|
This thread is roughly 10,000x better now and every centrist piece of poo poo who can't stand to see criticism of their fascist enabling asses who vows to take their non-existent ball and leave makes it even better.
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 11:11 |
|
|
Ardennes posted:Uh so what you think should have happened in Brazil may I ask? I never saw that particular line of thought. A democratic socialist leftist party got destroyed by a fascist. How is that not open and shut?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:05
|
|
|
Carlosologist posted:I’m not surprised at all that Hispanics are trending red in Florida, old Cuban Americans are still mad about JFK and younger ones will sell their souls to be white even though they’ll get played just the same as the brown people I am, weren't there a lot of Puerto Ricans that moved to Florida?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
Typo posted:key statistic/demography imo: There's a former buddy of mine who is basically in the same boat but a diehard trumper. I used to bounce off him with political debates but lately realized he's not worth dealing with and especially lately since he openly wears a trump beanie to work now that it's cold out. I've just been flatly ignoring his existence, which is much more tolerable for me than even saying hello to him since he's openly declaring he still supports trump at this point, I'm totally, utterly done with tolerating anyone, especially politically "informed" people (IE actually knows anything about politics at all, poo poo a fair number of folks I work with don't even know who Robert Mueller is) who still support trump. Edit: hamster alien abduction tax https://i.imgur.com/Hcew966.gifv
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
 Democrats need to run Panera Bread in 2020. That sketch gave me a huge "people will be looking back on this in 10 or 15 years appalled that they normalized him" dread. You know, after he runs for Senate or President.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
Carlosologist posted:I’m not surprised at all that Hispanics are trending red in Florida, old Cuban Americans are still mad about JFK and younger ones will sell their souls to be white even though they’ll get played just the same as the brown people I've seen more than a handful of think-pieces about how Scott and Representative Eyepatch are laying out a road-map for hispanic outreach for the GOP. I don't know how the gently caress it could possibly work given the open anti-latinx racism that loving flows from that group. It's not all counter-revolutionary cubans in Florida. I guess the argument is more that it only has to work ENOUGH because Latinx aren't breaking as hard for or showing up for Ds as people have been forseeing, and so the GOP only has to fool 5-10% of them to blunt the edge enough to win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
Axetrain posted:This thread is roughly 10,000x better now and every centrist piece of poo poo who can't stand to see criticism of their fascist enabling asses who vows to take their non-existent ball and leave makes it even better. I’m so happy that we get to see great discourse such as this now that we no longer restrict ourselves to our echo chamber.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
Stickman posted:I'm mostly disappointed that there's no place left in this post-election hellscape for puppies. There's a post pictures and chat thread here in D&D, multiple threads in PYF and likely GBS, plus an entire subforum called Pet Island that's just for posting pictures of puppies
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:I’m so happy that we get to see great discourse such as this now that we no longer restrict ourselves to our echo chamber. Yeah me too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
So they won the legislature and now their going to water down their own bills for bipartisanship and to make it more favorable to businesses? They win on progressive ideas and then immediately back off. It’s no wonder people don’t vote when they see poo poo like this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:This apparently doesn't cover half of it. Putin didn't even shake Trump's hand. Was Trump holding out his hand when Putin shook Merkel's hand?
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:I've seen more than a handful of think-pieces about how Scott and Representative Eyepatch are laying out a road-map for hispanic outreach for the GOP. I don't know how the gently caress it could possibly work given the open anti-latinx racism that loving flows from that group. It's not all counter-revolutionary cubans in Florida. I guess the argument is more that it only has to work ENOUGH because Latinx aren't breaking as hard for or showing up for Ds as people have been forseeing, and so the GOP only has to fool 5-10% of them to blunt the edge enough to win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:A democratic socialist leftist party got destroyed by a fascist. How is that not open and shut? Wasn't there a giant part of that story regarding the leader of the socialist party getting thrown in prison on trumped up charges before the overt fascist took over the conservative party? I mean, not that jailing your political enemies isn't fascist ENOUGH or anything, but I guess my point is that there was a stacking of the deck going on that low-information voters might not have been aware of, so I don't think it's fair to characterize Brazil as "fascism beating socialism in a fair election."
