|
the_steve posted:Shhh, you're not allowed to use a Democrat's previous words and actions against them if it makes them look bad. That's doxxing. Care to show us where anybody here has said this?
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 00:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:27 |
|
|
Clinton's third way neo lib poo poo was honestly the only way a Democrat would've been able to get elected in 1992. Also Ross Perot helped too. Had Perot not entered, HW Bush was likely to win a second term just off the popularity of Reagan and the quick win in the Gulf War. Clinton squeaked that victory out and proceeded to neolib the place to death
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 00:40
|
|
|
Yeah, it's not something a lot of people noticed because it took years for average Americans to feel the effects, but NAFTA alone did a hell of a lot of damage. It absolutely wrecked a lot of rural farming communities in Mexico, which was supposedly the prime driver for the waves of Mexican immigrants we saw in the early 2000s that all the racist shitheads in the US are still freaking out about. Also Clinton and the rest of the 90's democrats doing away with the protections that had been put in place to prevent another great depression from happening led pretty directly to other problems we're dealing with today.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 00:54
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Who gives a gently caress if you think it's a tragedy or justified violence. Either way you don't want buildings on fire. People are so upset they're seeing buildings on fire. The majority recognize the anger is justified. Leadership of doing very little to resolve problems. Both sides should be putting pressure on them to solve the underlying problems instead of sniping. When there is civil disorder and uprisings against state oppression in other countries, US media blames their governments (hmmm maybe we need to bring them some freedom) When there's civil disorder and uprisings against state oppression in our country, US media blames the people. Why aren't they being polite? VOTE! etc
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 01:08
|
|
|
Cranappleberry posted:not even one of the ignorant people who asks "did Mookie do the right thing?" But surety that Mookie did the wrong thing in the movie Do the Right Thing. Spike Lee still gets so (rightfully) pissed when he gets that question lol. The title isn't a question, it's an imperative.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 01:11
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Care to show us where anybody here has said this? Using Biden’s past actions and statements was basically verboten here during the campaign.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 01:22
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Yeah for real. Doesn't look like that'll work out much longer, G.O.P. Cements Hold on Legislatures in Battleground States quote:Republicans are locking in newly gerrymandered maps for the legislatures in four battleground states that are set to secure the party’s control in the statehouse chambers over the next decade, fortifying the G.O.P. against even the most sweeping potential Democratic wave elections.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 01:24
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Doesn't look like that'll work out much longer, G.O.P. Cements Hold on Legislatures in Battleground States I really hope this isn't me becoming an accelerationist, but I'm less concerned about this news now that I've accepted that the alternative isn't going to save us. Living under republican misrule may help foster the kind of attitude needed to disrupt the lesser of two evils dilemma. I know the democrats are "not as bad" and people suffer as a result of republican rule, but i think we should use whatever and whoever we can to take the power back. Nobody will accept that the tides are rising until their feet get wet (frustratingly).
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 02:07
|
|
|
i just try to look at the bright side. if horrible things are sure to come, maybe they'll make more people realize we need to do something about it
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 02:17
|
|
|
Kith posted:i just try to look at the bright side. if horrible things are sure to come, maybe they'll make more people realize we need to do something about it Much as I'd like to believe that, the argument will probably just stay the same. "You can't let the Republicans win, they'll keep drilling bigger holes in the boat! You HAVE to vote democrat because they'll compromise so that the Republicans only drill holes 80% as large as they originally wanted to, also Joe Manchin will block any efforts to let us have a teacup to try to scoop water out with. Stop letting perfect be the enemy of good though."
