|
AOC is far smarter than the NDP because the defining feature of her environmental policy is the "Green New Deal" which specifically sets a transition to more environmentally-friendly methods of energy production in economic terms, meaning the government is going to invest in infrastructure and create a whole fuckton of jobs in the process. Re-word that poo poo a little, and it'd fly in Alberta. Instead of bitching about oil, the NDP should be saying something like "Albertans have always worked hard producing energy for Canada [picture of pickup truck and man in hard hat]; in the 21st century, that will not change, but we're going to be doing it in a way helps our environment while making sure everyone has good jobs, etc., etc. [picture of beautiful environment and family having picnic]" Only idiots give a gently caress about oil itself. Replace the oil industry with good-paying jobs installing and maintaining wind turbines or nuclear plants or some poo poo and 95% of the population would jump right on board. PT6A fucked around with this message at 01:03 on Jan 3, 2019 |
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 00:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 00:29 |
|
|
zapplez posted:I kinda like Singh and do think its p. cool that a major party has a visible minority leader. Trudeau is half cuban, doesn't that count?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 01:38
|
|
|
T.C. posted:That's what the NDP Socialist Caucus tries to do. They haven't gotten a lot of traction, but they basically hold similar views as the people in this thread that think the NDP has gone in an unproductive direction. After looking at them, I'm not immediately impressed. The leap manifesto endorsement and anti-nuclear power stance personally leave me with red flags. I definitely want a left-NDP alternative. There is a lot to read and process here. I'm sure most of their positions are fine, but they come off as a group that I'd want to run through their policies with a very fine tooth comb before giving any form of endorsement.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 02:02
|
|
|
T.C. posted:That's what the NDP Socialist Caucus tries to do. They haven't gotten a lot of traction, but they basically hold similar views as the people in this thread that think the NDP has gone in an unproductive direction. Thanks for posting this! I've added myself as a supporter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 02:06
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Trudeau is half cuban, doesn't that count? You'd think he'd be a lot more left leaning if he was
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 02:13
|
|
|
zapplez posted:You'd think he'd be a lot more left leaning if he was Nah, Castro was milquetoast centrist before Che Guevara showed him socialism!* * And also before the US told him to gently caress off, and the USSR didn't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 02:23
|
|
|
ocrumsprug posted:I am a really big fan of how the DSA is interacting with the Democratic party at the moment. Not trying to run their own candidates as a actual party and split the left vote, but influencing the party nomination process to drag the party to the left. I think the big difference between the DSA and for example Courage or the Socialist Caucus is their locals ability to engage in local advocacy campaigns and not be purely electorally focused. I mean setting aside the fact that in the past the socialist caucus has been incompetent enough that you could think it could have been a false flag, both Courage and the Socialist Caucus are focused on electoral advocacy in one party and do not really build much strength between elections. Leadnow does a bit of that but they are pretty limited ideologically and also in their campaign help. Ideologically as there are a lot of liberals who do not really want to challenge market power, nor are interested in pushing the overton window much if at all, but also because they are a top down organization that does not really let the grassroots formulate policy. The campaign help they provided in 2015 was also pretty medicore. As they would not tell people to directly help local campaigns and instead do their own door knocks randomly in the constituency, which is, not really that helpful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 03:27
|
|
|
Have we considered that maybe the NDP's problem is we keep electing leaders who are all positive and happy? I'd be much happier voting for an NDP led by someone who constantly just trashes the Liberals and Conservatives at every turn. Acting like we are happy when those shitheads are literally destroying the world is loving insane.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 03:29
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Have we considered that maybe the NDP's problem is we keep electing leaders who are all positive and happy? I'd be much happier voting for an NDP led by someone who constantly just trashes the Liberals and Conservatives at every turn. Acting like we are happy when those shitheads are literally destroying the world is loving insane. I agree. It was truly bizarre seeing affable gramps Mulcair instead of what we typically saw of him in parliament.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 03:34
|
|
|
Question Time Mulcair was entertaining to watch, but all the fire and bluster in the world wouldn't have helped me get excited about the platform he ran on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 04:27
|
|
|
Well you see the NDP had to show Canadians they're serious and fiscally conservative 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 04:59
|
|
|
A Strong, Stable New Democratic Party government.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 05:12
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Have we considered that maybe the NDP's problem is we keep electing leaders who are all positive and happy? I'd be much happier voting for an NDP led by someone who constantly just trashes the Liberals and Conservatives at every turn. Acting like we are happy when those shitheads are literally destroying the world is loving insane. I'm down for luring Chapo Trap House to Canada and forcing them to run the NDP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 07:15
|
|
|
BGrifter posted:I'm down for luring Chapo Trap House to Canada and forcing them to run the NDP. A real political dream team.  Looks a lot more like a meeting of a chapter of the proud boys than the NDP though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 13:27
|
|
|
zapplez posted:A real political dream team. I still can't believe those guys clear $240k/yr each for a lovely podcast. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 16:13
|
|
|
Rime posted:I still can't believe those guys clear $240k/yr each for a lovely podcast. At least they're competing with the Joe Rogans and Jordan Petersons out there. The left needs more propaganda.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
