|
Who do you wish to win the Democratic primaries? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Joe Biden, the Inappropriate Toucher |
|
18 | 1.46% |
| Bernie Sanders, the Hand Flailer |
|
665 | 54.11% |
| Elizabeth Warren, the Plan Maker |
|
319 | 25.96% |
| Kamala Harris, the Cop Lord |
|
26 | 2.12% |
| Cory Booker, the Super Hero Wannabe |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Julian Castro, the Twin |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Kirsten Gillibrand, the Franken Killer |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Pete Buttigieg, the Troop Sociopath |
|
17 | 1.38% |
| Robert Francis O'Rourke, the Fake Latino |
|
3 | 0.24% |
| Jay Inslee, the Climate Alarmist |
|
8 | 0.65% |
| Marianne Williamson, the Crystal Queen |
|
86 | 7.00% |
| Tulsi Gabbard, the Muslim Hater |
|
23 | 1.87% |
| Andrew Yang, the $1000 Fool |
|
32 | 2.60% |
| Eric Swalwell, the Insurance Wife Guy |
|
2 | 0.16% |
| Amy Klobuchar, the Comb Enthusiast |
|
1 | 0.08% |
| Bill de Blasio, the NYPD Most Hated |
|
4 | 0.33% |
| Tim Ryan, the Dope Face |
|
3 | 0.24% |
| John Hickenlooper, the Also Ran |
|
7 | 0.57% |
| Total: | 1229 votes | ||
|
Jaxyon posted:The explanation is NOT strictly racial. Ok. So you're just repeating things that everyone agrees on in a tone that implies you think some people actually disagree?
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 15:31 |
|
|
SKULL.GIF posted:This is also why I'm glad Marianne and her anti-imperialism is in the primary. It's embarrassing that people are getting angry about Marianne but not about the people who loyally support the American war machine fuckin word ps truth wants to be free
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:43
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Ok. So you're just repeating things that everyone agrees on in a tone that implies you think some people actually disagree? If you agree on something and basically never talk about it other than to whine people bring it up, that's not great. Racism and sexism should be brought up at least as often as economics, but they generally aren't. That's because a non-insignificant portion of white folks think the economic part explains the other two and thus they can be ignored.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:51
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I like how that goalpost already shifted to "kinda". I feel like you misread my tone in saying "kinda." It was more of a, "I didn't just totally poo poo my pants!" "Yyyyeah...you kinda did, actually."
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:51
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I feel like you misread my tone in saying "kinda." It was more of a, "I didn't just totally poo poo my pants!" "Yyyyeah...you kinda did, actually." I was giving you the benefit of the doubt when you undercut your argument with a quote that didn't say what you wanted it to.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:52
|
|
|
goethe.cx posted:Who is Sarah Vowell and who engineered her to scientifically suck maximum rear end lol the only good part of that piece is the Times' bizarre decision to put a single person writing deadpan jokes beside all their pundits being totally serious with their bad takes e: hmmm i'm seeing some twitter posts suggesting those might be somehow her actual, unironic opinions. if so: lmao eke out fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Jul 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:53
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I was giving you the benefit of the doubt when you undercut your argument with a quote that didn't say what you wanted it to. It did, though. You shriek bloody murder whenever someone suggests that hey, maybe economic factors played a significant role in 2016, and this weird meltdown you're having right now is an example of that. Jaxyon posted:If you agree on something and basically never talk about it other than to whine people bring it up, that's not great. The reason why racism and sexism aren't brought up as often here is because we're all on the same page on those issues: Trump is fueled by them, we're against them, we're resolved to fighting against them. The reason why we talk about economic factors as much as we do is because people like you are not on the same page with us, and you whine whenever we point that out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:56
|
|
|
Midgetskydiver posted:LOL look how pristine all of his gear is. What a loving piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 21:59
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1156203815403687937
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
These people are such homunculi, good lord.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 22:13
|
|
|
I would believe Pete more if he talked about McKinsey at least the way Yang does.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 22:25
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The reason why racism and sexism aren't brought up as often here is because we're all on the same page on those issues: Trump is fueled by them, we're against them, we're resolved to fighting against them. The reason why we talk about economic factors as much as we do is because people like you are not on the same page with us, and you whine whenever we point that out. I realize you need to make me have an opposite opinion than you in order to make this work, but that's not anything I've posted
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:If you agree on something and basically never talk about it other than to whine people bring it up, that's not great. Can you try to relate whatever point you think you are making back to the question of whether Trump's debate performance helped him in places like Michigan?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Can you try to relate whatever point you think you are making back to the question of whether Trump's debate performance helped him in places like Michigan? They really related to him humping the hell out of that chair
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 22:55
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Why's that? It doesn't really say anything beyond "sure, Pete's bad, but I personally like him, even though I don't support him for president because he's still too bad for me". It doesn't exactly make a convincing case for why Pete should be president. Im not trying to convince y'all to vote for him; vote Bernie. Im pushing back at the hateful rhetorichimat mischarachterizes him, and correcting misinformed narratives about local political stuff I was there for.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 22:59
