|
Who do you want to be the 2020 Democratic Nominee? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Joe "the liberal who fights busing" Biden |
|
27 | 1.40% |
| Bernie "please don't die" Sanders |
|
1017 | 52.69% |
| Cory "charter schools" Booker |
|
12 | 0.62% |
| Kirsten "wall street" Gillibrand |
|
24 | 1.24% |
| Kamala "truancy queen" Harris |
|
59 | 3.06% |
| Julian "who?" Castro |
|
7 | 0.36% |
| Tulsi "gay panic" Gabbard |
|
25 | 1.30% |
| Michael "crimes crimes crimes" Avenatti |
|
22 | 1.14% |
| Sherrod "discount bernie" Brown |
|
21 | 1.09% |
| Amy "horrible boss" Klobuchar |
|
12 | 0.62% |
| Tammy "stands for america" Duckworth |
|
48 | 2.49% |
| Beto "whataburger" O'Rourke |
|
32 | 1.66% |
| Elizabeth "instagram beer" Warren |
|
284 | 14.72% |
| Tom "impeach please" Steyer |
|
4 | 0.21% |
| Michael "soda is the devil" Bloomberg |
|
9 | 0.47% |
| Joseph Stalin |
|
287 | 14.87% |
| Howard "coffee republican" Schultz |
|
10 | 0.52% |
Jay "nobody cares about climate change  " Inslee |
|
13 | 0.67% |
| Pete "gently caress the homeless" Butt Man |
|
17 | 0.88% |
| Total: | 1930 votes | ||
|
DaveWoo posted:I don't have a problem with this framing - I've talked to a fair number of folks who agree with Bernie on the issues, but who hate the label "socialist". So why get into a pointless slapfight over labels, when you can just portray these as common-sense American values instead? If you abandon the labels of "Socialism" or "Communism" you abandon with them centuries of literature and scholarship on issues that are still of foundational importance to any modern left. Here's a nerd on youtube talking about it for 10 minutes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TumR7eTc_-c
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 07:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
Moon Shrimp posted:Why is it going to be incomprehensible to them? It sounds like you're horribly over-generalizing from your own failed attempts to explain your ideas to older people. Because in general, to most older liberals, the idea that socialism and communism are self-evidently terrible and you should oppose them is normal, and young people becoming more sympathetic and interested in socialism is at best just a phase they’ll grow out of. You aren’t going to gain traction with them with an argument like “left-punching is bad” because that’s just how you do for old liberals. In the context of the 2020 primaries, stuff like the Pelosi “we’re capitalists, that’s just the way it is” clip isn’t going to play the same way for 40-60 year old middle class liberals the way it is to 20-30 year old online leftists. To them, that is just a self-evidently true and positive statement, because the Cold War broke everyone’s brains. Sanders has both an advantage and disadvantage here, in that he is manifestly rhetorically different than every other candidate which makes him very popular with some people and not so popular with others. That said, I think Sanders embracing the socialist label is actually positive and necessary and if anything I wish he’d lean more into it and move left relative to his 2016 campaign.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 08:32
|
|
|
I will not vote for any candidate whomsoever goes to Cedar Rapids. Cursed village.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 10:01
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Because in general, to most older liberals, the idea that socialism and communism are self-evidently terrible and you should oppose them is normal, and young people becoming more sympathetic and interested in socialism is at best just a phase they’ll grow out of. You aren’t going to gain traction with them with an argument like “left-punching is bad” because that’s just how you do for old liberals. "Left-punching is bad" is indeed a bad argument, because there's absolutely no argument there. You need to explain why you think socialism is okay (and therefore why using it as a punching-bag is bad), which seemed to be the thing that you thought would be "incomprehensible" to older Democrats. You are just taking this state of affairs that you describe as something that can't be changed without actually explaining why it can't be changed. Lightning Knight posted:In the context of the 2020 primaries, stuff like the Pelosi “we’re capitalists, that’s just the way it is” clip isn’t going to play the same way for 40-60 year old middle class liberals the way it is to 20-30 year old online leftists. To them, that is just a self-evidently true and positive statement, because the Cold War broke everyone’s brains. Sanders has both an advantage and disadvantage here, in that he is manifestly rhetorically different than every other candidate which makes him very popular with some people and not so popular with others. Giving up on old people because their brains are supposedly broken is pretty dumb, in my opinion. They can still reason and listen to arguments about why capitalism is bad and socialism is good. Just because you and others you've talked to have found it difficult (no doubt because you guys have a far more shaky grasp on what capitalism and socialism even mean than you're willing to admit) doesn't mean it's impossible. I'm sorry for picking on you in particular, my problem is more that I frequently see people make these sweeping statements that radically narrow down the scope of what's possible without anyone really questioning them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 11:03
|
|
|
Moon Shrimp posted:You are just taking this state of affairs that you describe as something that can't be changed without actually explaining why it can't be changed. The type of people I’m talking about either are going to get with the program in time to do something relevant about climate change right the gently caress now or aren’t worth my time. It’s that simple.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 11:09
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:The type of people I’m talking about either are going to get with the program in time to do something relevant about climate change right the gently caress now or aren’t worth my time. It’s that simple. The broader the support for your plans, the easier they will be to enact and the harder they will be to undo. It's that simple. Tapping your foot impatiently and saying there's no time doesn't change that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 11:21
|
|
|
Moon Shrimp posted:The broader the support for your plans, the easier they will be to enact and the harder they will be to undo. It's that simple. I mean, perhaps, but if you’re an older liberal in tyool 2019 who thinks capitalism is salvageable and not the literal thing hurtling us towards collective doom, nothing I say is going to convince you otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 11:44
|
|
|
Moon Shrimp posted:"Left-punching is bad" is indeed a bad argument, because there's absolutely no argument there. there is absolutely an argument there. the left is supposed to be your allies. we're supposedly in the same party. punching left depresses turn out for no good reason if you don't agree with socialism, you don't have to mention it (or clap along when a fascist yells about it in a fascist speech)
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 11:48
|
|
|
Indeed, nothing you say will convince them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 11:49
|
|
|
Condiv posted:there is absolutely an argument there. the left is supposed to be your allies. we're supposedly in the same party. punching left depresses turn out for no good reason You are making an argument for why punching left is bad, which is quite different from just declaring "punching left is bad."
