|
McGlockenshire posted:The context is that the cops are always on the side of the fascists and the entire system needs to be burnt down and rebuilt from scratch. The Oregonian has more information about the attempted nazi snipers https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2018/10/armed_protesters_were_on_portl.html
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 02:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 06:07 |
|
|
anthonypants posted:A good summation of the entire Democrat policy platform. Lmao quote:Asked why the public was not told of the incident sooner, Chief Danielle Outlaw said, "Hindsight is always perfect." Outlaw said the Police Bureau warns the public that protesters may be armed. Both right- and left-wing demonstrators have come to Portland protests armed, she said. Yup, sure thing chief.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 02:49
|
|
|
Thaddius the Large posted:Maybe it would help if you specified why you feel the Democrats are “fighting for the rights of the disenfranchised”. Please note, merely not supporting the outright attacks from Republicans or taking credit for social changes doesn’t count for much, I’m talking about ways in which they’re proactively doing so. They said mean things about Kris Kobach? While the Republicans have made it their business to do everything in their power to suppress votes, the Democrats have... asked them very nicely not to? They guaranteed that they would maybe start talking about Medicare for All, sometime. Also, they have all sorts of great ideas, like not being Donald Trump; or--and this is a good one--not doing the things Donald Trump does. Really, just the party for the future.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 05:41
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:A good summation of the entire Democrat policy platform. I'm sure if these guys had been Muslim or black, "they weren't doing anything illegal" definitely would have stopped the hail of bullets, or follow-up reporting on stopping a terrorist attack.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 05:44
|
|
|
Dungeon Ecology posted:There's one party thats cemented itself as anti-choice, anti-labor, anti-woman, anti-immigrant, anti-black, anti-union, anti-environment, anti-education, and pro-corporation. The democrats are at worst, just republicans in sheeps clothing, buuuuuttt, at best they are actually fighting for the rights of the disenfranchised. Here's the thing, Democrats do, occasionally, make laws that benefit the disenfranchised. Usually it's helping rich members of minority groups get the same privileges as other rich people while leaving everyone else in the gutter, but sometimes it's restoring voting rights for prisoners or something else unambiguously good. It does happen. The problem is they do so much more that hurts those groups, it ends up being a net negative almost as bad as the gop's general policy. Now prisoners can vote again, but we need child prisoners to fight wildfires for 1$ a day and no choice while denying them firefighting positions on release. Is it good that they can vote now? Yes. Are Democrats still responsible for these horrifying practices? Also Yes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 07:29
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:It was mentioned at some impromptu press conference the city held to discuss the ordinance they're going to write, which is what the bulk of that article's about. Maybe what you're missing is that Portland cops are nazis, just like the proud boys? They're actually just World War 2 enthusiasts. That's why they collect so much Nazi memorabilia. Wasn't that what that one Nazi cop said? #believecops
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 07:32
|
|
|
Javid posted:"republican with bad ideas, Democrat with no ideas"
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 09:18
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:They said mean things about Kris Kobach? While the Republicans have made it their business to do everything in their power to suppress votes, the Democrats have... asked them very nicely not to? They guaranteed that they would maybe start talking about Medicare for All, sometime. Also, they have all sorts of great ideas, like not being Donald Trump; or--and this is a good one--not doing the things Donald Trump does. Dude, I posted a whole list of things the Democratic legislature accomplished in direct response to your question and you keep ignoring it while posting this "nothing matters" bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Dude, I posted a whole list of things the Democratic legislature accomplished in direct response to your question and you keep ignoring it while posting this "nothing matters" bullshit. Okay, let’s take a look at what we’re talking about here. Rambling off the top of my head: Solkanar512 posted:As far as this year, there was net neutrality, bump stock ban (yeah, I know it's useless), gender pay equity, voting rights act (allows 16 and 17 yr olds to register to vote), three different bills making it easier for employees to be protected against harassment on the job (one prevents employees from being blocked from publicly speaking about what happened, another secured the right to file claims while the third developed model practices to prevent sexual harassment in the first place) and outlawed housing bias from landlords based on source of income. -Net Neutrality - beyond the aforementioned “Kate Brown signed a letter written by Comcast” thing, how do you feel this is working out? Like yeah, that’s a nice idea, but in practical terms it does nothing to break the virtual monopoly (play on words yay) of telecoms -Bump stock ban - if it’s useless why post it? -Gender pay equity - I’ll own I know nothing about what you’re referring to here, but to call back to that tweet about Republicans wanting concentration camps and Democrats wanting women guards, does this address the social factors that lead to women being less able to enter, maintain in, and succeed in the workplace? Does it help reduce overall low wages, or are those women now earning jack poo poo, just like their male counterparts? -Voting rights act for 16/17 year olds - again, nice idea, but barely