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
King of Solomon posted:So where do you draw the line? At what point do you look at a Democratic candidate and say "no, I can't support this person, even though the Republican is worse"? IMO a very good line to draw is when a candidate sabotages the ability to have national solidarity. For all the complaining about fragmenting the party, the real situation that fragments it is when a candidate throws one group under a bus. The solution? Build local solidarity through interest groups specific to your state, and make it clear that you won't support any candidate that is against the interest of the groups that you are working with locally. edit: For example, I'm from Alabama. I will literally never cast a vote for anyone that is anti-Muslim. In addition, I will never vote for anyone that waffles on LGBT rights or the rights of immigrants. If a candidate thinks that attacking one of those groups will help get them up on the polls, I will not vote for them, straight up. Mormon Star Wars fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Nov 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:18
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:Wasn't there a giant part of that story regarding the leader of the socialist party getting thrown in prison on trumped up charges before the overt fascist took over the conservative party? You're not gonna get a fair election in America either. Hillary would have destroyed Trump in a fair election. But we dont have fair elections, so if your entire "give me power, only I can save us" plan relies on the Republicans acting fair, shut the gently caress up until you can figure out a way to beat them when they're not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:You're not gonna get a fair election in America either. Hillary would have destroyed Trump in a fair election. But we dont have fair elections, so if your entire "give me power, only I can save us" plan relies on the Republicans acting fair, shut the gently caress up until you can figure out a way to beat them when they're not. Despite the chants, Hillary did not get locked up, nor did anyone else. There are degrees of fairness in elections.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:You're not gonna get a fair election in America either. Hillary would have destroyed Trump in a fair election. But we dont have fair elections, so if your entire "give me power, only I can save us" plan relies on the Republicans acting fair, shut the gently caress up until you can figure out a way to beat them when they're not.  yeah if you're telling other people to shut the gently caress up because they can't win against a stacked deck it kind of falls flat when you're doing it on behalf the corporate wing of the democratic party, who haven't exactly proven themselves master strategists
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
You know when a more left-wing Democratic party could have really come in handy? 2009-2010 when they could have passed a comprehensive universal healthcare bill that would have massively improved tens of millions of people's lives and household budgets overnight and that would have been an extremely concrete and visible benefit to motivate them at the polls, as well as a very direct refutation of Republican ideology. They could have backed it up with a very visible campaign to jail Wall Street executives, using carefully timed announcements of prosecutions to whip up popular anger just before the next midterm in much the same way that Trump whipped up anger about migrants to try and motivate people to the polls. Finally, they could have made a big and visible show of bailing out underwater home owners and standing up to the illegal mass foreclosures, again being careful to visibly pick fights with the worst offenders so they could get lots of free television coverage of them fighting for home owners. To top it all off they would have spent the summer of 2010 constantly talking about how the economic recovery was recent and fragile and how important it was to elect more Democrats in 2010. Even if this strategy failed to prevent losses in the midterms the party could have emerged more unified and goal oriented and with a clear theme to run on for the next few electoral cycles plus a popular policy agenda that gave people concrete and visible material benefits they would have an incentive to defend. By the time you get to 2016 and are asking how the left could have done better it may well have already been too late. The reason to demand leftist candidates isn't necessarily because they're more likely to win elections (though at this moment many of them are just by virtue of having something they actually care about) but because the policies they might pass while in office - especially in the midst of another crisis - actually have some chance of improving people's lives and breaking out of the death spiral the country is in. 2016 was effectively lost during the Obama administration. Sure a better candidate could have possibly won against Trump and then lost in the next midterms and possibly lost the White House in 2020, but that's really not the point. The point is an actual populist social demcoratic agenda that gave people really visible and useful forms of government assistance while demonizing Wall Street could have achieved the same kind of dominant position that the post FDR Democrats did, but instead Obama and his team intentionally did everything they could to preserve the status quo and in the process probably hosed up the last real chance the United States had to set itself on a better track. While centrists don't have a great track record of winning elections recently by far the biggest problem with them is how they govern not how they campaign.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Stexils posted:
And yet, you keep losing to them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:You're not gonna get a fair election in America either. Hillary would have destroyed Trump in a fair election. But we dont have fair elections, so if your entire "give me power, only I can save us" plan relies on the Republicans acting fair, shut the gently caress up until you can figure out a way to beat them when they're not. Okay Fulchrum if your hot take is that the left is the one that insists on playing fair and respecting the process above all else, and that is why they can't win elections, then you're even farther gone than I thought. And I thought you were really far gone. Jesus loving Christ, my dude. You need that Innuendo Studios video pumped into your eyeballs for a month. I mean Obama even said last week "if they try to take away your right to vote, the only solution is to get out and vote" and you still manage to come back here with this weak bullshit. You're committed to the gimmick, if nothing else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:I've seen more than a handful of think-pieces about how Scott and Representative Eyepatch are laying out a road-map for hispanic outreach for the GOP. I don't know how the gently caress it could possibly work given the open anti-latinx racism that loving flows from that group. It's not all counter-revolutionary cubans in Florida. I guess the argument is more that it only has to work ENOUGH because Latinx aren't breaking as hard for or showing up for Ds as people have been forseeing, and so the GOP only has to fool 5-10% of them to blunt the edge enough to win. It’s not going to be that hard for the GOP to poach conservative hispanic people. We talk about anti-Latinx racism like they are a monolithic group. Latinx people probably hate other Latinx people more than they hate white people or Black people. Much like Asia, counties have beefs going back generations that help sustain deep divides. When Republicans get specifically racist against Mexicans, South American authoritarian conservatives nod and cheer in agreement about those cheating rapists that skipped the immigration line. This can be repeated for other counties like when they bash Venezuela. Latinx countries tend to be extremely Catholic as well, which acts as a catalyst for single issue voting anti-abortion bullshit. It also reinforces patriarchal hegemony (zero important Catholic leaders are women). It’s actually kind of amazing that Latinx people don’t vote GOP more often to be honest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:And yet, you keep losing to them. you got me dude, the socialists haven't overthrown the entirety of capitalism in 2016-2018. i'll be sure to support hillary 2020.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
RasperFat posted:It’s actually kind of amazing that Latinx people don’t vote GOP more often to be honest. This is gonna be written on our collective tombstones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:don't forget decided pretty much from the get go that he wasn't going to do the needful when it came to the bankers. Yah; I edited in a line for that. But that happened in 2014, after "insurance reform" had already been enacted, so surely it was a mistake that Aetna got away with penny-pinching and killing cancer patients. (I really really really wish that the ACA had tackled the "reform" of private insurance companies beyond "limiting" their profits to a multiplier of amount spent toward medicare care, and excluding pre-existing conditions. Things like making people wait on hold thru rage-inducing Muzak for 2 hours to get a live one, or continuing to bill people for premiums for 6 months after they've switched insurance plans, or foisting out-of-network bills on people for every rando practitioner who enters their hospital room and scans their chart barcode, or "pre-authorizing" procedures that are later billed in full to patients because the insurers changed their minds... these are the things that matter to most people, and make it extremely hard to navigate our clusterfuck of a system, particularly when they're undergoing serious health issues, and they're also why "defending and protecting the ACA" rings hollow to voters absent any meaningful policy positions.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:And yet, you keep losing to them. MSDOS KAPITAL posted:
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
It's funny because "the invisible primary" and "the party decides" are long running and uncontroversial cliches in political science and until around 2015 I never saw anybody familiar with politics serious disputing the idea that of course the party establishment plays a significant role in selecting the nominee but suddenly it became a beyond insane conspiracy theory to suggest that a party primary was anything other than flawlessly impartial.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:34
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:A democratic socialist leftist party got destroyed by a fascist. How is that not open and shut? Just FYI, PT was honestly fairly center-left and not very radical if you're suggesting that. If anything they tried to be fairly moderate especially recently and was soft-couped by a liberal party back in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:38
