|
RBA Starblade posted:The lesson to learn from Lee Carter is that if you don't play the game right, even if the rules are stupid, you lose. The lesson was that you lose either way, they had no intention of ever passing the bill. The rules were you lose. If you don't play along with the rules you also lose.
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 23:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 00:54 |
|
|
If you're going to be an elected rep, you win the fights you can, and you lose more than you win. It sucks, but you're an idiot if you try to get elected to office without realizing that. Saying "oh Lee would have to compromise his values to stay in office" is trivially true. Yes. Of course he would. "They'll limit how much a leftist can do, if anything" Yes of course they will. Why the gently caress would you get into politics if you realize that? Assuming he's not a domestic abuser, that's great that he ejected himself on principle, but kinda silly he was there in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 23:51
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:The lesson to learn from Lee Carter is that if you don't play the game right, even if the rules are stupid, you lose. The game is a carnival game though. The only way to win is to flip the board over.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 23:55
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:If you're going to be an elected rep, you win the fights you can, and you lose more than you win. This is ignoring my post/s pointing out how this is counter-intuitive to staying in office or getting things done. We even have posters in this very forum who are hardcore into purity politics and have openly refused to vote for anyone that doesn't meet their standards. If they're representative of a necessary part of the population of left leaning people to stay in office then you're essentially hosed either way, so why not make for at least the opportunity of positive change on the way out the door? Also, all this is is you essentially arguing for a strategy where the people in favor of the status quo must make a mistake to such an extreme degree that progress can possibly happen for anything to even have a chance of getting done. Which is just bad tactics in any profession or situation. In any competitive field your approach should never rely on your opponent failing in their own efforts as part of an attempt to actually succeed or win on your own behalf. I'd even go so far as to say that it's arguing in favor of a status quo by default, given that there is this weird obsession with just going "That's politics!  " when people point out the fallacies in the strategy of quiet acceptance and the many, many, many, times and ways it's failed in the past.
Archonex fucked around with this message at 00:03 on Mar 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:00
|
|
|
Archonex posted:This is ignoring my post/s pointing out how this is counter-intuitive to staying in office or getting things done. We even have posters in this very forum who are hardcore into purity politics and have openly refused to vote for anyone that doesn't meet their standards. If they're representative of a necessary part of the population of left leaning people to stay in office then you're essentially hosed either way, so why not make for at least the opportunity of positive change on the way out the door? I don't think anything Lee did was making an opportunity for positive change. I think the opportunity he had, limited as it was, involved him staying in office if he was going to the electoral route for change, rather than the activist or radical route. If the argument is that the status quo is such that the status quo needs to make a mistake for an elected leftist to get anything done at all....then why would you waste the time and energy to get elected? If you're hosed either way what opportunity was there for positive change, even on the way out? If you're going to say "well it made it clear they weren't going to have that vote" but also them not having that vote for years made it clear that they weren't going to have that vote so I'm not sure what the win was.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:08
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:The lesson to learn from Lee Carter is that if you don't play the game right, even if the rules are stupid, you lose. On the flip side if you have a goal in mind that the rules won't allow, then you can't win by playing by the rules either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:09
|
|
|
What is this Carter did domestic violence talk about? Everything I can find is about him talking about being abused and predates all of that RTW stuff.
Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Mar 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:14
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:What is this Carter did domestic violence talk about? Everything I can find is about him talking about being abused and predates all of that RTW stuff. P I've never heard any of it but several people in this thread seem to think there's something to it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:17
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I've never heard any of it but several people in this thread seem to think there's something to it. He opened up about being abused back in 2019. It's pretty hosed up to spread rumors like that, even if you can't get sued about it. Sources would be appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:18
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:What is this Carter did domestic violence talk about? Everything I can find is about him talking about being abused and predates all of that RTW stuff. hit public back in December. Lee's aggressive non-denial did not aid his cause. https://mobile.twitter.com/SeanRMoorhead/status/1475306821078294534
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:19
|
|
|
Srice posted:On the flip side if you have a goal in mind that the rules won't allow, then you can't win either. To be fair, this isn't actually true. It's not that the rules weren't allowing for it. It's that the people who had power over those rules didn't want it to happen. This is a far easier to correct problem as those people can be voted out, though it demands both significant amounts of time and effort to build the necessary support to get a proper majority representing the interests of the populace and not private interests. The rules ultimately said nothing about whether or not it should happen. It just so happened that the people in power disagreed with the idea of RTW being repealed, so they manipulated the rules for years on end until Carter forced them to show their hand. Jaxyon posted:I don't think anything Lee did was making an opportunity for positive change. I think the opportunity he had, limited as it was, involved him staying in office if he was going to the electoral route for change, rather than the activist or radical route. I've already summed up my thoughts fairly succinctly, and even explained the last point you made in depth. At this point it's obvious that you won't be swayed no matter what anyone says, and I certainly don't believe a word of what you're saying due to my own experiences with politics. Hell, you haven't even rebutted the points aside from essentially saying "Well I think differently.". There is no explanation for the rationale you have based on prospective outcomes or how it would be perceived by the public at large and his future election prospects, something that is utterly integral for a politician in a democracy to consider. Why would that outcome you suggest have worked out? Why would the reputability of Carter not be damaged by doing what you say when so many other politicians quietly laying down on hot topic issues have been in the past have been harmed by doing the same? You've explained none of this and disregarded far more, instead making a vague gesture at "Well, at least he'd have kept his office as an ineffectual politician!" as if that matters in matters not related to holding the majority position. I'll also take a moment to note that this is exactly the view that has so many democrats on here enraged at the national party, as so much of the establishment seem content to aspire only to be a lame duck/controlled opposition or are sabotaged by a minority that actively seeks this position for the party at large such as Manchin, Sinema, and the conservative dems. You even have misconstrued several points i've made, somehow trying to attribute things i've extrapolated off of you saying to my own side of the argument. To be honest, if this is the extent of the conversation we can have i'm not certain there's any point in continuing it since it's functionally impossible to talk against a vague set of talking points instead of detailed analysis. Archonex fucked around with this message at 00:49 on Mar 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:22
|
|
|
Archonex posted:To be fair, this isn't actually true. It's not that the rules weren't allowing for it. It's that the people who had power over those rules didn't want it to happen. This is a far easier to correct problem as those people can be voted out, though it demands both significant amounts of time and effort to build the necessary support to get a proper majority representing the interests of the populace and not private interests. I don't think you've really refuted anything I've said beyond making tangential arguments that decorum fetishization is bad(which I don't disagree with and wasn't arguing for), and also making the argument that Lee was already a lame duck due to his lack of infrastructure and so literally the only useful thing he could do was to flame out publically. I don't think that constitutes an argument that is substantially at odds with what I'm saying, it sounds like you're having an argument with what you think I'm saying. And if you think I'm arguing in bad faith, take it to the mods.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:40
|
|
|
Wait I'm confused I thought he lost his support because of his public flameout? Now he lost it before that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 00:57
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:The game is a carnival game though. What do you mean by "flip the board over"? You mentioned viewing the world through a Marxist framework a few posts earlier, so do you mean a Marxist revolution that institutes full Communism?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 01:01
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:hit public back in December. Lee's aggressive non-denial did not aid his cause. ... some completely anonymous messages, sharing second-hand at best gossip, posted by someone who very publicly hates him? Can we at have some standards when sharing accusations like this?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 01:05
