|
Corbolan posted:lol this is your response Except it was just bullshit edgelord posturing.
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 05:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:27 |
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Here’s the only argument anyone in this thread should need: Again, this ignores the entire line of questioning I just brought up.... How are you so certain that Biden being President doesn't just, at best, delay those justices by 4 years? Are you assuming if Biden wins then Democrats 100% get the senate? Because delaying certain defeat by 4 years don't actually end up with a better outcome.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 05:48
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Except it was just bullshit edgelord posturing. yes, yes, you are confident everyone else's political views are as hollow and based solely on trying to look good as your own. nobody is shocked. now, do we move on to you actually engaging with the question "what about putting a pro-segregation guy in charge strikes you as putting the brakes on a descent into fascism" or do you continue to while about how the goddamn alt-left is just virtue signalling when they say the Democratic party should act as if black people are equal to whites.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 05:49
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Again, this ignores the entire line of questioning I just brought up.... Well, if Biden or another democrat wins there’s a good chance of a democratic senate (another good reason to vote for democrats by the way). Even if the GOP holds the senate by a seat or two, there’s still a chance of peeling off a Susan Collins, or a Lisa Murkowski or Cory Gardner since Yertle won’t have the fig leaf of the “Biden rule” (really the Thurmond rule, but he’s too toxic even for the GOP now, see: Lott, Trent) to hide behind. If, on the other hand, Trump is re-elected, then the demolition of the constitution and packing of the federal bench will certainly continue unabated. So I guess no one can be “certain” that a Biden win would produce a better outcome, but that’s a very silly reason to embrace the worst outcome on purpose. Unless you’re a silly edgelord trying to impress everyone with your cynicism on an Internet message board, obvs.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 05:56
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:we will win America back by our stalwart refusal to stand for a solitary goddamned thing, out of our fear that someone might make fun of us for caring if we did And then on November 4 2020 everyone will stand and clap for the noble, principled leftists that demonstrated their strength and importance by ... enabling the reelection of Donald Trump. But at least then, as was proven by the 2016 election, everyone will rally behind the furthest left candidate in the next election. *checks polls* oh Republicans recognize the value of power, however imperfect it may be, and that's why Cruz or Jeb lovers that disagreed the direction of the party still voted Trump. They're not trying to lose to make an intra-party point because they know influence of a four year term as president lasts longer than four years. The left dead enders just want to wallow in misery and despair and complain about what could have been if only their own party had been smarter. Win the primary first.
|
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 06:04
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:And then on November 4 2020 everyone will stand and clap for the noble, principled leftists that demonstrated their strength and importance by ... enabling the reelection of Donald Trump. But at least then, as was proven by the 2016 election, everyone will rally behind the furthest left candidate in the next election. *checks polls* oh consider what it means that your "value of power" is possessed solely by the voter and the republican politician, while the democratic politician must always be a helpless, spineless, cringing supplicant. who dare not take action on what they claim to believe, for fear they might hurt the feelings of a professional carrion-eater.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 06:10
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:consider what it means that your "value of power" is possessed solely by the voter and the republican politician, while the democratic politician must always be a helpless, spineless, cringing supplicant. The democratic politician doesn't have to be a helpless, spineless, cringing supplicant. But that person still has to win the democratic primary so I can vote for them in the general. If they don't win the primary I'm left picking between two inferior candidates with one (the democrat) being better than the other. If Sanders wins the primary you certainly aren't going to sing the praises of Biden supporters not voting in the general so they can prevent the party from deviating further from their position. It's a one way street where it's fine for you to desire a bad outcome because you're absolutely convinced of the righteousness of your views. You need the moderate dems more than the moderate dems need you.
|
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 06:24
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:You need the moderate dems more than the moderate dems need you. Then there shouldn't be a problem with me not voting
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 06:31
|
|
|
Isn't that literally what Hillary stans said about Bernie voters?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 06:37
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:Then there shouldn't be a problem with me not voting Then don't. You think white affluent libs in Manhattan or San Francisco with hefty 401k's and company insurance are seriously affected by a second Trump term? The worst thing that's happened to these people since Jan 2017 is their SALT deduction was capped.