registers (another play on words!) in reducing disenfranchisement, it’s not like those kids can now vote. Moreover, I doubt this’ll be more than a minute blip in reducing the disparity among voters who’re young versus old, to say nothing of racial and socioeconomic minorities, prisoners, etc -Employees can’t be fired for speaking publicly - how does that stop employers from cooking up any other number of means to oppress their workers? It doesn’t reduce the power disparity between owner and worker at all -Employees can file claims against employers - oh good, because arbitration/courts aren’t massively stacked against employees as is? Even if they file claims, how easy is it for the company to lawyer or buy their way out of bad practices. -Develop model practices to stop sexual harassment at the source - so, not hiring abusers? I’m not sure how this works, because any time I see “model practice” I see “HR poo poo people ignore”, especially without stringent enforcement mechanisms -Outlaw housing bias based on income - great, I’m sure that’ll stop landlords from pricing people out of the market What I’m seeing are a bunch of shallow half-measures that don’t fundamentally alter the existing power structure, it’s rhetorical victories while failing to meaningfully improve things. When I say Democrats are interested in looking good while maintaining their wealth and power, this is what I mean, they won’t risk anything that puts them at risk, so they offer conciliatory gestures while supporting what got them power and influence in the first place. Ultimately what I think we’re failing to connect on is that I believe the system is broken, and at my best extension of faith to the Dems, I don’t think band-aids will fix it, they need to advocate for some major alterations to that system, or they need to own that they benefit from it and want it to continue largely unchanged. Undermining organized labor and then issuing some new regulations about how employers totally should be nice to their workers doesn’t work. Scolding landlords while failing to take away their power doesn’t work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 16:47
|
|
|
Thaddius the Large posted:Okay, let’s take a look at what we’re talking about here. Rambling off the top of my head: look you can either have bandaids or a thousand years of darkness
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 17:00
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:I'm not going to defend the DCCC and related orgs because they're poo poo, this is the PNW thread so I figured we're talking about fairly local stuff when I made my other posts. Net neutrality is so massively popular that the Republicans may very well have done the same thing, but sure, points for that, I guess. The bump stock ban is a glass of wine to a forest fire. Gender pay equity is nice, but the only reason for the sexual harassment bills was the sexual harassment scandals in the loving legislature, which greatly subtracts from that as an achievement. Outlawing housing bias from landlords is good, but again, largely a glass of wine to a forest fire. I'll definitely be voting for Bob Ferguson again, so congrats on one good Democrat, I guess? What I'm really complaining about here is opportunity cost, and most of this (with the possible exception of net neutrality and the definite exception of Ferguson) is bare minimum stuff. The Democrats control both houses of the legislature, and the Governor's office. Why aren't we restoring the voting rights of felons? Inslee could totally do that by himself. The loving chief turd sandwich himself, Terry McAuliffe did this in Virginia, and yet Inslee's just sitting on his loving laurels, here. We should be passing more progressive taxes, even if we can't do income taxes because of a fantastically stupid Supreme Court ruling. We should be repealing the ban on rent control, instituting taxes on non-owner-occupied property, developing public housing, and transit, etc. Instead we're trying to gut public transit, and sitting on our loving laurels as far as the rest is concerned. We have the most regressive loving tax structure in the loving country and we aren't doing poo poo about it. Teabag Dome Scandal posted:look you can either have bandaids or a thousand years of darkness
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 17:20
|
|
|
First off, you cut off the most important part of the post:Solkanar512 posted:And as I said before, you don't stop pushing, and you don't stop primarying. But if you think a deadlocked or Republican legislature would be doing this, you're sadly mistaken. Why did you exclude this? Thaddius the Large posted:Okay, let’s take a look at what we’re talking about here. Rambling off the top of my head: I was talking about the Washington State legislature here, so I'm with you that Brown is lovely here. quote:-Bump stock ban - if it’s useless why post it? It's a minor example of way forward, and something a deadlocked or Republican led legislature would never, ever do. Like I said before, build on previous successes and primary those who stand in the way. quote:-Gender pay equity - I’ll own I know nothing about what you’re referring to here, but to call back to that tweet about Republicans wanting concentration camps and Democrats wanting women guards, does this address the social factors that lead to women being less able to enter, maintain in, and succeed in the workplace? Does it help reduce overall low wages, or are those women now earning jack poo poo, just like their male counterparts? What I'm trying to show here is that all options aren't the same, successes can be made and threats during the primaries work. We have to keep pushing. Simply falling into despair, conflating local and national politics and just shouting "nothing matters" isn't the solution. And letting Republicans get elected so they can tear everything down in an instant the solution either. We've seen the damage that happens nationally, and that erosion is going to take a generation to fix.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 17:24