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Wait I'm confused I thought he lost his support because of his public flameout? Now he lost it before that? You had it right as far as I know. There were some types hooting and hollering about decorum prior to that but not many people were listening to them outside the usual types of hand wringers and people who were low information about the whole thing. The forcing of the vote to repeal RTW was what was used as propagandistic leverage to turn the public against him on a large scale. The (unsubstantiated, I believe? Some rando twitter message that doesn't even have names on the people saying these things doesn't constitute evidence in any legal or public sense. Haven't heard anything about it outside of that.) allegations of abuse were probably just a nice addition. As people would default to assuming the guy did the wrong thing with the RTW vote no matter what, which would make it a nice way to cover the state party's asses even further and ensure he couldn't cause any more trouble for them. Not that they were happy about him being there in the first place, it seemed. Mind, another poster pointed out the awful poo poo the state Democrats got up too that was made public occurred around that general timeframe, like the governor wearing blackface  . So maybe there was an element of trying to distract the public by using him as a scapegoat too, though it's doubtful if we'll ever know for sure.Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:yeah, my suspicion on that is that the "how dare he try to get us to vote on right to work" thing was a mutually-convenient way for everyone involved to go out claiming to be guns blazing for their ideological commitments, as opposed to an actual reason of "can we please get rid of this guy before the domestic violence story blows up into something bigger, we've already got enough of that between Governor Great-Yearbooks and Lieutenant Governor Look Women Make This Stuff Up All The Time." Archonex fucked around with this message at 01:14 on Mar 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 01:07
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:If you're going to be an elected rep, you win the fights you can, and you lose more than you win. The offer was they get everything, we get nothing. And not only must he totally give in and stop making a serious effort to help working people, he had to help the Democrats lie to the people about their intentions and conceal from his constituents that the party opposed the bill. Somebody is being unreasonable here and it's not the side who was expected to not only totally surrender but aid the other side in deceiving the people of Virginia to boot
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 01:36
|
|
|
Maybe Lee Carter is just a giant rear end in a top hat
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 01:47
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:
It wasn't a "win" it was a refusal to just play along and be an active participant in the continued loving over of the working class. There was also a sense that after VA went blue it would mean things would finally change and he helped to highlight that these fucks had no intention of actually instituting meaningful progress. He stayed true to his conscience and got drummed out for it. And now the common refrain is "he was just an rear end in a top hat who couldn't cut it" which is of course horse poo poo, but kind of proves his point (the system will find a way to grind up individuals with conscience, and it will convince the public they deserved it too). At least he tried. That's more than can be said for 99.9% of posters here, myself included.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 01:52
|
|
|
There is no "win" because there was never any winning. Some of those people now have recorded a vote they didn't want to have and it can be used against them by Republicans as easily as primary challengers. There is hope for change in the imperial core, but not today.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 01:58
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:... some completely anonymous messages, sharing second-hand at best gossip, posted by someone who very publicly hates him? Can we at have some standards when sharing accusations like this? I err on the side of believing women in these things, and it does a lot to explain why most of Lee's one-time allies went from zero to 'this guy is loving radioactive' well in advance of the party humiliating itself in the right to work debacle as numerous stories over the past few years can attest, the bar for being considered radioactive by the Virginia democratic party is REAL fuckin high, and this story is one of the few I can understand clearing it
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 01:59
|
|
|
How are u posted:What do you mean by "flip the board over"? You mentioned viewing the world through a Marxist framework a few posts earlier, so do you mean a Marxist revolution that institutes full Communism? let's start with 'stop putting kids in cages in the hope it will make suburban Republicans vote for us' and see where the night takes us
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:01
|
|
|
One thing I have trouble understanding in serious elevated political discourse, is why the people who want good things are the only ones expected to compromise, but the people who want just plain evil things are automatically assumed to be reasonable and are never expected to compromise. Really that's not accurate, because for the people who want good things to compromise, the people who want bad things would by definition have to be compromising with them, so really the good people are just always expected to 'be reasonable' by surrendering totally. If legislator A wants to put an end to industrial child-mangling factories, and legislator B wants child-mangling expanded everywhere, the issue isn't framed in terms of a compromise ("both sides must be reasonable and agree on some amount of child mangling"), it certainly isn't framed in moral terms ("child mangling is evil and people supporting it must be reasonable and stop"), instead it's always oh come on A why are you being such a dick gosh B just wants to mangle more children, look A you need to get along with people in politics just let him mangle kids already, you catch more flies with honey you know, how dare you criticize child mangling look now B feels bad this toxic behavior has no place in politics, oh my god are you making him vote for it alone you need to help him share the blame and pretend it's not his fault etc etc Why is wanting to gently caress workers on behalf of corporate donors reasonable? Why is wanting to help workers unreasonable? Why is demanding that people who want to help workers help sandbag their own bills instead to protect your political career from embarrassing votes reasonable? Why is demanding that after they sandbag their bills they help you lie about what happened to deceive voters about who their friends are reasonable? Why is refusing to take part in such a corrupt and dishonest scheme unreasonable?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:21