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:Im not trying to convince y'all to vote for him; vote Bernie. Im pushing back at the hateful rhetorichimat mischarachterizes him, and correcting misinformed narratives about local political stuff I was there for. But you see, your lived experience runs counter to their narrative, so you must be fought
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:04
|
|
|
I've had CNN on in the background and they keep having pieces of poo poo on who support Biden and literally none of them has said 1 word about anything he would do as president or why he wants to be president. Only that he would win. Democracy was a mistake.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:07
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Can you try to relate whatever point you think you are making back to the question of whether Trump's debate performance helped him in places like Michigan? No problem. I already did that. Jaxyon posted:I'm suggesting that white people who were drawn to Trump for "economic reasons" were also there for "racism reasons", probably more so. This is a conversation that grew out of you talking about how Trump effectively debated by covering economic issues and you never mentioning anything but that in the context of your post. And I guess I was supposed to just assume you also thought the things you never mentioned were a big part of it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:22
|
|
|
Excellent (Wikipedia Edit)
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:24
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/tomscocca/status/1156690458690670592
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:25
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:But you see, your lived experience runs counter to their narrative, so you must be fought The thing is that nothing in that overlong post actually rebuts Pete being loving terrible and largely comes off as assuming good intentions from someone who hasn't actually put in the work to earn those assumptions, as the Current Affairs article pointed out. It certainly doesn't do anything to rebut the picture of Pete as a careerist piece of poo poo with a life curated around building a presidential resume. I mean for God's sakes the entire bit about the police situation amounts to "Pete chose to protect Pete." Oh Snapple! fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Jul 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:29
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:The thing is that nothing in that overlong post actually rebuts Pete being loving terrible and largely comes off as assuming good intentions from someone who hasn't actually put in the work to earn those assumptions, as the Current Affairs article pointed out. I mean, Pete is not defending the racist cops; and it was the FBI that directed him to fire cheif boykins. And he didn't bulldoze occupied buildings or evict poor folk for the 1000 Homes thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:32
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:I mean, Pete is not defending the racist cops; and it was the FBI that directed him to fire bodkins. And he didn't bulldoze occupied buildings or evict poor folk for the 1000 Homes thing. he didn't have to fire a dude for reporting racism, no, I don't care what the scary FBI man said also yes, the program did threaten people in their homes with 'consequences', just because he didn't actually pull the trigger on kicking someone out for failing to gentrify fast enough doesn't mean scaring poor people wasn't hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:34
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:I mean, Pete is not defending the racist cops; and it was the FBI that directed him to fire cheif boykins. And he didn't bulldoze occupied buildings or evict poor folk for the 1000 Homes thing. no his program was fining people in older housing, and forcing people out of their homes via fines they couldn't afford also, he is defending racist cops when he doesn't fire a cop who murdered a black man while his bodycam was off.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:36
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:Im not trying to convince y'all to vote for him; vote Bernie. Im pushing back at the hateful rhetorichimat mischarachterizes him, and correcting misinformed narratives about local political stuff I was there for. Not really, no. More than half of the post is you trumpeting yourself up as an antifa superhero so that when you say that Pete has to bulldoze homeless encampments because that's just what mayors do, we'll know you must be telling the truth because right-wing talking points are always more believable when they start with "I'm a progressive, but..."
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:I mean, Pete is not defending the racist cops; and it was the FBI that directed him to fire cheif boykins. And he didn't bulldoze occupied buildings or evict poor folk for the 1000 Homes thing. I respect you Uglycat, from what I know of you, but I do not agree with your assessment of the mayor of South Bend. i dont know about the housing or the SBPD to be honest, I only have the mans own words to judge him by and I find them wanting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:38
|
|
|
to be clear I don't think Pete is a literal medical sociopath for real, I just think he's a very privileged guy who genuinely doesn't understand these issues. Like Beto, but with slightly more charm and the added checkbox of being the country's most safe and non-threatening gay.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
Condiv posted:no his program was fining people in older housing, and forcing people out of their homes via fines they couldn't afford Hey if I had my druthers he'd lay off the whole force and put that money into social services but find me any mayor or presidential candidate that agrees. The fine thing is news to me. Source?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
like, yes abolish cops, but it is weird to frame 'maybe just fire the guys who actively murder people if you're running as some kinda progressive and a murder happens literally while you're out campaigning' as 'hey man yea but find me one mayor who'd line up every member of his police force and throw them in a big pit and seal the pit with a stone, can't blame Pete!'