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:What I'm really complaining about here is opportunity cost, and most of this (with the possible exception of net neutrality and the definite exception of Ferguson) is bare minimum stuff. The Democrats control both houses of the legislature, and the Governor's office. Why aren't we restoring the voting rights of felons? Inslee could totally do that by himself. The loving chief turd sandwich himself, Terry McAuliffe did this in Virginia, and yet Inslee's just sitting on his loving laurels, here. We should be passing more progressive taxes, even if we can't do income taxes because of a fantastically stupid Supreme Court ruling. We should be repealing the ban on rent control, instituting taxes on non-owner-occupied property, developing public housing, and transit, etc. Instead we're trying to gut public transit, and sitting on our loving laurels as far as the rest is concerned. We have the most regressive loving tax structure in the loving country and we aren't doing poo poo about it. What in the heck are you talking about with felon voter restoration? What am I missing here? WA SOS posted:Felons and Voting Rights Outside of letting the incarcerated vote, isn't the the gold standard? The rest are perfectly fine topics to discuss, but one of us is missing something important here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 17:29
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:First off, you cut off the most important part of the post: I left it out because I was solely asking about what the Dems have accomplished, in my eyes the debate about primaries/internal versus external pressure is a separate issue. Regarding that issue though, my frustration is that we’ve been doing that, and it hasn’t loving worked. The issues I’m most concerned about have either been actively getting worse (wealth inequality, dismantling of labor power, gerrymandering, handing over local governments to the right), and “progress” on social issues has either happened in spite of the Dems passivity (gay marriage), or is a band aid to a bullet wound. I don’t believe the things you mentioned can be “built upon” because the Dems wash their hands and say mission accomplished rather than continuing the fight. And, as I previously mentioned, I don’t give a single poo poo that they’re better than the Republicans, that “lesser of two evils” is a distraction and doesn’t show why the Democrats are themselves good, just that they’re less evil. It’s not a way forward if it’s one step forward after three steps back, and especially if the step is the only one the Dems are willing to take.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 17:40
|
|
|
Democrats try to sound progressive when Republicans are in office but once they get elected they remember they're rich and have rich friends.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
Maybe you should be making the case to centrist democratic voters why your issues matter. That is kind of how things get done. Politicians do things that their constituents demand, so they can get elected. You need to drum up public support for your positions in addition to finding politicians who are willing to get behind your cause. You can try putting up socialist candidates but if you can't get a majority of voters to go for them then where does that leave you?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 18:04
|
|
|
What I always wind up thinking about is that the underlying problem is people want to be good, and in our society we define that as nice, polite, kind, and successful, and that last descriptor is the biggest problem, because we equate success with money and power. Wanting any sort of egalitarianism is kind and nice, but also requires sacrificing personal wealth and power, or at least seemingly doing so in the short term, and that’s a dissonance liberals are unable to reconcile with, resulting shallow pretenses of working toward equality with no real sacrifice or change required. It’s “not gently caress you got mine” so much as “got mine so here’s a few pennies good luck champ!” Also, systemic change is impolite because it requires challenging the privilege and position of those exploiting the system for success, which places anyone wanting major reforms further at odds with those trying to maintain the system but with a happy face sticker slapped on. Centrist Dems aren’t especially receptive to the message because they don’t want to hear about things that are impolite or seemingly alter the power structure, whether that’s because they don’t want to lose their position or because change is inherently scary I don’t know, but it’s super frustrating when the evidence is right here in front of our faces. Things are broken, they’re not getting better, and we keep trying the same nonsense over and over and over.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 18:17
|
|
|
it sounds like democrats and republicans are basically the same terrible people so lets flip the script then: who's actually fighting for The People?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 18:25
|
|
|
Dungeon Ecology posted:it sounds like democrats and republicans are basically the same terrible people
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
Dungeon Ecology posted:it sounds like democrats and republicans are basically the same terrible people I think there are plenty of good people, but for a plethora of reasons they can’t get elected except in extremely rare instances. The way our system works, money so vastly out-powers anything else, winning an election requires selling out or already having been bought, and to overcome that barrier requires such an investment of time and energy it makes it all but impossible for most, especially if they’re already having to work for a living in this employment hellscape; it’s that much more difficult for anyone representative of the majority of Americans to get elected. There’s definitely some good efforts being made by grass roots organizations, but to gain entry to the doors of power is all the more difficult when elections and ballot measures are opposed or neutered by those in power. That’s why I say the system is broken, the poor and oppressed have virtually no means out of that. The groups and people I most often believe in are those who try and address those disparities, whether by working to change laws and elected officials, or by organizing their own systems outside those currently offered by the government, either major party, or even existing components of the system. To directly answer your question, I think that’s a decision made on a personal level, but for me it means being a union steward, a social worker, and volunteering to support political causes and individual candidates I believe will bring about meaningful reform, regardless of their underlying political affiliation. At the moment I’m focusing largely on trying to build union power at my office, and in turn pressure the union leaders to be more aggressive and assertive on reforms I believe will benefit our overall organization, because their baseline policy of “support all Dems” hasn’t panned out for our union, and labor at my office has become so disorganized and passive most people have utterly disengaged and become apathetic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 18:39