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 11:56
|
|
|
Moon Shrimp posted:You are making an argument for why punching left is bad, which is quite different from just declaring "punching left is bad." it's pretty drat obvious so the argument shouldn't even have to be made. you all expect us to #votebluenomatterwho, doesn't it immediately follow that you shouldn't treat the left like trash so they have less problems voting for centrists that don't really represent them?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:04
|
|
|
Condiv posted:it's pretty drat obvious so the argument shouldn't even have to be made. you all expect us to #votebluenomatterwho, doesn't it immediately follow that you shouldn't treat the left like trash so they have less problems voting for centrists that don't really represent them? Why even declare "punching left is bad" if it's all so obvious? Shouldn't even that go without saying?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:09
|
|
|
Moon Shrimp posted:Why even declare "punching left is bad" if it's all so obvious? Shouldn't even that go without saying? it should, yes. and then the dems clap along to trump in the middle of a fascist speech so apparently it does need saying
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:13
|
|
|
Condiv posted:it should, yes. and then the dems clap along to trump in the middle of a fascist speech so apparently it does need saying Oh, so it does need saying, but it does not need to be explained? The mere declaration of it causes the necessary arguments to unfold in the listener's mind through some sort of automatic process? What an efficient method of communication you've discovered here!
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:18
|
|
|
Most older liberals don't understand what fascism is aside from something hippies yell about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:25
|
|
|
Moon Shrimp posted:Oh, so it does need saying, but it does not need to be explained? The mere declaration of it causes the necessary arguments to unfold in the listener's mind through some sort of automatic process? What an efficient method of communication you've discovered here! it shouldn't need to be explained either. that you need me to explain it in detail doesn't reflect well upon you
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:28
|
|
|
Condiv posted:it shouldn't need to be explained either. that you need me to explain it in detail doesn't reflect well upon you I don't think you know what you were even responding to originally at this point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:33
|
|
|
Moon Shrimp posted:I don't think you know what you were even responding to originally at this point. sure I do quote:"Left-punching is bad" is indeed a bad argument, because there's absolutely no argument there. i'm responding to a false statement. then you responded with a bunch of "well clearly the argument had to be expanded cause i couldn't put two and two together"
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:42
|
|
|
Condiv posted:sure I do In the original post, I agree that left punching is bad and say that there are arguments that can be made to support that statement. The simple point I was trying to make in that sentence which you bizarrely laser-focused on was that "left punching is bad" is not an argument, it's just a statement. I have no problem thinking of arguments to support that statement. Just because you and I can think of arguments to support that statement does not make it an argument, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:54
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Because if you fear the label "socialist" that much, then you're probably going to refuse to work with or cooperate with the socialists calling for the same policies you are. Moreover, people willing to embrace a radical term are going to be more willing to embrace radical or disruptive tactics, while people who shy away from the radical term for fear of being demonized are going to tend more toward conciliatory cooperation. Organized labor's decline began when the big unions started purging their socialists and communists, removing people willing to raise a ruckus and stacking their leadership with people who desired peaceful harmony with employers. This is very well said.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 14:33
|
|
|
Moon Shrimp posted:In the original post, I agree that left punching is bad and say that there are arguments that can be made to support that statement. The simple point I was trying to make in that sentence which you bizarrely laser-focused on was that "left punching is bad" is not an argument, it's just a statement. it is an argument, just one that you think isn't very good on its own
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 14:49
|
|
|
The capitalism vs socialism thing makes my eyes glaze over. It's always going to be a continuum and there is no american politician calling for actual socialism as in the government owning all the means of production. Just advocate for policy that works for the problem you're trying to solve and is popular with people...