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 02:21
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:They are not in fact untouchable and the climate collapse will expose how vulnerable they are once the system starts failing severely enough that it doesn't protect them anymore due to a critical mass of people no longer able to or willing to buy into it. Give it 20-30 years at the most. The only reason they're considered untouchable now is because there aren't enough people desperate enough yet, but that won't take a long time to happen. Oh they know what's coming for them. Here's an article I came across a while back that touches on what's going on in their heads and how laughably naive and unprepared they are. quote:Survival of the Richest The interesting thing about a lot of the Thiel/Musk/Zuckerberg types is their obsession with great people of history, people who stepped up in their society and were transformative, people who were visionaries and geniuses, who's contributions saved us from ourselves and pushed humanity to reach ever greater heights of development and progress. It's part of why they love Ayn Rand so much. The protagonists of her books are who they want to be. And they could've been. They could've used their wealth and resources to aid humanity in it's darkest hour. They had the opportunity to live out (at least as closely as they could in the real world) the fantasies they'd had while reading Atlas Shrugged or the biography of Marcus Aurelius. But they didn't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 02:28
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Care to show us where anybody here has said this? I can think of a specific example in GiP when I was told that bringing up Biden's actions from 1975 IRT Vietnamese refugees were too old an example to use against him. IDK what the cutoff is though. Probably not when he and Chuck Grassley tried to freeze Federal benefits in the 80s, or how he treated Anita Hill. Is the Crime Bill too long ago?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 02:42
|
|
|
Kith posted:i just try to look at the bright side. if horrible things are sure to come, maybe they'll make more people realize we need to do something about it Woah easy there, that sounds like accelerationism to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 03:11
|
|
|
Kith posted:i just try to look at the bright side. if horrible things are sure to come, maybe they'll make more people realize we need to do something about it I wonder about that. If current events are any indication, I assume the horrible things will either be politely ignored, or actively cheered on for when they happen to the "right" people. See: the current pandemic; the AIDS crisis, respectively. Although there may be an opportunity in there somewhere for someone who can create a fake terrible thing to monetize with. Though that market might already be cornered by televangelists, now that I think about it...
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 03:38
|
|
|
Ershalim posted:I wonder about that. If current events are any indication, I assume the horrible things will either be politely ignored, or actively cheered on for when they happen to the "right" people. See: the current pandemic; the AIDS crisis, respectively. According to the Fox News commercials that are always playing at work, when the global economy crashes, silver will be the only thing worth anything and we should all be stocking up on that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 03:50
|
|
|
the_steve posted:According to the Fox News commercials that are always playing at work, when the global economy crashes, silver will be the only thing worth anything and we should all be stocking up on that. I need to stock up on that and those doomsday prep canned soups with my reverse mortgage right away! Err.. I can reverse mortgage my student loans, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 03:55
|
|
|
It used to be gold, now its silver. Can't wait till Fox is promoting Crude Oil as the next Apocalypse proof commodity
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 03:57
|
|
|
Kyle Rittenhouse is exploring legal options to sue Joseph Biden for defamation.quote:"What did you make of the president of the United States calling you a white supremacist?" Rittenhouse was asked by Fox News host Tucker Carlson during a wide-ranging interview, a portion of which was aired on Monday evening. quote:"Intentional malice" and a disregard for truth is the legal standard required to convict someone of defamation. quote:Rittenhouse, during the interview with Carlson, maintained that his case "never had anything to do with race" and was instead about "the right to self-defense." https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1463195406511513605
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 03:58
|
|
|
If that was possible everyone would have sued Trump by now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 03:59
|
|
|
