|
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 | ||
|
Poor optics, one might say.
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 04:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 18:21 |
|
|
Phone posted:This post is problematic because it uses the default yellow clapping hands and not the multiracial ones that are only available on newer iOS devices. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 04:41
|
|
|
A troubling trend I've found is that if you take things and strip them of all context they often look less than ideal (with regards to optics). Do better!
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 04:41
|
|
|
good thing pete buttigieg is here to say that raising workers' wages is anti-gay why are you against drone striking innocents? drone striking innocent bystanders is pro-gay!
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 04:41
|
|
|
Man what is with all the concern trolling about how Bernie doesn't do enough to help minorities. It's Medicare for all, not medicare for white people JFC. Every policy he is offering will help minorities because they help poor people who disproportionately happen to be minorities. What more do you want? An LGBTQ labeled handjob because the normal handjob isn't doing it for you anymore? Are you telling me that minorities are somehow going to be better off if they didn't have access to free healthcare? If they didn't have benefits like collective bargaining rights? Because boy howdy do I have news for you bud, none of the other candidates are going to do any of these things so how are you any better off? We already had a black president, how'd that work out for minorities? Last I checked we still got cops gunning down un-armed black men in the streets without due process. Like gently caress, if Bernie had his way, disenfranchised and poor LGBTQ people would have better access to HIV care or prevention stuff like PREP without having to pay insane amounts of money they may not be able to afford. This is a rising tide that lifts all boats and objectively makes people's lives better. Kraftwerk fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Jun 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 04:49
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Yeah, is anyone actually arguing Bernie is bad on LGBT issues? Why are we rebutting that? I thought it was some sort of mental exercise. Like, literally everybody in here knows that no matter what Bernie says or how he says it, Donut Twitter is going to twist his words into knots trying to frame it as some sort of strike against him. I figured folks were just trying to guess what DT says before they say it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:03
|
|
|
I wonder why the classical left reacts so defensively when asked to center minority voices and minority issues instead of lumping them in with "the poors". I get it to a certain extent: there are a lot of bad-faith arguments coming from deeply compromised libs and there's also a desire for less idpol-style atomization and more collective action... but you seriously can just ask PoCs what their concerns with certain universal programs like M4A actually are (mostly its the idea that it will just perpetuate the same kind of systemic racism currently embedded in the health care system) and then just maybe... take some of their concerns on board.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:05
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:I wonder why the classical left reacts so defensively when asked to center minority voices and minority issues instead of lumping them in with "the poors". I get it to a certain extent: there are a lot of bad-faith arguments coming from deeply compromised libs and there's also a desire for less idpol-style atomization and more collective action... but you seriously can just ask PoCs what their concerns with certain universal programs like M4A actually are (mostly its the idea that it will just perpetuate the same kind of systemic racism currently embedded in the health care system) and then just maybe... take some of their concerns on board. What are the concerns about M4A do you have that you think haven't been integrated into the discussion and bills already put forth?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:07
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:What are the concerns about M4A do you have that you think haven't been integrated into the discussion and bills already put forth? I think he believes that even when hospitals become free at the point of service, the hospitals in black neighborhoods will be really awful and the ones in the rich neighborhoods with the help of republican state govts will be able to turn down patients that don't live in the county etc etc... Basically banning black people without ever saying you're doing so and creating a two tier system where medical outcomes in underfunded black community hospitals are significantly worse than the white ones.... or something like that. I could see something like this potentially becoming an issue unless there was a way to keep the states from pulling shenanigans to keep black people out of the good hospitals or away from the good doctors. Also if you want my cynical opinion: Giving minorities minority specific programs that only they benefit from but no on else do seems like preferential treatment to white people who are used to getting it by default. So they think you're doing handouts and "gimmedats" and it becomes really easy for the right to savage and discredit all your social programs. Making them all encompassing makes it harder to fight them. Americans by far are a spiteful society that never wants to hear about someone might be getting something a little more than someone else even if it is deserved or being done in recompense for past wrongs. Kraftwerk fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Jun 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:12
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:What are the concerns about M4A do you have that you think haven't been integrated into the discussion and bills already put forth? That was a broader response to: quote:It's Medicare for all, not medicare for white people JFC. Universal programs often aren't... because poo poo like racism/sexism lives on and thrives in a variety of structures, even if they explicitly remove the profit motive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:17
|
|
|
Medicare for All won't fix the fact that white doctors prefer white patients. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:18
|
|
|
Medicare 4 All won't solve racism and it wont solve sexisn. The classical left refuses to acknowledge this and Im so loving done with them
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:20
|
|
|
LinYutang posted:Medicare for All won't fix the fact that white doctors prefer white patients. Guess it's not worth doing at all then! Vaccines don't solve racism either, might as well get rid of those.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:20
|
|
|
LinYutang posted:Medicare for All won't fix the fact that white doctors prefer white patients. it does fix the fact that poor people die from lack of healthcare
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:24
|
|
|
sirtommygunn posted:Guess it's not worth doing at all then! Vaccines don't solve racism either, might as well get rid of those. The point isn't "don't do it", it's that fixing economic issues isn't enough, and it's important to keep the pressure up and make sure that doesn't get forgotten.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:27