xtal posted:At least they're competing with the Joe Rogans and Jordan Petersons out there. The left needs more propaganda. Wait I thought joe rogan was on the left
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
The left of what? He's a doofy idiot who uncritically interviews pretty much anyone, and coincidentally a lot of the people he interviews are either alt-right or alt-right adjacent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 17:02
|
|
|
Let me tell you about how horrible it is to be a comedian today I gotta watch out with what I say or nameless person #140504 will call me out. I gotta be careful. I gotta tell you, it's the best time to be a comedian today, so much opportunity out there. There's never been a better time to be a comedian. You ever try DMT? Crazy. There's Joe Rogan in a nutshell. Edit: For every good episode of Joe Rogan (977 Jeff Evans & Bud Brutsman) there's like 20 episodes of chuds (Jorp and Shapiro)
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 17:07
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:Wait I thought joe rogan was on the left I thought he was on the right cause I only see vids of him interviewing alt-right weirdos. I will mention I don't really know who he is other than angry face guy in thumbnails.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
Slotducks posted:Let me tell you about how horrible it is to be a comedian today I gotta watch out with what I say or nameless person #140504 will call me out. I gotta be careful. You forgot chimps. Man loves him some chimpanzees.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 17:22
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:Wait I thought joe rogan was on the left He is. He was a big Obama fan. Pro drug legalization. Abortion rights. Climate change,separation of church/state etc , anti-war, prison reform, etc. He likes to talk about being libertarian but actually believes in a lot of government spending like national parks, green energy support, etc. Didn't like Hillary, but who the gently caress did. He is super free speech though (like most comedians are) and that comes across right wing nowadays. vincentpricesboner fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Jan 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 17:58
|
|
|
zapplez posted:He is. He was a big Obama fan. Pro drug legalization. Abortion rights. Climate change,separation of church/state etc , anti-war, prison reform, etc. He likes to talk about being libertarian but actually believes in a lot of government spending like national parks, green energy support, etc. So he's your typical centre-right liberal who uses his show to aggressively market the alt-right. Cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
Joe Rogan is left wing like Justin Trudeau is a Communist - not at all except in the delusional minds of the alt-right
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 19:01
|
|
|
I'm truly shocked that zapplez likes a complete idiot who doesn't have a critical bone in his body and can't even cobble together a political ideology beyond the absolute base minimum required to not be a monstrous piece of poo poo, but has no idea what kind of damage his simple-minded insubstantial ideas do to the political fabric of his nation when he tolerates and even embraces the existence of the straight-up fascists trying to take over his country. Reminds me of someone, actually. I wonder why.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
I wish Pallister had actually not been found when he fell on his trip. Today he announced privatizing seasonal road workers. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/manitoba-infrastructure-special-operations-layoff-privatization-1.4960940 quote:Dozens of Manitoba Infrastructure seasonal employees are expected to be out of a job once the construction season resumes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
Can't wait to see Manitoba degrade to Saskatchewan levels of garbage road quality!
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:I wish Pallister had actually not been found when he fell on his trip. I wonder which friend of Pallister landed this contract
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 19:35
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:American politics is v homeostatic, and Obama reactivated state-level realignments (particularly in the south) that had slowed down during the Bush years. What timescale are you speaking on? Because the United States over the course of the 20th century went through at least four significant periods of dramatic reform and realignment. Progressives and populists at the beginning of the century reworked the party system and lead to a huge wave of trust busting and economic regulation, in the 30s and 40s the New Deal again dramatically changed things, and depending on how you count things there was one or even several dramatic political and economic realignments again during the 1970s. Every thirty or forty years the political system and government have undergone a dramatic change that reflects changes in society, if anything one of the big mysteries of the Great Recession was why the US government was so much more resistant to change than it has been during past crises. quote:The "1000 seat" number that gets thrown around I don't think is very useful for a number of reasons (it "punishes" Dems for having won a landslide in 2006/2008, doesn't take into account that say one California state senator represents as many people as all 400 NH state house members), but sure, there's a case that different choices by the Obama administration (in particular around administrative discretion re: financial regulation and prosecution) might have had better electoral outcomes by changing the environment. It might have had worse, though! What a bizarre analysis. Of course the Democrats should be "punished" for losing the huge wave of support they won in 2006 / 2008 when they were emphasizing their anti-war stances and intentionally taking advantage of people who projected their hopes of a break from the Bush Administration onto Obama. "Oh we cannot blame the party that had all three levels of federal government within its grasp for not delivering on any of their major promises" is such a weird way to defend Obama's huge missed opportunity. During the New Deal the Democrats didn't hesitate to deliver concrete and highly visible benefits that earned voter loyalty, and here's how that played out in Congress:  Eisenhower, writing in the 1950s, described the post New Deal dynamic like this: Dwight D. Eisenhower posted:Should any political party attempt to abolish social security unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group of course that believes you can do these things. Among them are a few other Texas oil