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:... some completely anonymous messages, sharing second-hand at best gossip, posted by someone who very publicly hates him? Can we at have some standards when sharing accusations like this? No poo poo; it's way less proof than we had, say, for Hunter Biden's diary when it was probatable to mention it. eta: Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:I err on the side of believing women in these things, Is there proof that a woman has alleged this, or only FOAF rumors?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:26
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:On this issue you mean surrender, not compromise. There was no compromise on the table, he was not offered half a loaf which he foolishly refused only to end up with nothing at all. The state party was not willing to meet him halfway to negotiate a mutually acceptable deal on right to work. They wanted no bill, no progress, no change to right to work at all. The compromise would have been his values, not with the leadership. I'm aware they were intending to go nowhere with it. Like I said, I respect his stance to leave, but I don't know what he was expecting by getting into electoral politics. VitalSigns posted:One thing I have trouble understanding in serious elevated political discourse, is why the people who want good things are the only ones expected to compromise, but the people who want just plain evil things are automatically assumed to be reasonable and are never expected to compromise. Really that's not accurate, because for the people who want good things to compromise, the people who want bad things would by definition have to be compromising with them, so really the good people are just always expected to 'be reasonable' by surrendering totally. That's not true. Everyone has to compromise. But if you have no power, no infrastructure as the other poster put it, and nothing to offer or take away....then nobody has any need to compromise with you. That's, in fact, the basic argument you are making when you say you'll withhold votes from democrats. And it doesn't get anything done yet, because there's not enough people doing it. And when you start to have enough, you're going to start compromising your values, because you're going to let some bad things happen in order to prove your point and gain your power, and that's going to suck. I'm not saying "be reasonable". Politics is incredibly unreasonable. There are no good people in politics because politics doesn't reward being good. Every politician you've ever admired has made deals you'd be horrified at.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:29
|
|
|
Yeah I think that was basically the deal he was offered. You have no power to get this bill passed over our opposition, so you play your part and help us pretend we don't oppose it, and in exchange you get to keep your power and take credit for the stuff that we'll allow to pass which is no different from what any other Blue Who Didn't Matter Who would accomplish with your seat. Or we run you out and get someone who will play ball. It wasn't a deal to get some stuff passed rather than nothing, it was a deal to buy in and get on the gravy train. Maybe he thought his only leverage was to threaten them with exposure by forcing the vote, gambling they might vote for it rather than reveal their hand to the voters ahead of an election year, he tried it and it failed. But it's not like selling out would haver brought more benefits to the people, only to him personally so eh not really the same as making some awful compromise to get like Medicare passed or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:38
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Yeah I think that was basically the deal he was offered. It's possible that building up some power would have later allowed him to do some good stuff, but without a substantial power base, yeah he's just going to be able to do nothing. And yes, building up power would have required him to abandon a bunch of principles. That's how this works. That's why I don't run for office(among dozens of other reasons)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:42
|
|
|
How are u posted:What do you mean by "flip the board over"? You mentioned viewing the world through a Marxist framework a few posts earlier, so do you mean a Marxist revolution that institutes full Communism? I refer to "Marxist" as the belief that groups of people are competing with one another to maintain and gain as much power as possible. In this framework 'politics' are a competition. "Liberal" refers to the belief that groups of people want to work together for the common interest of a better society, and that any disagreements are by far and large due to either miscommunication or backwards traditional beliefs, rather than fear of losing power. It's not entirely due to economics but more so how one views the world. Like one could argue that The Financial Times sees the world through a more Marxist lens as oppose to The New York Times that views the world through a liberal lens. In terms of what I imagine should be done: Electing more militant left wing officials who don't back down on their beliefs. Punishing those who compromise too much. If Democrats make it impossible to move them an inch than start a third party and use them as a spoiler to scare the poo poo out of them. If they still don't change have the goal for the new party to overtake the Democratic Party. On the ground he focus should be to build organizations and unions to engage in direct action strategies. There also has to be a focus on recruiting more minorities, working class, and the poor into these organizations/unions as well as to vote for left wing candidates.. The ultimate goal is to have a strong left coalition that fights for the interest and benefit of the public at large. some plague rats posted:... some completely anonymous messages, sharing second-hand at best gossip, posted by someone who very publicly hates him? Can we at have some standards when sharing accusations like this? Yeah, I was fully prepared to poo poo on Carter due to the statements, but the fact that the tweet only has like 300 likes and two dozen retweets should tell how much of a factor it was and how many people bought it. punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Mar 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 02:59