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:I think he believes that even when hospitals become free at the point of service, the hospitals in black neighborhoods will be really awful and the ones in the rich neighborhoods with the help of republican state govts will be able to turn down patients that don't live in the county etc etc... I'm pretty sure public schools already operate in such an implicitly segregationist manner. I think issues like this are prevalent even in countries with single-payer health care systems: I'm pretty sure I can dig up stories about how poorly Canadian and Australian public health services treat their respective indigenous populations. I'm not trying to make a point in bad faith. M4A would undoubtedly help minorities, but the idea that minority issues aren't relevant to the discussion... or that all such arguments should illicit immediate defensiveness... is what's frustrating me here. Yes, I'm aware that libs have poisoned the well on this issue, like they have on many others.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:30
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:The point isn't "don't do it", it's that fixing economic issues isn't enough, and it's important to keep the pressure up and make sure that doesn't get forgotten. To add to this. I could be wrong but I don’t think civil rights would’ve succeeded as a movement if it happened during the Great Depression, or today’s economic climate. I believe that it’s an issue that people are better equipped to handle, support and think about when they aren’t poor and starving or losing family to preventable medical problems.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:32
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:The point isn't "don't do it", it's that fixing economic issues isn't enough, and it's important to keep the pressure up and make sure that doesn't get forgotten. Are you not familiar with LinYutang? "Don't do it" is absolutely their point when they say medicare for all won't solve racism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:32
|
|
|
*thinking harder than ever before in my life* what if...we get medicare 4 all and keep working on knocking down institutional racism and sexism at the same time
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:40
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:To add to this. I could be wrong but I don’t think civil rights would’ve succeeded as a movement if it happened during the Great Depression, or today’s economic climate. I believe that it’s an issue that people are better equipped to handle, support and think about when they aren’t poor and starving or losing family to preventable medical problems. I don't think you have the right to make that decision for minority groups... to ask them to defer their liberation while waiting for yours. Civil rights have to go hand in hand with social rights, or you end up with the "prosperity" of the 50's and 60's: reserved for white workers only.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:44
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:I don't think you have the right to make that decision for minority groups... to ask them to defer their liberation while waiting for yours. Civil rights have to go hand in hand with social rights, or you end up with the "prosperity" of the 50's and 60's: reserved for white workers only. We already have had that with the situation we're talking about. The civil rights of some have greatly advanced, while the civil and economic rights of others haven't. Can you guess which group advanced? It's the one that includes the wealthy white people
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 05:49
|
|
|
LinYutang posted:Medicare for All won't fix the fact that white doctors prefer white patients. it will once we amend the bill to ban white doctors check and mate
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:12
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:if you take things and strip them they look less better! Agreed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:13
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:I wonder why the classical left reacts so defensively when asked to center minority voices and minority issues instead of lumping them in with "the poors". I get it to a certain extent: there are a lot of bad-faith arguments coming from deeply compromised libs and there's also a desire for less idpol-style atomization and more collective action... but you seriously can just ask PoCs what their concerns with certain universal programs like M4A actually are (mostly its the idea that it will just perpetuate the same kind of systemic racism currently embedded in the health care system) and then just maybe... take some of their concerns on board. Don’t mind me, I’m just throwing out rhetorical questions into the aether to pass the time. Phone fucked around with this message at 06:19 on Jun 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:15
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:I think I understand what you mean, and you're right that I should have phrased that differently. What you're saying you read is really far from what I believe, but I understand how it can been read that way. There's a way to say "I wish he would use this opportunity to talk about issues that affect LGBTQ people specifically" without sounding dismissive of the issues he did talk about. (With regards especially to unionization especially, I don't think *anything* gets better in this country, not sustainably, without the left managing to revive the union movement - my union just went through a contract negotiation and it was really obvious just how much weaker we were because of RTW laws and having a big chunk of the bargaining union be completely checked out because they weren't members.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:30
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:I wonder why the classical left reacts so defensively when asked to center minority voices and minority issues instead of lumping them in with "the poors". I get it to a certain extent: there are a lot of bad-faith arguments coming from deeply compromised libs and there's also a desire for less idpol-style atomization and more collective action... but you seriously can just ask PoCs what their concerns with certain universal programs like M4A actually are (mostly its the idea that it will just perpetuate the same kind of systemic racism currently embedded in the health care system) and then just maybe... take some of their concerns on board. Because 99% of the time it's some weirdo pulling some dumbass move like "Wow, wow. Just wow. Bernie Bros are SERIOUSLY saying that #corporations #centering #LGBT voices is bad now? Not a good look, fam! #Cancelled #Biden2020" (also just because some their politics are good doesn't mean that the left consists of universally good posters and I'm sure some people are just poo poo) exhibit one: Pinterest Mom posted:https://twitter.com/SenSanders/status/1136032865693720577 Marxalot fucked around with this message at 06:40 on Jun 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:32
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Calling out rainbow capitalism is good, but workers being underpaid and not represented by collective bargaining isn't a uniquely LGBT problem. LGBT folks would certainly benefit from that (as would all workers), but again... it subsumes specific group issues into broader class struggle issues. This is a typical pattern of Marxist discourse and I don't think its one that always works or even makes sense. That's because you don't understand it, not because it's wrong, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:33
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:A better analogy: Bernie came out to my birthday party but spent the whole time talking about his own birthday party, and its far more reasonably priced cake, instead. That analogy is worse and you're deliberately misrepresenting what's happened to make your point, and the point you're making is literally factually incorrect anyway!