|
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 06:37
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:The democratic politician doesn't have to be a helpless, spineless, cringing supplicant. But that person still has to win the democratic primary so I can vote for them in the general. If they don't win the primary I'm left picking between two inferior candidates with one (the democrat) being better than the other. we expect around the same quarter of you to defect to the republicans as you did the last time the Rational Moderate lost the primary to an outsider, tbh. fortunately, both for civil rights and the country in general, most of the White Moderates (tm) who were so angry at that rabble rouser King for behaving so damned indecorously have a saving grace: they genuinely believe in nothing, and only engage in politics as a team sport. they will follow where they are lead, because the alternative is standing for something. and being told by the guy on the cartoon show "oooh, somebody's gonna get laid in college." evidently this is something these people fear. I know, weird, right.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 06:42
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:Then don't. You think white affluent libs in Manhattan or San Francisco with hefty 401k's and company insurance are seriously affected by a second Trump term? The worst thing that's happened to these people since Jan 2017 is their SALT deduction was capped. It shouldn't matter, according to you, because they don't need my vote.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 06:51
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:It shouldn't matter, according to you, because they don't need my vote. Every electoral victory for the right drifts politics and policy further from you than them. The only way that doesn't matter is if you think it'll spur more drastic change. All for nothing, though -- the court is 7-2 with a 37 year old replacement for Thomas. You aren't getting anything done, voters get restless, and votes in the other party again for "change."
|
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 07:00
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:Every electoral victory for the right drifts politics and policy further from you than them. The only way that doesn't matter is if you think it'll spur more drastic change. All for nothing, though -- the court is 7-2 with a 37 year old replacement for Thomas. You aren't getting anything done, voters get restless, and votes in the other party again for "change." Okay but if they don't need me in order to win, why are you hellbent on convincing me to vote for the status quo
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 07:22
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:Okay but if they don't need me in order to win, why are you hellbent on convincing me to vote for the status quo Liberals think they can neg leftists into submission
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 07:30
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Liberals think they can neg leftists into submission I didn't need you you fuckin traitor I scream at the leftists who I definitely didn't need to do win even tho I lost
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 07:34
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Here’s the only argument anyone in this thread should need: Yeah this. I hate neoliberals and centrist Democrats more than most people do. I hate their divide and conquer tactics, I hate their obscurantism, and I hate their poll-tested, data driven policy proposals. I hate everything about them, and I hope the left continues to expose Biden as the piece of poo poo he is with the scorched earth tactics that they're using. I even voted Bernie during the 2016 primaries, and sat out the general election. The only thing I hate more than neoliberal Democrats are republicans and the religious right. I hate republicans more than neoliberals because I literally watched Fox News and Limbaugh indoctrinate and destroy my parents lives right before my eyes with the religious right bullshit - my brother is a drug addict due to this. If Trump gets reelected and stacks the SCOTUS and Circut courts with more fascists, then I'll get the privilege of watching this happen to the whole country. Permanently.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 07:39
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:Okay but if they don't need me in order to win, why are you hellbent on convincing me to vote for the status quo I'm not. Another four year safe-zone for pharma and lower taxes. Plus the decades long benefit of a judiciary hell-bent on destroying any leftist progress. Love it B2! Vote (or not) on your principles. Stick it to the bad guys.
|
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 07:44
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:And then on November 4 2020 everyone will stand and clap for the noble, principled leftists that demonstrated their strength and importance by ... enabling the reelection of Donald Trump. Why is always people like you think everyone on the left only does things for attention or performative reasons, and doesn't actually care about the world? You never see moderate republicans think the far right are insincere, and just looking for attention, heck you never see democrats think that about the far right either. They may insult them, but they never doubt their intentions. With the left though, it always comes back around to attention seeking. Is it because anyone with an ounce of principles and conviction makes them not feel like the "good guys", and reminds them they're not on the ethical path? Is it because recognizing someone genuinely cares, would make them feel they don't, make them feel guilt? I think its that. I think people don't like a reminder they aren't the good guy in the story, that anyone is "better" than them. It must all be fake, and performative, it must be unrealistic and something to roll your eyes at, because the alternative is a blow to the ego.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 07:44
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:I'm not. Another four year safe-zone for pharma and lower taxes. Definitely not a thing that would exist with Biden as president
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 08:01
