000? I bought into the same bullshit that you are spouting here. I voted green like a moron (my only redemption being that I live in Texas so it really doesn't matter who I vote for ever) . And that election was lost in a squeaker. The result from it? Complete ignoring of the threat posed by climate change, removal of intelligence attention on Al Qeda which most likely resulted in the success of the 9/11 attacks and the stupid reaction to those. The completely illegitimate Iraq invasion and occupation. Economic meltdown and so many lovely things that I can't even remember them all. Like I said I totally agree that the Democrats would be far more effective electorally if they were braver in their policies. But what the left has been doing to try and change hasn't loving worked, and frankly as a liberal /progressive lefty I'm for discarding failed strategies and going with things that actually work. AOC showed us an effective strategy. But she isn't going to be able to push her policies on her own. She is going to need political allies. And as exciting and fresh as she is, she's not going to be as effective as anyone would like. She will have to make compromises just like every politician who came before her. You do get that most Democrats get into politics for idealism right? Because they want to make the world a better more just place? Even Hillary Clinton, go hunt down that commencement address she gave in college where she called bullshit on the idea of civility. She was on the defense team for Bobby Seal in the Chicago 5 trial. Bobby Seal founding member of the Black Panther Party for self defense endorsed her over Obama. And I guarantee no one in this thread has done more than he has to promote the ideals and policies of the left. Someone who knew her on a personal level who is as bonified a leftist as anyone you can name thought that she was a good choice. Kinda makes one doubt the sincerity of her critics from the "left" particularly ones who seem to like parroting right wing talking points. Every politician is going to compromise, every hero is going to disappoint you eventually. That doesn't mean that you throw the game to the opposition.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
You don't get to hide behind primaries when they're rigged to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 00:10
|
|
|
here's a failed strategy you don't seem to have realized doesn't work: attacking the left and blaming them for the incompetence and lack of appeal of neoliberalism that leads to centrists losing elections to fascists
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 00:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 14:33 |
|
|
The difference between accepting compromise from a leftist vs a centrist or right winger is you end up in the center, not the right. AOC disappointing and compromising would land is in the middle and possibly left leaning. Hillary compromising would land us on the right. So stop with the mealy mouthed long posts sneering at is and the electorate and pretending you're the adult in the room.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 00:14
|
|