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 15:24
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:The capitalism vs socialism thing makes my eyes glaze over. It's always going to be a continuum and there is no american politician calling for actual socialism as in the government owning all the means of production. Just advocate for policy that works for the problem you're trying to solve and is popular with people... Socialism is not when the government does stuff and the more stuff it does does not mean the more socialist it is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/RebeccaBuck/status/1094224058437300224
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 15:41
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:The capitalism vs socialism thing makes my eyes glaze over. It's always going to be a continuum and there is no american politician calling for actual socialism as in the government owning all the means of production. Just advocate for policy that works for the problem you're trying to solve and is popular with people... The only thing that'll work for that is real no-poo poo Socialism. Not whatever caricature of Socialism that lives in your head, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
Probably best not to assume people are Spanish-speakers just because they have a funny accent
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 15:52
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Bernie, or any other potential 2020 candidate who wants to embrace socialism, doesn’t need to win the majority of anti-left olds in the general, though I’m not sure about the primary. It depends on how many young people and disaffected voters come out. It also depends on how many of those young people and disaffected voters who show up to the primary are allowed to: 1. Vote. 2. Have their vote counted. Depending on their state, neither is guaranteed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 16:02
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:Probably best not to assume people are Spanish-speakers just because they have a funny accent It's really crazy how a bunch of Dems seem to genuinely think that being able to speak Spanish is like a magic spell
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 16:04
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:The only thing that'll work for that is real no-poo poo Socialism. Not whatever caricature of Socialism that lives in your head, though. We can argue that but the government isn't taking over every industry in the country in our lifetime. That just isn't going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 16:53
|
|
|
Please stop conflating actual real things with the ridiculous caricatures of them that you've created in your head, tia. E: Besides that, your attitude is complete loving garbage. We've got about a decade until we hit full climate change catastrophe and here you sit pontificating that nothing big can be done in our lifetimes. Well guess what? It loving has to. Either we reform our entire economic system into something that can work sustainably or everything loving collapses. Cerebral Bore fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Feb 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
Moon Shrimp posted:"Left-punching is bad" is indeed a bad argument, because there's absolutely no argument there. You need to explain why you think socialism is okay edit: Like contrast this with a person saying "Racism is bad" are you going to go after someone saying that with "Well actually you need a set of logical arguments explaining why racism is bad to say that". twodot fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Feb 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:15
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:The capitalism vs socialism thing makes my eyes glaze over. It's always going to be a continuum and there is no american politician calling for actual socialism as in the government owning all the means of production. Just advocate for policy that works for the problem you're trying to solve and is popular with people... Yeah, IMO it makes more sense to take a more pragmatic approach, where you nationalize certain industries and sub-sectors where it makes sense, add regulation to private industries where it makes sense, and (dare i say it on this message board!) even de-regulate certain functions where it makes sense. Political theory is not that good at making predictions and guaranteeing results, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to me to be ideologically committed to employ only one type of one approach to every problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:44
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Yeah, IMO it makes more sense to take a more pragmatic approach, where you nationalize certain industries and sub-sectors where it makes sense, add regulation to private industries where it makes sense, and (dare i say it on this message board!) even de-regulate certain functions where it makes sense. that's the pragmatic solution but you have to keep in mind the majority of this thread is interested in winning the ideological identity politics fight that's why the labels are so important
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Yeah, IMO it makes more sense to take a more pragmatic approach, where you nationalize certain industries and sub-sectors where it makes sense, add regulation to private industries where it makes sense, and (dare i say it on this message board!) even de-regulate certain functions where it makes sense. It doesn't last because a decade down the line all the propaganda the private industry you've left around blaring "everything will improve if you just PRIVATIZE EVERYTHING" will either get through or provide enough cover for their bribery to not be obvious.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:48
|
|
|
capitalism's end goal is grind your bones into dust for whichever trillionaire comes out on top. the pragmatic solution is its eradication
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
Maybe if we just grind the right bones...
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:53
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:It doesn't last because a decade down the line all the propaganda the private industry you've left around blaring "everything will improve if you just PRIVATIZE EVERYTHING" will either get through or provide enough cover for their bribery to not be obvious. Love to tout as the pragmatic approach the exact same thing we already tried doing that got completely rolled back in a few short decades, thus bringing us neofascism and climate death.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:54
|
|
|
None of this is about the primary...
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:54
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:It doesn't last because a decade down the line all the propaganda the private industry you've left around blaring "everything will improve if you just PRIVATIZE EVERYTHING" will either get through or provide enough cover for their bribery to not be obvious. ? "everything will improve if you just PRIVATIZE EVERYTHING" sounds like a position that is ideologically committed to one type of approach to solve every political problem. This is the kind of position I was arguing against in my post.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
it would be nice if one of the democratic candidates was running on abolishing capitalism, but as far as i know none of them are
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 18:00
|
|