the_steve posted:Much as I'd like to believe that, the argument will probably just stay the same. I feel like the reason this particular debate keeps coming up is mostly just due to disillusionment. If you ignore the nuance of the situation then "the Dems control all three branches of government, why don't we have full communism now", might seem like a reasonable (if slightly hyperbolic to make a point) question. The Dems were elected to do certain things, why aren't they doing them? Well, perhaps because not every member of congress with a D next to their name votes in lockstep with AOC? This is not some conspiracy where "the Dems secretly don't want to do good things." The reality is some of the Dems want what we perceive as good things, other Dems are lovely moderates, and that's the boring truth. There are too many lovely moderates in the party, and if you want the more progressive legislation to get through Congress, you need to make sure there are enough progressive Democrats in Congress so that legislation can't be blocked or watered down by any moderates. What's the most analogous example of the kind of transformative legislation that we're basically looking for? The New Deal? And how much of the vote share did the Democrats have in Congress when the first and second New Deal were passed? Let's have a look: 73rd Congress (1933-1935): Democrats: Senate: 62.5%, House: 72.4% Republicans: Senate: 36.5%, House: 26.4% 74th Congress (1935-1937): Democrats: Senate: 75% , House: 73.7% Republicans: Senate: 22.9%, House: 23.9% Interesting, how about Biden now? 117th Congress (2021-2023): Democrats: Senate: 50%, House: 50.9% Republicans: Senate: 50%, House: 49.1% It's obviously not that simple of course, a lot has changed since then and there are a ton of other variables, including lobbying, and it should be clear by now that just having a D next to their name doesn't make a candidate a reliable vote for progressive legislation. Which takes us back to the need for primarying moderate Dems. -Blackadder- fucked around with this message at 04:34 on Nov 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 04:04
|
|
|
LorneReams posted:If that was possible everyone would have sued Trump by now. There actually are still defamation lawsuits against Trump pending and the courts technically haven't ruled on the ability to sue a President for slander or defamation specifically. Clinton v. Jones has already established that a sitting President can be sued civilly while in office, though. One of them was just withdrawn by an Apprentice Contestant two weeks ago, another one is still ongoing, and a third by Dominion Voting systems is still pending. But, slander and defamation suits are (for better or worse) very difficult in general to successfully win in America and doubly impossible if the slander and defamation is directed at someone who is considered "a public figure," which is a description that basically everyone who is "defamed" by a sitting President would fit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 04:10
|
|
|
-Blackadder- posted:I feel like the reason this particular debate keeps coming up is mostly just due to disillusionment. The problem there is that the party, largely speaking, has made it abundantly clear that they will do whatever they can to tip the scales for the lovely moderate over any sort of progressive. Pelosi threatened to block funds to any progressive running against a lovely incumbent. Sure, she said it was supposed to apply across the board, but it never seemed to come up when a moderate was running against anyone even slightly left of them. You had the Dems "considering" the idea of abolishing the position that a progressive had won the primary for over the lovely moderate, until they decided instead to change course and decide that sore loser laws no longer applied to their picks, and getting rid of the elected position was retconned to cloud talk once they thumbed the scales for their guy. The "Democrats are not a monolith" is a really popular excuse for why good things just can't happen-gosh darn it- but the moderates in the party absolutely are a monolith, and they've proven they're just as bad at Republicans when it comes to changing the rules to make it virtually impossible to get those progressive candidates into place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 04:26
|
|
|
-Blackadder- posted:Oh they know what's coming for them. Here's an article I came across a while back that touches on what's going on in their heads and how laughably naive and unprepared they are. I think the Zuckerberg/Theil/Musk/Bezos types don’t to use their wealth in way to aid humanity because they don’t have the same type of wealth as Carniege/Ford/JP Morgan. Like JP Morgan was able to bail out the US government because of the cash he had on hand. For current crop of robber barons to do the same, they would have to sell a bunch of stock in their companies tank the stock price and their wealth. Even Musk & Bezos, the only two whose companies produce or move real goods wealth is based on fictional stock prices. That are based on monopolistic fantasies of total control of the EV or Cloud Provider market spaces. Marx was right in that capitalism traps the capitalists as much as it traps everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 04:27
|
|
|
Politico is deeply concerned about the "alarming" news that ... too many people are employed and getting raises in Nebraska.quote:HELP WANTED — Nebraska set an alarming record this week: “Nebraska logged the lowest unemployment rate of any state on record in October, reflecting the acute labor shortages that have quickly swept across the nation amid an economic recovery that is without parallel,” WSJ’s Sarah Chaney Cambon reports. “Nebraska’s unemployment rate ticked down to 1.9% last month, well below the national jobless rate of 4.6% and the lowest for state records tracing back to 1976, Labor Department data show.” https://www.politico.com/newsletter...001&nlid=630318 the_steve posted:The problem there is that the party, largely speaking, has made it abundantly clear that they will do whatever they can to tip the scales for the lovely moderate over any sort of progressive. What progressive incumbent was primaried by a moderate supported by the DCCC?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 04:34