millionaires and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid. You could argue that circumstances have changed and that the available options are different now, but stop acting like it is some timeless truth of American politics that nothin much gets done and that policy has no influence over elections. Or at least make actual arguments about why that is now the case instead of presenting it as some eternal truth of American politics. quote:But even in the Obama elections, House Dems who voted against the ACA and stimulus and cap and trade did better than Dems that voted for those. The point I'm trying to make is that it's likely a mistake to believe that being better on policy is an electoral winner. I haven't really seen numbers that bear that out, but the evidence I've seen seems to point the opposite way. I think there's a tendency on the left lately to believe that maximalist policy is also a political winner, and the conclusion there is that anyone who hedges must be craven. The ACA was a terrible piece of legislation that left a lot of people with really bad healthcare they couldn't actually afford but were obliged to pay for, and it was also designed in such a way to largely disguise the more popular aspects of the program while making the least popular parts highly visible. It's a perfect example of why centrist Rube-Goldberg policies that guys like Obama love are electoral poison. As for the stimulus, are you really surprised popular opinion turned lukewarm on it given that by the spring of 2010 Obama was already talking about a "summer of recovery" and had already pivoted from talking about recovery to talking up the need to reduce the deficit? The news cycle in the summer of 2010 was completely dominated by the Simpsons-Bowles commission that Obama himself decided to set up. I should emphasize though that this has nothing to do with maximalist or minimalist approaches to political policy, per se. It's about creating programs that deliver easily understood and popular benefits and then backing that policy agenda up with an easy to understand and compelling narrative about why the other side wants to take your benefits away. Pointing to two huge examples of centrist failure - Obama's terrible economic record and his even more terrible healthcare bill - and using those of all things to try and justify his incrementalist approach is a very strange take. Helsing fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Jan 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 20:38
|
|
|
zapplez posted:A real political dream team. You could have at least gone with the drunk Matt Christman photo from the midterm election live show!  Not like Canada has an aversion to voting for drunks of course.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 20:39
|
|
|
xtal posted:At least they're competing with the Joe Rogans and Jordan Petersons out there. The left needs more propaganda. Current Affairs is my fave. Hardly mainstream popularity, though they do get some buzz when a particular article strikes a nerve. The podcast is also a delight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 20:59
|
|
|
Citations Needed is probably the best media-focused podcast out there and despite its American focus a lot of the narratives it breaks down almost all apply to the Canadian media.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2019 21:25
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xY_D8SMNtE This is all anyone needs to know about Joe Rogan
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 03:48
|
|
|
The totally leftist Joe Rogan (thread) https://twitter.com/zei_nabq/status/1072523267091718145?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:I'm truly shocked that zapplez likes a complete idiot who doesn't have a critical bone in his body and can't even cobble together a political ideology beyond the absolute base minimum required to not be a monstrous piece of poo poo, but has no idea what kind of damage his simple-minded insubstantial ideas do to the political fabric of his nation when he tolerates and even embraces the existence of the straight-up fascists trying to take over his country. Reminds me of someone, actually. I wonder why. Turn off your monitor. You are seriously going to keel over and die of a heart attack in that shitposting chair someday soon man. Calm down. I do appreciate the thread frothing over about how much a bad man joe "dumbass MMA commentator who doesn't know much about politics" rogan is. Always good to point out even if he agrees with the left on 17 major points (important stuff like gay marriage, abortion rights, green energy,etc), if he ever made a joke with a republican then he is not worthy as an ally and is a garbageman. Its important when you are trying to win over more people to make it clear 99% of people aren't lefty enough and aren't true allies. vincentpricesboner fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Jan 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 19:04
|
|
|
Whether or not he technically agrees on the most blindingly obvious points in the world, the fact of the matter is that he's still a gateway to the alt-right. His brand of unthinking counter-intellectual conspiracy garbage is inherently incompatible with anything that can make progress in the real world. The fact that you think he's a good guy based on half a dozen criteria that mean nothing more than "he's not a hateful monster" just confirms everything I've been saying about you in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 19:15
|
|
|
Chairmaster you should take a deep breath and chill 'cause your gonna feel really lovely when this manic period wears off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 19:26
|
|
|
I feel lovely at all times, what you perceive as a manic phase is just me having more time than usual to post on the internet for a while. e: also there's an easy target in the thread right now to illustrate the uselessness and stupidity of the average Canadian, so it'd be a waste to not take advantage. ChairMaster fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Jan 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
UnknownMercenary posted:The totally leftist Joe Rogan (thread) https://twitter.com/zei_nabq/status/1072523267091718145?s=19 Leaving aside all the racist poo poo in the video, and all the problems with Joe Rogan's show in general, I don't understand why people have a problem with "yes you're supposed to just stand there and get robbed". You're a business, there's insurance for that, get it or don't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 19:47
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 00:29 |
|
|
Because this guy had Abby Martin on one time doesn't excuse the parade of human garbage he uncritically has on his show the rest of the time, gently caress sakes
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2019 20:02
|
|