|
|
|
It's very telling how mad liberals get about Lee Carter and how badly they're able to explain why in any other way than 'He didn't follow the ruuuuuuules!' (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:09
|
|
|
Archonex posted:The upside is that now people know that these politicians, be they Democrats or Republicans, aren't going to vote for it no matter what. Which can give the impetus to vote them out and replace them with someone more amenable to the interests of the public. Whereas before they could hide behind an eternal claim of "We'll get to it next year" as they had been doing for years on end to avoid the bad PR. Well, looking at VA house incumbents who got primaried out in 2021, after the vote to block the bill occurred, 4 of them lost. Out of these 4, only 1 voted for blocking the bill (Heretick). The other 3 voted against it (Carter, Levine, and Samirah). Do you still think this is a positive change for VA politics? Based on this, I don't think most VA voters agree with your stance of quote:give the impetus to vote them out and replace them with someone more amenable to the interests of the public For your questions at the end, there's miles between staying silent and doing what Carter did. But, as I stated, I don't know local VA politics very well, so I might be missing something big. But until you can point me to some concrete evidence of positive outcomes that have occurred, call me skeptical. Kalit fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Mar 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:09
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Well, looking at VA house incumbents who got primaried out in 2021, after the vote to block the bill occurred, 4 of them lost. Out of these 4, only 1 voted for blocking the bill (Heretick). The other 3 voted against it (Carter, Levine, and Samirah). It's definitely not a positive change. Though, this goes back to one of my other points: I've heard exactly nothing about any sort of organized effort from VAers in response to the RTW repeal bill being voted down. And given the uh...well, pretty much everything about the general behavior of the state democratic political machine in VA it's unlikely that whatever state/local apparatus would be okay with those three staying in office if they voted to repeal RTW. I'd have to talk to some folks I know who live in the state, but the last I heard everyone was pretty much disgusted with all the Dem politicians rallying around the governor to try and write off the whole blackface thing and all the other horridly racist stuff. Which certainly would hit the Democrats in office in the state pretty hard either way, and certainly possibly even worse than that if they supported the governor if that disgust was the general feeling amongst people. Without knowing if the people who were primaried out ran cover (I haven't checked this yet. Probably will now.) for the governor during the whole blackface and KKK thing it's hard to say if their failure to stay in office was directly the cause of attempting to repeal RTW by the voters or a lack of support as a result of their own lovely behavior. Likewise, if the pro RTW politicians are as entrenched as it sounds however i'd be looking into who ran against the failed incumbents, who their opponents donor money came from, and whether or not the state party supported the incumbents before I start making judgements about the failed viability of activism in office in the state. Archonex fucked around with this message at 03:47 on Mar 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:40
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:It's very telling how mad liberals get about Lee Carter and how badly they're able to explain why in any other way than 'He didn't follow the ruuuuuuules!' What is it telling of?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:44
|
|
|
Archonex posted:It's definitely not a positive change. Though, this goes back to one of my other points: I've heard exactly nothing about any sort of organized effort from VAers in response to the RTW repeal bill being voted down. And given the uh...well, pretty much everything about the general behavior of the state democratic political machine in VA it's unlikely that whatever state/local apparatus would be okay with those three staying in office if they voted to repeal RTW. I'm sorry for misinterpreting your post. You had previously stated "the upside is", which I associate with positivity to some degree. I didn't mean "a positive change" as in more positive than negative, so I should have stuck with saying "the upside". If you hear any more from people there/etc, please post it. And just to clarify, I'm not saying the vote on blocking the bill had anything to do with those 4 getting primaried out. I'm just saying it doesn't appear like there was a large backlash just because of a public record for a yay vote on blocking that bill, which seems to refute what you were saying as an upside.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:46
|
|
|