|
|
|
Thaddius the Large posted:What I always wind up thinking about is that the underlying problem is people want to be good, and in our society we define that as nice, polite, kind, and successful, and that last descriptor is the biggest problem, because we equate success with money and power. Wanting any sort of egalitarianism is kind and nice, but also requires sacrificing personal wealth and power, or at least seemingly doing so in the short term, and that’s a dissonance liberals are unable to reconcile with, resulting shallow pretenses of working toward equality with no real sacrifice or change required. It’s “not gently caress you got mine” so much as “got mine so here’s a few pennies good luck champ!” Also, systemic change is impolite because it requires challenging the privilege and position of those exploiting the system for success, which places anyone wanting major reforms further at odds with those trying to maintain the system but with a happy face sticker slapped on. Centrist Dems aren’t especially receptive to the message because they don’t want to hear about things that are impolite or seemingly alter the power structure, whether that’s because they don’t want to lose their position or because change is inherently scary I don’t know, but it’s super frustrating when the evidence is right here in front of our faces. Things are broken, they’re not getting better, and we keep trying the same nonsense over and over and over. This is good. We're not in a phase of tweaking the republic. We need deep structural changes and weak lists of minor victories is actively undermining that effort. I need a loaf of bread but this slice will do is nothing but its own form of kicking the can down the road for someone else to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 19:01
|
|
|
"Why even bother passing regulations when some people will skirt them?" - This is considered a progressive take now?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 19:35
|
|
|
Cicero posted:"Why even bother passing regulations when some people will skirt them?" - This is considered a progressive take now? No, “why bother passing meaningless regulations and calling it a day” is the take
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
to summarize that thought, the whole system is rigged against structural reform; designed to keep those in power in power, and those without without. without a fundamental change in the way we run our government, the current pack of politicians are two sides of the same poo poo coin. and so, to tie that stuff back down to local races... if both candidates are D/R -- don't vote? write in? vote for least bad candidate? i'm legit trying to get a read on the sentiment here.... My go to is 'vote because if you don't you're basically asking for no representation.' but if the system is rigged and is not designed to represent me anyways write in another candidate? So in the case of Knute V. Brown, if they're both awful candidates...?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
Teabag Dome Scandal posted:look you can either have bandaids or a thousand years of darkness The bandaids are just going to lead to a thousand years of darkness anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/spekulation/status/1052260507606900736
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
Dungeon Ecology posted:to summarize that thought, the whole system is rigged against structural reform; designed to keep those in power in power, and those without without. without a fundamental change in the way we run our government, the current pack of politicians are two sides of the same poo poo coin. To be honest I don’t much care. Like, yeah, Brown is better than Knute, but the shift in focus needs to be as far away from general elections as possible if we’re going to change things. Voting is better than not voting, but advocacy, campaigning, and building movements is far more important and where the conversation needs to be at.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 19:49
|
|
|
Dungeon Ecology posted:and so, to tie that stuff back down to local races... if both candidates are D/R -- don't vote? write in? vote for least bad candidate? Priority one should be changing our voting system away from first-past-the-post and towards some variety of approval or instant-runoff voting. This will allow third party candidates to realistically win races and loosen the grip that the two party system has. I'm personally a fan of unranked approval voting. It's literally just changing it from "pick one" to "pick as many as you want." The candidate with the most votes still wins, and appealing to the majority will naturally lead towards more moderates and fewer extremists while still allowing for local specialty-issue candidates to have a realistic shot. I kind of wish I had any know-how (and the motivation) on how to get this kind of stuff on the Oregon ballot. I'm out of my element and out of my league. McGlockenshire fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Oct 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 20:01
|
|
|
therobit posted:Maybe you should be making the case to centrist democratic voters why your issues matter. That is kind of how things get done. Politicians do things that their constituents demand, so they can get elected. You need to drum up public support for your positions in addition to finding politicians who are willing to get behind your cause. "Why do you keep bringing up these purity tests? Stop causing infighting and support Your Team"