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Considering that she was overtly lending credence to white nationalist propaganda about the caravan before she lost, I am not entirely sure I agree with this. At some point, you need to have standards. I was very disappointed at that, but I will be even more disappointed if we end up one Senate seat short of a majority in the future. *the DSA sighs and draws its katana* At least, so I hope.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:38
|
|
|
YourBoyFancy very likely does far more in his daily life to pursue progressive, um, progress than 99% of people here so it’s always interesting seeing him bashed in these discussions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
hahaha, this is sad as gently caress and I'm broken.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:45
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Education4Libs/status/1061287157573320705 24k likes just throwing that out there
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:haha No, I think your attitude is that Republicans would suddenly decide to be nice and play fair against leftists because reasons. Hell, that's what that idiotic "Bernie would have won!" mantra is based on, taking polls from when he was not being attacked by anyone, then just assuming that would continue and Republicans would not go with attack ads. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Nov 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
Helsing posted:It's funny because "the invisible primary" and "the party decides" are long running and uncontroversial cliches in political science and until around 2015 I never saw anybody familiar with politics serious disputing the idea that of course the party establishment plays a significant role in selecting the nominee but suddenly it became a beyond insane conspiracy theory to suggest that a party primary was anything other than flawlessly impartial. Some people you just have to ignore for a while, because while they might not be "enemies" in a broader sense, they're also too clueless to be effective allies until such time that the war is already nearly won anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:24k likes Considering that people still make unironic "but how will they pay for it?" arguments on these very forums, I am entirely unsurprised by this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:50
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:https://twitter.com/Education4Libs/status/1061287157573320705  just throwing that out there Helsing posted:It's funny because "the invisible primary" and "the party decides" are long running and uncontroversial cliches in political science and until around 2015 I never saw anybody familiar with politics serious disputing the idea that of course the party establishment plays a significant role in selecting the nominee but suddenly it became a beyond insane conspiracy theory to suggest that a party primary was anything other than flawlessly impartial. It was because a lot of people were actually enthusiastic about Bernie and were forced to realize the reality of how poo poo the two party system is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:YourBoyFancy very likely does far more in his daily life to pursue progressive, um, progress than 99% of people here so it’s always interesting seeing him bashed in these discussions. With the exception of the very, very few posters who are pushing for people not to vote for purity reasons, these forums are filled with people doing more for progressivism than 90+% of the country. We pretty much all voted in the primaries and general election, donated time and/or money to progressive candidates or Dems in general, phone banked, canvassed, and probably annoyed the poo poo out of friends and families by pestering them to vote (assuming they don’t vote R). Not too much more to this point, just a reminder that we are allies and we collectively have done a shitload to try to improve our country. Hell, some of the local races were close enough that just the effort from goons may have added another D in a state house or something. Despite our insistence on infighting, we’ve actually gotten some good poo poo done.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
Helsing posted:It's funny because "the invisible primary" and "the party decides" are long running and uncontroversial cliches in political science and until around 2015 I never saw anybody familiar with politics serious disputing the idea that of course the party establishment plays a significant role in selecting the nominee but suddenly it became a beyond insane conspiracy theory to suggest that a party primary was anything other than flawlessly impartial. Gee, I wonder if 2015 saw a rise of some candidate in one party who the establishment wanted to stop at all costs, who then grabbed the nomination easily, thus disproving that notion. But that would require you actually thinking about these things for two seconds. Can't have that..
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:https://twitter.com/Education4Libs/status/1061287157573320705 A person who isn't rich wants to promote policies that would help other non-rich people Checkmate liberals 
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Uhhhhhhh lol if you haven't already thrown money at Mike Espy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 11:11 |
|
|
"Dems can't effectively fight facsists, therefore, we should elect the fascists" is certainly a take.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2018 21:54
|
|