Archonex posted:I'd have to talk to some folks I know who live in the state, but the last I heard everyone was pretty much disgusted with all the Dem politicians rallying around the governor to try and write off the whole blackface thing and all the other horridly racist stuff. Which certainly would hit the Democrats in office in the state pretty hard either way, and certainly possibly even worse than that if they supported the governor if that disgust was the general feeling amongst people. Northam got a pass for the blackface thing because then Lt. Governor Fairfax ended up facing sexual assault allegations and then Attorney General Herring also ended up having a less horrid blackface incident in his past. Everyone thought Northam was doomed (especially after one of the most disastrous press conferences I've ever seen) until everyone else who would have been a Democrat successor had their own unpalatable poo poo to deal with. I'm not sure if the blackface fiascos (sigh that I have to put that in plural) really put a damper on black voter turnout because aside from Herring, the Dems were running with people who were not touched by that scandal. It wasn't even mentioned, but the GOP running Winsome Sears might have helped sap black voter enthusiasm for the Democratic ticket. For better or worse, the transition of Virginia from red state to purple/blue state has come from the growth of the more economically successful Northern Virginia suburbs supplementing the urban cores. Central counties with growing suburbs like Henrico and Chesterfield also have been shifting from their past status as GOP strongholds. The Dems have continued to slide in the rural areas, which is where Youngkin really hit paydirt when it comes to turnout. The impression I got was that given the power base Virginia Democrats were working with, RTW repeal was not a "make or break" issue. Everything was viewed through a very white, suburban lens. The way I saw it, Dems got their backlash because of Covid lockdown fatigue, not having Trump around as a turnout aid, and McAuliffe's baffling decision not to run an affirmative and positive on "checkbook" issues. I'm sure donor interests played their part too in making a lot of Dem legislators put the RTW repeal on the backburner. We'll see how the party retools from here. I think the CRT/schools and culture war weapons caught them totally flat-footed and they had no good idea how to respond because of fear of alienating the blue suburbs. Eric Cantonese fucked around with this message at 03:58 on Mar 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:53
|
|
|
Kalit posted:I'm sorry for misinterpreting your post. You had previously stated "the upside is", which I associate with positivity to some degree. I didn't mean "a positive change" as in more positive than negative, so I should have stuck with saying "the upside". No problem! I've got family living there so if I talk to them in the next few days i'll post back. Might be a good way to shed some more light on what folks in the state think. I should clarify a bit by pointing out that my point was that some good possibly could have been eked out via an organized effort to push for RTW to be repealed in light of a vote blocking that. However, as the above post demonstrates, the VA democrats are a poo poo show of racism, incompetence, and nepotism of epic proportions so in light of hindsight of all that's happened since then it's questionable how reliable they are. So about the best outcome was always probably going to be making it a wedge issue for future elections via using this as way to attack corporate aligned dems on the topic and pressure them to capitulate. Regardless, you made a good point. Unfortunately, given the sheer volume of crap that happened in VA around then I can't say for sure if them being voted out had to do with RTW, a lack of support by lovely local politics, or if it was blowback from the sheer volume of all the other awful stuff that went down around that time. It's a good thing to look into however, as I know there was a lot of effort to repeal RTW prior to Carter (along with some folks suddenly deeply concerned about the RTW vote being "sabotaged" on social media once Carter was being scapegoated.) forcing the vote and it all just went silent afterwards. So i'm not sure if it was legitimate and Carter somehow screwed those efforts over (Seems doubtful, since nothing has been done about a new repeal attempt since then), if some of the people pissed about it were the usual low info voters that just take what they hear at face value, or if it was just unfortunately the sort of fair weather activism that falls apart at the slightest setback. 
Archonex fucked around with this message at 04:11 on Mar 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:54
|
|
|
Somehow, the forum double posted my reply.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:54
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:I err on the side of believing women in these things, and it does a lot to explain why most of Lee's one-time allies went from zero to 'this guy is loving radioactive' well in advance of the party humiliating itself in the right to work debacle People who get abused also have lots of rumors about them and abusers always think they're the real victim. I'm not saying it didn't happen but if genders were reversed a bunch of second hand accounts claiming that "actually he was the one who was really abused" would be laughed at as solid evidence. Politics are dumb and the simplest answer can be that they didn't like working with Lee so he gets no support but the politicians like Mr. Blackface so he gets all the support. And like in this case can be anything from "We have the same policies" to "Gee he's a swell guy" because politicians are really dumb and we know how often their decisions come down to their own personal comfort.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 03:59
|
|
|
Fritz the Horse posted:What is it telling of? They let themselves get led around by their noses
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 04:06
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Politics are dumb and the simplest answer can be that they didn't like working with Lee so he gets no support but the politicians like Mr. Blackface so he gets all the support. And like in this case can be anything from "We have the same policies" to "Gee he's a swell guy" because politicians are really dumb and we know how often their decisions come down to their own personal comfort. When it gets down to it people shouldn’t forget that legislatures are basically like high school in term of interpersonal interactions and everyone wants to be seen being friends with the popular kids.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 04:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 00:54 |
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:It's very telling how mad liberals get about Lee Carter and how badly they're able to explain why in any other way than 'He didn't follow the ruuuuuuules!' How do you explain the local DSA, the unions, apparently half of his grass-roots supporters, and seemingly 85% of the rest of the people in VA politics not being able to stand his guts? They were all feckless liberals in disguise? Seriously, maybe the dude is just a toxic jerk.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2022 04:10
|
|