|
|
|
GrunkleStalin posted:I think the Zuckerberg/Theil/Musk/Bezos types don’t to use their wealth in way to aid humanity because they don’t have the same type of wealth as Carniege/Ford/JP Morgan. I assume they wouldn't even if they could, but ignoring that, even if they did try to sell all of their stocks I don't think there's enough extant money in existence for them to actually "have" what they "own." I think you're spot on about how their wealth is more or less fictional. In theory there's something like 6 trillion actual physical dollars that exist, and something like 2 quadrillion dollars that people "own" in various ways. I haven't seen that reading of Marx before, though. I take it to mean that Marx understood capitalism to be a thought prison more than an actual "they can't do these things" kind of thing. Like, the commodification of everything that relies on the exploitation of everything will, because it has to, erode anything that exists for its own sake in favor of ways to accrue more capital and thus more money -- a more metaphorical prison than one of constraint due to monetary limitations; but I may be misunderstanding your point. I wonder if monopolistic forces could bail out the country in another sense, though. Corporate influence is significantly stronger than many actual countries (see Nestle or Coca Cola), and so I think it's entirely possible that they could simply magic up some way for their finances to intermingle with the governing body to gain something of approximate imaginary value to whatever it was they were trying to bail us out of. Like, land rights, or sea rights, or the intellectual property of the concept of the country, or something. Nestle Presents New Jersey would be worth at least a couple hundred thousand
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 04:37
|
|
|
the_steve posted:The problem there is that the party, largely speaking, has made it abundantly clear that they will do whatever they can to tip the scales for the lovely moderate over any sort of progressive. How so?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 04:53
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Politico is deeply concerned about the "alarming" news that ... too many people are employed and getting raises in Nebraska. Not a progressive incumbent (or congress critter) but the Buffalo mayoral race was pretty hosed up. The incumbent Dem didn’t bother to campaign in the primary cuz he assumed he’d walk away with it, he lost to the socialist who, despite being the official democratic candidate, was basically disavowed by the NY state dem machine and the heavy hitters and lost in the general to the incumbent who ran as a write in cuz “everyone begged me to do it”
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 04:57
|
|
|
tigersklaw posted:Not a progressive incumbent (or congress critter) but the Buffalo mayoral race was pretty hosed up. The incumbent Dem didn’t bother to campaign in the primary cuz he assumed he’d walk away with it, he lost to the socialist who, despite being the official democratic candidate, was basically disavowed by the NY state dem machine and the heavy hitters and lost in the general to the incumbent who ran as a write in cuz “everyone begged me to do it” She was endorsed by like both NY Senators, yet somehow burned a lot of her progressive supporters over the course of the general. And total turnout was pretty dismal, it's not like she was overwhelmed by a massive showing despite getting popular support: she just went flat. It was a bummer since I was pulling for her and expecting her to win, but there's a lot more that failed than the local Dem machine not liking her. And the fact that she was backed by the most national and mainstream Dems relevant to the race puts the lie to the whole "DNC fighting tooth and nail to primary every progressive" thing we hear about but never really see.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 05:21
|
|
|
tigersklaw posted:Not a progressive incumbent (or congress critter) but the Buffalo mayoral race was pretty hosed up. The incumbent Dem didn’t bother to campaign in the primary cuz he assumed he’d walk away with it, he lost to the socialist who, despite being the official democratic candidate, was basically disavowed by the NY state dem machine and the heavy hitters and lost in the general to the incumbent who ran as a write in cuz “everyone begged me to do it” When you're the only name on the ballot and still lose because only 10% of the electorate turned out to write in someone else, you're a pretty crappy candidate. It had nothing to do with her being a socialist and everything to do with her being a lousy politician who couldn't give anyone a reason to vote for her.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 05:28
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:She was endorsed by like both NY Senators, yet somehow burned a lot of her progressive supporters over the course of the general. And total turnout was pretty dismal, it's not like she was overwhelmed by a massive showing despite getting popular support: she just went flat. It was a bummer since I was pulling for her and expecting her to win, but there's a lot more that failed than the local Dem machine not liking her. Also the state Republican party supported her opponent: https://nypost.com/2021/10/26/democrat-gets-gop-support-as-write-in-over-socialist-in-buffalo-mayors-race/