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:42
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:Hey if I had my druthers he'd lay off the whole force and put that money into social services but find me any mayor or presidential candidate that agrees. the current affairs article that has been posted multiple times in recent pages and my point with the police was that pete deserves the hate he's getting. he told a group of blm protestors he didn't want their vote when they were grieving and upset because yet another black man was murdered by a cop and said cop had his bodycam off and mayor pete chooses to do nothing about it
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:44
|
|
|
Pete is loving garbage and he is a sociopath . His ideas are atrocious , he’s clearly in this only for himself , and would not help anybody but putting “President “ on his resume so he could do speeches for Goldman Sachs after. He is far and above the most selfish person on that stage , he’s even more selfish than Biden . And that’s saying a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:46
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Trump looked like a lost moron at the debates, and also whomever "slaughtered" whomever debates is always just who you thought was going to win and debates are meaningless. I distinctly remember people clapping at several of Trump's lines like "because then you'd be in prison". He up-ended how you judge who won a debate, but people were still using the old metrics so Clinton won 2.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:46
|
|
|
Good for her for making use of her ex-polycule to raise money.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:47
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:like, yes abolish cops, but it is weird to frame 'maybe just fire the guys who actively murder people if you're running as some kinda progressive and a murder happens literally while you're out campaigning' as 'hey man yea but find me one mayor who'd line up every member of his police force and throw them in a big pit and seal the pit with a stone, can't blame Pete!' I agree. Fire cops. Kill a person, lose your badge and gun. And cops shouldn't have weapons at all. Or exist. The FBI did very much control the tapes and firing, and pete would have been indicted if he heard the tape or released it, no matter how much our black leadership demands it. I wanna hear the tapes - I've not, but I have been told of the contents by someone that did.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:47
|
|
|
quote:This is the human element that Buttigieg’s critics say he initially missed with 1,000 Houses in 1,000 Days. There were people in the neighborhoods who wanted to rehab vacant properties, either for themselves or as investments, and to keep money in the community. But they found a system working against them, from the city bureaucracy to costly fines and penalties. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/henrygomez/mayor-pete-buttigieg-south-bend-gentrification Included, a profile of someone who ran for city council literally because of fines in programs such as 1000 homes loving people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:47
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:Im not trying to convince y'all to vote for him; vote Bernie. Im pushing back at the hateful rhetorichimat mischarachterizes him, and correcting misinformed narratives about local political stuff I was there for. What criticism of Pete do you think specifically mischaracterizes him? I read your post and I didn't see anything there that corrected any incorrect statements made by anyone, only your perspective that it is a tough job and he is in a tough situation and you personally sympathize with him. "He is a troop. I don't care for troops" isn't exactly rebuking the notion that he glorifies violence against Muslims as a way to further his career. "He employs the very latest in 'evidence-based best practices', but best practices for mayors still involves some really dumb turn-of-the-century bullshit like bulldozing homeless camps" isn't exactly denying that he is a technocrat in the worst McKinsey vein of amoral sophistication. And particularly, "Pete hasn't solved any of this, but he's keenly aware of them and seeking creative solutions" doesn't really change anyone's impression of him prioritizing his career progression over providing solutions for his community. This isn't an attack on you. It's great that you've been active in so many causes. But it is perhaps the defining problem of the democratic machinery such as it is that personal allegiances take precedence over policy considerations. It's what makes outsides with new ideas be silenced, what makes holding on to existing seats more important than making actual changes to people's lives, and so on. It's what leads someone to put Bernie and Pete as their top choices despite the fact that they have radically different conceptions of not only what policy should look like, but how politics should be conducted.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:49
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:I agree. Fire cops. Kill a person, lose your badge and gun. And cops shouldn't have weapons at all. Or exist. even if we take 'he literally had to fire the guy or go to jail' as not absurd, he could have, ya know, defended him, pointed out the insanity in firing someone for pointing out racism, done literally anything for the guy with his wealth and power...
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:50
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:No problem. This grew out of me arguing that Trump's specific message on trade helped him with a specific subset of white voters in a particular region of the country. The question is how to explain why counties that voted for Obama - by pretty big margins in a lot of cases in 2008 - voted for Trump in 2016. So far as I can tell your only actual objection to this is that you are resistant to the idea that Trump did anything to win the election other than be a racism elemental.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
here's a video about the black guy that got murdered and how pete's been dealing with it by the way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VIGB7Zzf-4 here's the picture of the guy murdered:  now, the police claim the guy above was breaking into cars, and they confronted him and he pulled a knife and rushed at them and they had to shoot him after he ignored their warnings. the cop who shot him has a reputation for racism (stuff like seeing an interracial couple walking down the street and commenting that poo poo like that "makes him sick") and he loving had his body camera off. pete isn't doing anything. he's telling angry blm protestors who are pissed that yet another white racist cop is gonna get off scot-free murdering a black person in cold blood and pete's gonna shrug his shoulders and say his hands are tied by the system. but when it's brought to light that cops on the force are making racist chatter, pete fires the black chief who was the target of the racism people are right to hate him for this poo poo. we don't need another "cog in the machine" style president like obama. we need someone who will actually fight the entrenched, unjust systems that are killing and maiming and brutalizing people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2019 23:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 15:31 |
|
|
Buttigieg isnt a sociopath, he's just a careerist blinded by white privilege. This is different in the following meaningful ways:
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2019 00:01
|
|