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:35
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Note that I'm not saying that Bernie is bad on LGBT issues. I'm saying that this one specific tweet is bad messaging. This single tweet, taken completely out of context, looks less than ideal...just like Elizabeth Warren's single policy release, taken completely out of context, looked less than ideal. The fact that they've made plenty of other, better statements on those issues doesn't change the fact that they've fed the media that hates them a nice soundbite by failing to prioritize the issue properly. This is something Bernie has had problems with in the past, and I was really hoping he'd have improved on that this time around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:36
|
|
|
It's like you can point to a lifetime of public service standing in solidarity with working class people and oppressed people and minorities, and that's all well and good, but on other hand have y'all seen this tweet? It's a doozy! He talks about LGBTQ issues and broader systemic issues in the same sentence. The loving nerve of that guy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:40
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Man what is with all the concern trolling about how Bernie doesn't do enough to help minorities. Liberals will side with the fascists every time, it's nothing more complicated than that. They want to preserve the status quo and their true goal is to provide as much lip service as necessary and as little action as possible. Count on it 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:43
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:I wonder why the classical left reacts so defensively when asked to center minority voices and minority issues instead of lumping them in with "the poors". I get it to a certain extent: there are a lot of bad-faith arguments coming from deeply compromised libs and there's also a desire for less idpol-style atomization and more collective action... but you seriously can just ask PoCs what their concerns with certain universal programs like M4A actually are (mostly its the idea that it will just perpetuate the same kind of systemic racism currently embedded in the health care system) and then just maybe... take some of their concerns on board. Shut the gently caress up, liberal
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:45
|
|
|
My only consolation is that after the nazi pisspigs finish snapping my neck and cremating me, they are coming for you next, centrist
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 06:46
|
|
|
crazy cloud posted:Liberals will side with the fascists every time Pembroke there was probated in this thread for lamenting that the Spartacist movement forced the SPD to arm the freikorps
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 07:00
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:i was kinda surprised at how lackluster her campaign's been, but i suspect there was a bit of behind-the-scenes blacklisting happening in retaliation for the franken thing nah gillibrand got her turn being floated as not-bernie/biden very early on just like Beto/Buttplug did she didn't float and everyone moved on to newest flavor of the month candidates before settling down to the inevitable Biden vs Bernie showdown with Harris/Warren as backups
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 07:19
|
|
|
kudos to Pinterest Mom for pulling off the same concern troll shtick to derail a thread, reminds me of the OG Bernie thread that Pinterest Mom, a canadian neoliberal with no skin in us domestic policy that affects millions of americans, would constantly do this and then probate people after the fact in YCS->EE->C-SPAM its really not that hard to lay it out that Bernie would be infinity plus one better pushing for LGBTQ advocacy in socio-economic (that means both social and economic) policies even if he doesn't frame every single thing in a tiny e-flash card for millions to read, and is more likely to enact policies with LGBTQ in mind if he gets elected president. It's also his cabinet picks that would be important since he is only but one man. He is pretty much a lightning rod to rally to, and just a foot in the door to further enact social issues after the economic groundwork has been laid down to de-escalate a lot of hardships that is creating an intense amount of friction in every layer of this society to strive for a more equal country, even if things slip through the crack. It's like a million bajillion times better than just not doing anything at all, and people can start having real dialogue about what to do about said cracks in the system because no system is ever perfect. Also you're canadian, like what the gently caress, you have nationalized healthcare, what is your major malfunction with Bernie Sanders  I know you won't bother to answer this or read this because you hate me, and I don't give a poo poo but seriously~Can we talk about how Trump just dunked on Joe Biden for plagiarism just now? Thank u, next
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 07:21
|
|
|
How do I frame this though, like do I go to a Kinko's to make sure that this gets blown up and I get a complementary plastic frame and plexiglass with it. I also want to blow this up to make sure it's not Bruce Rappaport but indeed Bernie Sanders. this is occam's razor poo poo 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 07:34