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
drat republicans
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 20:33
|
|
|
therobit posted:Maybe you should be making the case to centrist democratic voters why your issues matter. That is kind of how things get done. Politicians do things that their constituents demand, so they can get elected. You need to drum up public support for your positions in addition to finding politicians who are willing to get behind your cause. The Republicans are the opposition, they're at least face-forward about what they do, but the centrists back their candidates with all the systemic power they've been granted since the Clinton era, and make sure that even when progressive candidates win primaries, they have huge uphill battles. Thanatosian posted:State-level Democrats in Washington are loving garbage. National level Democrats are loving garbage. The leadership hamstrings leftists candidates in primaries whenever possible, and even when the leftists manage to win in spite of every effort made by the national party/DCCC, they pull out all their funding, support, and access, and sometimes even endorse Republicans, and then when they're done ratfucking the candidate, have the audacity to say "oh, look, leftists can't win elections!" loving Joe Crowley kept his name on the ballot, nobody from the leadership went after him for it; the leadership chose Bob Menendez over Lisa McCormick in New Jersey, when the correct choice was literally anyone other than Bob Menendez. Cory loving shitpiece Booker even loving endorsed him. They don't even bother to loving lie about it. Donna Brazile is still in the loving leadership of the party. Voting for leadership-endorsed Democrats is as bad--if not worse--than voting for Republicans; they are more effective at stopping progressive change than Republicans are.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
Thaddius the Large posted:... but advocacy, campaigning, and building movements is far more important and where the conversation needs to be at. I agree with though on this point. Changing hearts and minds so that people start demanding the right actions from lawmakers is how improvements can be made, not just picking politicians out of a bad pool.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 21:35
|
|
|
More deets. Seems like bullshit, but the Burgess/Harrell faction on the council will undoubtedly push it through.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 22:54
|
|
|
Alright, I got some responses on my legal status to vote as an ankle-monitor federal ex-con who is still "in custody".Christoph's PO posted:Hi Christoph, Sounds pretty good. Christoph's public defender in a phone call posted:I asked around the office and none of us know. But better be safe than sorry, don't vote if you want to keep your life from getting complicated. This irritates me. Safe for who, ultimately? Corporatists? I think I'm going to call the secretary of state.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 23:14
|
|
|
therobit posted:Politicians do things that their constituents demand, so they can get elected. They almost universally don't though, studies have found essentially no correlation between what voters want and what gets passed, but a huge correlation between what rich donors want and what gets passed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
GodFish posted:They almost universally don't though, studies have found essentially no correlation between what voters want and what gets passed, but a huge correlation between what rich donors want and what gets passed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
October 12: Gangs of nazis march through the streets of New York City, yelling obscenities and beating up people in the street October 13: Gangs of nazis march through the streets of Portland, yelling obscenities and beating up people in the street October 15: The mayor of New York City, the governor of New York, and several police release statements in disagreement with the nazis, and some of the nazis are wanted for questioning by the NYPD October 15: The mayor of Portland holds an impromptu press conference discussing a future ordinance he hasn't written yet, and also mentions that he just found out the police found a gang of nazis with rifles on a rooftop before a nazi march in August WWeek has a collection of statements from the city councillors, who of course weren't told about this ordinance before yesterday https://www.wweek.com/news/city/201...public-process/ I was looking for a statement from Kate Brown about last weekend, but all I found was this op-ed about how Kate Brown is "a true champion of democracy" anthonypants fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Oct 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 00:58
|
|
|
Man, gently caress Durkan so much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 01:54
|
|
|
Ezra Klein does a great job summarizing the problem with Democratsquote:Faris goes on to recommend a slew of ways Democrats can “fight dirty,” by which he means rewrite the rules of American politics so Democrats have an even chance, or better than that. The whole article is worth a read for the really huge systemic problems we're staring down the barrel of now, and the fact that the Democrats would rather sit by and  all loving day than actually do anything about it, because they're so invested in the system and maintaining their position (which is, on a governmental scale, pretty powerless, but on a personal scale, amazing for them).
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 08:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 06:07 |
|
|
I actually wonder if I can sue who ever keeps putting the anti gun bills for WA. The last one was GUN SAFETY CHECKS and it passed and now https://www.initiative1639.org/ they are doing another bill to fund the last one and impose terrible terrible unconstitutional rules and taxes. Legit dont believe it will pass, but I didnt think I594 would pass either. Lord trump please save WA from losing guns for ever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 10:47
|
|