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 05:33
|
|
|
Yeah the Buffalo race really was her just being a bad candidate. She wasn't very knowledgeable, she lost her one union supporter by hiring scabs, and said she supported charter schools at some fundraiser. But even if it were a back stab from the moderates, so what? This speaks to a problem the Left in the U.S. has had forever, we always have some whiny excuse for why we lose. Socialism not working in some country? CIA is undermining their government, not fair! Bernie didn't get the nomination? The moderates pulled some convention trick to sabotage him, not fair! Republicans exploit cold war hysteria and propaganda to misconstrue our goals and make people think we're the Khmer Rouge? Not fair! The media clearly hated Bernie and was completely in the tank for Biden? Not fair! All of those things are true and all of those things are indeed not fair, and it doesn't matter because history is written by the winners. No kidding the U.S. is going to run black ops on anything to the left of McDonalds it sees in other countries, no kidding the establishment is going to try to maintain the status quo, no kidding the moderates are going to stab us in the back and ally with our enemies, no kidding the GOP is going to do whatever it can to maintain white supremacy, anyone who didn't already know that coming into this was finished before they even got started. We either figure out a way to get into power or we don't. Abrams is out there putting in work. Can everyone else, who spends so much time here or on reddit, or twitter agonizing over the Democrats failures, honestly say they're putting in equal effort as far as they are able? And I remember in a previous thread another goon mentioning that they'd run for something. Which is really what we need a lot more of. In the most recent election in Jersey a truck driver who got annoyed he couldn't get a concealed carry permit ran as a Republican with zero experience and $2200 in campaign funds and unseated his democratic opponent who was a 20 year incumbent and the state senate president. -Blackadder- fucked around with this message at 07:28 on Nov 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 07:11
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Kyle Rittenhouse is exploring legal options to sue Joseph Biden for defamation. Prediction: court case will be a drawn out version of this thread litigating "he was/wasn't a white supremacist actually" debate and the verdict will not settle anything in the slightest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 07:54
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Kyle Rittenhouse is exploring legal options to sue Joseph Biden for defamation. Weird how he keeps hanging out with people like Tucker Carlson, Donald Trump and the Proud Boys if he's so mad about people trying to link him to white supremacists...
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 09:29
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:Weird how he keeps hanging out with people like Tucker Carlson, Donald Trump and the Proud Boys if he's so mad about people trying to link him to white supremacists... I think people's frustration is understandable but that's just how politics work everywhere. It'd be like expecting a 5% socialist party in a coalition to push through their agenda. There's just going to be more than a few contrarian assholes who disagree and won't vote for that stuff so the only solution is to vote in more than a handful people who support your goals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 09:41
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:Using Biden’s past actions and statements was basically verboten here during the campaign. No, it wasn't. It was discussed on every page, 24/7. What kind of amnesia does that sort of understanding imply?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 11:26
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:No, it wasn't. It was discussed on every page, 24/7. What kind of amnesia does that sort of understanding imply? Their concerns about Biden's mental state are just projection. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 11:59
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:Care to show us where anybody here has said this? In this specific thread unsure but yes there was a very long conversation in the previous thread that you couldn't determine Democrats future actions based on past actions because maybe they changed their minds.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 13:26
|
|
|
Biden better impose brutal travel restrictions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 14:32
|
|
|
n/m
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 15:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:27 |
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:No, it wasn't. It was discussed on every page, 24/7. What kind of amnesia does that sort of understanding imply? It wasn’t exactly accepted by Biden supporters around here to, say, use his championing of the crime bill and being besties with Strom Thurmond as evidence he’s a racist, for instance. Nucleic Acids fucked around with this message at 15:38 on Nov 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 15:36
|
|