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Isn't that literally what Hillary stans said about Bernie voters? The thread title was literally "if you do not like Hillary Clinton, do not vote for her" which was about as close as 2015/2016 D&D ever got to a correct prediction KingNastidon posted:Every electoral victory for the right drifts politics and policy further from you than them. The only way that doesn't matter is if you think it'll spur more drastic change. All for nothing, though -- the court is 7-2 with a 37 year old replacement for Thomas. You aren't getting anything done, voters get restless, and votes in the other party again for "change." If the right affects policy when they win and the democrats jerk off to pictures of themselves 50 years ago while crying when they win, then let's hurry the gently caress up about getting to the end result of that trend so God willing we might also see the end of your interminable excuses for curling up into the fetal position as the economy becomes more untenable than at any point since the gilded age and the environment becomes more hazardous than at any point since the Permian.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 09:19
|
|
|
Tom Guycot posted:Why is always people like you think everyone on the left only does things for attention or performative reasons, and doesn't actually care about the world? You never see moderate republicans think the far right are insincere, and just looking for attention, heck you never see democrats think that about the far right either. They may insult them, but they never doubt their intentions. With the left though, it always comes back around to attention seeking. Pretty much, yeah. Liberals thought they could be the hero forever in the end of history without having to give up anything, and react extremely badly to their fantasy being punctured.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 09:27
|
|
|
Tom Guycot posted:Why is always people like you think everyone on the left only does things for attention or performative reasons, and doesn't actually care about the world? You never see moderate republicans think the far right are insincere, and just looking for attention, heck you never see democrats think that about the far right either. They may insult them, but they never doubt their intentions. With the left though, it always comes back around to attention seeking. loving amen.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 09:50
|
|
|
i liked the idea where you vote for bernie sanders no matter who's in the general. i'm gonna do that since centrists don't need my vote
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 09:58
|
|
|
The moderate Dems do Jack and poo poo for leftists while helping push the window to the right by endlessly reaching out to Republicans. The fundamental issue is that just electing Democrats and assuming that we are all on the same side has clearly failed based on the state of the country so just keeping up with the plan of voting for whatever literal former Republican they nominate is not going to work. The whole stupid idea was about protecting the courts and look at what happened when you elect a bunch of weak losers that don't actually care since if they fail they just run off to a high paying firm. Also I can't believe we are already back on the "look you leftists are not needed so you get absolutely nothing but you better drat well vote for our team you virtue signalling selfish assholes" after 2016. If Manchin can talk about maybe voting for Trump while confirming radical judges and Biden can campaign for Republicans, how can you make the argument that the Democratic voters need to be more in lockstep than the actual drat party leaders?? Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 11:32 on May 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 11:29
|
|
|
It’s really loving tiring having folks freak the gently caress out about Biden when there hasn’t been a single loving primary or caucus vote. “Biden announced, that means all Dems suck, I’m just going to stay home” is an incredibly self defeating attitude. Why not, I dunno, quit using this forum as your personal therapist and support good candidates instead?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 13:42
|
|
|
Who is doing that? There's a lot of people who won't vote for Biden making that clear and being harangued about "Blue no matter who". That's hardly freaking out. "people I agree with have principaled stances, people I disagree with freak out"
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 14:02
|
|
|
Tom Guycot posted:Why is always people like you think everyone on the left only does things for attention or performative reasons, and doesn't actually care about the world? You never see moderate republicans think the far right are insincere, and just looking for attention, heck you never see democrats think that about the far right either. They may insult them, but they never doubt their intentions. With the left though, it always comes back around to attention seeking. There’s another possibility of course. Which is that the far right pretty much always falls in line and votes for the GOP, even when the GOP isn’t quite on the same page. That’s smart of them, because it’s resulted in a lot of their agenda coming to pass. The left on the other hand is constantly whining and purity testing to the clear detriment of actually fixing any problems. Leftist opposition to the ACA is a clear example. The ACA is the best healthcare policy because it was the one that could pass the senate. No amount of leftist caterwauling can change the fact that anything vaguely like single payer was impossible in 2009. Single payer might be possible if democrats controlled congress today, but only because the democrats moved the ball on this issue the last time they had possession, if you catch my metaphor (they also helped a ton of people in the process and would have helped more but for the GOP winning a bunch of elections and sabotaging the law). But still the left relentlessly attacks the signal improvement to the social safety net of the past fifty years because it isn’t exactly what they wanted, never mind that what they wanted clearly could not have been done. And there are so many examples like that. It’s enough to make anyone sincerely wonder what the left really cares about. I think you have it exactly backwards, you see. It’s the leftists who are in love with a story featuring themselves as the heroes of history. Feeling like they’re the righteous fighters for justice is more important than actual outcomes. That’s very clear to me.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 14:04
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:There’s another possibility of course. Which is that the far right pretty much always falls in line and votes for the GOP, even when the GOP isn’t quite on the same page. That’s smart of them, because it’s resulted in a lot of their agenda coming to pass. in this version of the universe are the blue dogs who actively ran against the ACA in 2010, got massacred for it, and proceeded to usher in ten years of right wing governance marked by a Democratic president trying as hard as he could to cut Medicare and Medicaid the left's fault? or was their running against the blessed ACA also the best policy because it's what democrats decided to do.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 14:49