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:A better analogy: Bernie came out to my birthday party but spent the whole time talking about his own birthday party, and its far more reasonably priced cake, instead. I don't know why it's impossible for you libs to get it through your thick skulls, but how LGBTQ people are being treated in the workplace is literally a labor rights issue. The lib approach is passing some symbolic and toothless poo poo that it easily circumvented, whereas the socialist approach is to implement strong worker's rights to stop the owners from mistreating employees, but apparently that's bad because it's not done using the right language even though it would objectively result in a better situation and this mindset is both dumb as gently caress and extremely condescending to minority persons. Because from every conversation I've ever had with someone belonging to a hosed-over minority they're much more interested in poo poo that actually improves their material conditions than they are in some politician saying nice-sounding words that ultimately mean nothing, and I'm pretty drat convinced that this holds across the board because minority people are by and large reasonable people who can both identify their own material benefits and recognize bullshit when they see it. Just something like ending at-will employment would overwhelmingly benefit minority people because now your boss can't fire you for being black or gay, whereas they absolutely can today as long as they're a little smart about it. Besides all that it's extremely easy to see that it's actually the woke libs who are treating minority issues along strict class lines where upper to middle-class minority people are the only ones even given any consideration while those who are lower-class are quickly shuffled out of sight and out of mind. And besides that, a nationwide Marxian class solidarity approach to minority issues has literally never been tried, so how the gently caress do you know that it wouldn't work better than the current approach?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 08:59
|
|
|
the lib starter pack to sucking air through their teeth and saying "this ain't it chief" or "not a good look" when concern trolling over issues that disproportionally affect minorities communities is like a #hashtag to rally around, a time appropriate instagram filter, and vague overtures to Do Something. it's seriously like the final form of idpol metastasized into pure neoliberalism. class solidarity and acknowledgement that economic discrimination is still discrimination isn't gonna cut it apparently. the big issues is that there aren't enough symbols to rally around and pay lip service from the image point of view, and from the policy point of view it's twofold because we're all a bunch of loving sadists who need to see someone get directly punished in lieu of another person and that we're passing up a perfect opportunity to propose yet another means-tested earned income tax credit. paying people isn't on the table since it's so loving outlandish and impossible, and it's not going to solve racism within the span of a finger snap. i, on the otherhand, a umedy certified woke lib have come up with a tiered minority grievances apparatus which will be budget neutral by offering tax cuts and earned income tax credits to those who sign up within a 2 week window in the middle of july between the hours of 10am and 2pm 50 miles away from anything resembling civilization. the real trick though is the queuing process where people are prioritized based on how many minority points they earn on the minority scorecard they have to fill out; there are modifiers that give points based on race, sexual orientation, how many times they've tweeted at a blue check on twitter, whether or not they ever abused EBT, and if they're a fan of country music (you know, to weed out "those people"). gently caress off. Phone fucked around with this message at 09:20 on Jun 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 09:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 18:21 |
|
|
I can only speak for myself and #NotAllGays, but history has shown through anti-discrimination rights for the disabled that they sometimes are violated, and then nonetheless must be tested in court. The "no war but the class war" approach has two benefits: 1) Libertarians, and some concern trolls claiming to be Democrats, claim "you're inventing rights that only apply to certain people." Assholes and homophobes are going to make some strawman example of how the law could be exploited. Probably the easiest go-to is that disability is medically proven, but holy poo poo some kissless virgin might suddenly have turned out to be a lifelong gay (even though their family, friends, and classmates never knew) and come out only once they were fired and sues your small business into nonexistence. Yes, these sorts of people are assholes, but their stupid arguments will attempt to muddy the water until we just back up to the status quo. "Ya see, my theoretical nightmare scenario proves it dangerous to make change. Better do nothing!" And now, the really most important one... 2) Anti-discrimination claims are settled in court. Which means, you know, getting an attorney. Honestly, keeping the common man from having to get an attorney is so much more popular. Just making at-will employment illegal for everyone means no trials over whether a termination was motivated by discrimination or fairly at-will, since the latter just never happens anymore to anyone. There's much less workload in the legal system. There's fewer attorney hours billed, which is super popular among people who aren't attorneys.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2019 09:24
|
|