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:in this version of the universe are the blue dogs who actively ran against the ACA in 2010, got massacred for it, and proceeded to usher in ten years of right wing governance marked by a Democratic president trying as hard as he could to cut Medicare and Medicaid the left's fault? This is just nonsense. Democrats in general didn’t run against the ACA. In fact lots of them knew that voting for the bill would it their seats in danger. Even if it were true, why would running against the ACA be bad? Do you admit that the ACA was a good law?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 15:40
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:This is just nonsense. All of those things happened
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 15:46
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:This is just nonsense. Democrats in general didn’t run against the ACA. In fact lots of them knew that voting for the bill would it their seats in danger. Even if it were true, why would running against the ACA be bad? Do you admit that the ACA was a good law? unsurprisingly, you will find that a socialist thinks "that's bad because it's socialism" is both stupid and wrong as a reason for something being bad. this is a phenomenon you refer to as "purity testing" and everyone else refers to as "believing a thing is true." did you forget the blue dogs who ran against the ACA in 2010, as a thing that should not have come to pass, on the grounds it was socialism, actually. and, despite this sensible, reasonable compromise with their republican electorate, got wiped out down to the man.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 15:48
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:unsurprisingly, you will find that a socialist thinks "that's bad because it's socialism" is both stupid and wrong as a reason for something being bad. this is a phenomenon you refer to as "purity testing" and everyone else refers to as "believing a thing is true." I’m not even sure what you’re arguing here. What should democrats have done differently re: health care in 2009? They didn’t reach a compromise with republicans, they passed a huge bill with zero republican votes.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 15:53
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:I’m not even sure what you’re arguing here. What should democrats have done differently re: health care in 2009? They didn’t reach a compromise with republicans, they passed a huge bill with zero republican votes. Pass a public option? You know, that thing Obama campaigned on? If they weren't going to get any GOP votes anyway, why did they water it down so much, Ogmius?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 16:04
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:I’m not even sure what you’re arguing here. What should democrats have done differently re: health care in 2009? They didn’t reach a compromise with republicans, they passed a huge bill with zero republican votes. let me remind you. Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:in this version of the universe are the blue dogs who actively ran against the ACA in 2010, got massacred for it, and proceeded to usher in ten years of right wing governance marked by a Democratic president trying as hard as he could to cut Medicare and Medicaid the left's fault? you have made it clear that you believe the Left's opposition to the ACA is wrong, because the Democrats passed the ACA, and therefore it must be good. so I am curious what your take is on the Democrats who ran against the ACA as both socialism and wrong, got wiped out, and in so doing ushered in the Why Won't Republicans Let Me Cut Medicare years of the Obama administration.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 16:04
|
|
|
A delay may be better than letting them take control again immediately. Census is next year, and a democratic control at that time would probably be better than not. It staunches the bleeding for now in the supreme court, let's us redistrict to our advantage, and gives more time for boomers to die, including center rights that like Biden or Hillary. Bernie is better for bringing people in and I prefer his policies to any other candidate, but President Biden wouldn't be totally useless just because he would be an incompetent racist trash president, as we can already see how Republicans benefit from Trump dispute his being that exactly. The left is only gonna keep pushing harder, and unless the liberals actually throw people an FDR style bone at least, that isn't gonna change. Another thing to note is that just as the frothing chuds didn't start running the madhouse immediately upon manifestation in the Republican caucus, the left is still metastasizing through the Democratic party. The longer it takes, the more the rot sets in on both sides, to our advantage. Hopefully a hypothetical Biden government can also be browbeat into behaving a little better in the midterms too. If left folks can take some state legislatures, they can show people there is someone who actually what's to help, which could also lead to a snowball effect itself, similar to how states went one by one on gay marriage, and are on weed. If they lose anyway dispite the left holding it's nose and voting for them, it accomplishes what not voting does and more. thechosenone fucked around with this message at 17:23 on May 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 16:57
|
|
|
thechosenone posted:
Except for another four years of wailing about how the left didn't help them win and a further shift right
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
Wouldn't this happen if they didn't and the liberal wing lost also? I can't blame anyone when so few people vote anyway. We would be better off energizing non voters, but we are making due with a system that wants to depress voting rather than provide things so people want to.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 20:21
|
|
|
Leftists and liberals can compromise, liberals and conservatives can compromise and conservatives and fascists can compromise. President Biden means liberals compromising with conservatives, who've already bent over to the fascists. Four more years of President Trump is at least not a rightward compromise. If we wanna prevent that, the Dems need to compromise with the left.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:27 |
|
|
Tom Guycot posted:Why is always people like you think everyone on the left only does things for attention or performative reasons, and doesn't actually care about the world? You never see moderate republicans think the far right are insincere, and just looking for attention, heck you never see democrats think that about the far right either. They may insult them, but they never doubt their intentions. With the left though, it always comes back around to attention seeking. Because it's much easier to believe someone cares about themselves than others.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2019 22:21
|
|
