|
Nenonen posted:The right to be owned and carried by anyone anywhere? ugh, can mods please ban this incel?
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 15:39 |
|
|
Queering Wheel posted:People weren't trying to oppose a mass surveillance state with shitloads of cops and soldiers armed to the teeth with modern tools and weaponry for most of recorded history Are you saying this makes it impossible?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:32
|
|
|
Rigel posted:If their demands are not going to be met by voting, then that means they are unpopular, the politicians and people in power will not fear or care about them at all, and there will not be ends met by "other means". Your "other means" (unless you are talking a serious going for broke violent revolution) would result in a lot of people being chased by the FBI and going to prison for a long time, sharing cells with the 1/6 insurrection idiots. Politicians ignore popular issues, issues they often explicitly camapign on, all the time the second they take office. The only oponion that actually matters to them are donors', because I know this sounds like "no u" but I can't honestly think of any other way to put this: this is an astoundingly naive take that takes for granted that monied interests, cynicism, and outright corruption haven't seeped into nearly every level of electoralism. People think they can intimidate the ruling class because that is historically the only way they typically relinquish even the barest scrap of power. They think nothing of you, of anyone, and consider themselves above consequence. Again, historically, when it is shown to them that there are consequences(and I don't mean just being voted out into a cushy golden parachute) they change their tune extremely quickly. A lot non-revolutionary social change happens this way! Queering Wheel posted:People weren't trying to oppose a mass surveillance state with shitloads of cops and soldiers armed to the teeth with modern tools and weaponry for most of recorded history Again we can look to the history of U.S leftism which is full of assassinations, psyops and in one case, bombing an entire neighbourhood(look up may 13, 1985). People were and are trying to oppose that, and the ruling class recognizes and fears it which is why they devote so many resources to crushing it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:38
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Leave. If I can't leave, I keep my head down, stay out of trouble, and work on whatever is preventing me from leaving. You really have an extremely shallow understanding of mass politics. Do you think revolutions have a signup sheet to join them? Do you think that you can calculate the success chance of revolutions like this is a strategy game? What do you think happens if everyone shares your view of "well I'll just save my own hide unless I can latch onto a movement that I think is already going to succeed"?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:40
|
|
|
Rigel posted:If their demands are not going to be met by voting, then that means they are unpopular, the politicians and people in power will not fear or care about them at all, and there will not be ends met by "other means". Your "other means" (unless you are talking a serious going for broke violent revolution) would result in a lot of people being chased by the FBI and going to prison for a long time, sharing cells with the 1/6 insurrection idiots. This isn't historical analysis, it's just you framing your boilerplate white moderate fears beneath a veneer of pragmatist affectation. It's shockingly obvious you don't know poo poo about actual history(or politics for that matter), and perhaps you should consider reading some books or something instead of regurgitating a slurry of early 2010s liberal blog comments you drank from a blender Rigel posted:maybe I try to help that along instead of leaving lmaooooo you absolutely would not, come on dude. Your posts are all centered around convincing yourself of a fictional reality where you're an effective political actor from the comfort of your gooncave. In this scenario, you'd be tripping over yourself to snitch (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:40
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:My best guess at this point is that the Dems pick up PA and maybe WI; lose NV, AZ & GA, and the rest of the Senate seats remain the same. ellasmith posted:I just wish women had the same rights as a gun.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:49
|
|
; NV as 32-57; GA as 28-59; and WI as 36-55. PA is 33-55, but the Fetman's lead is p. strong in current polling, while the other states have the Dem Senate candidate polling at ties, at best.
|
FlapYoJacks posted:Let’s look at California where I live. Rent is terrible everywhere, but I'll concede that housing and homelessness are especially bad in California, and that democratic policies haven't done nearly enough here. I can tell you that the Republican response to homelessness in my state is just to force them to move from community to community until they either die or move to California, so there's that. Cali gas prices are the most expensive in the US, but still below what they probably should be to offset the externalities of climate change (compare them to EU prices). California, to its credit, is doing more than red states here. I don't think you understand what the Covid response looked like in most red states. Only 3 red states, each much less dense in terms of its population centers, had death rates per capita less than California (Alaska, Utah and Nebraska), and every other red state's death rate per capita was much much higher. Additionally California's vaccination rates are much higher than any red state. What is your definition of covid response if not measured through vaccination rates and per capita death rates? The entire central and western US is on fire this year so I think that one's beyond the scope of the democrats in California. But again to their credit, they're doing more than most red states about it. In my state (Texas), we have brownouts and then have to pay 50x the normal amount for energy during our bi-annual hunger games events where either extreme cold or heat threatens our grid. It's awesome. California ranks #1 in the country in having the lowest infant and maternal mortality rates. My red state ranks 43rd and that's before we effectively banned abortion after 6 weeks last year, or the full ban taking effect in a few weeks. Before those took effect, we already had the worst rates in the 'developed' world. In our schools we can't teach actual US history if it makes people uncomfortable about race, and if we want to talk about the holocaust, we have to provide both sides of.. the holocaust. Trying to take care of your trans kid, or even slightly effeminate son or tomboy girl, can get you an appointment with child protective services where you potentially lose your kid for being a groomer. Does that happen in CA yet? theCalamity posted:In cities controlled by Democrats in states controlled by Democrats, we have seen police budgets rise to astronomical heights and seen them brutalize the people they are there to protect. Best Friends posted:George Floyd was killed by a cop in a blue city in a blue state. Comparative numbers are hard to find here, but the Lancet had a good study in 2021 that's one of the best we've seen so far. The worst states for police violence against black men from 2000 to 2009 were Oklahoma, Nevada, Nebraska, Iowa and Kansas. From 2010 to 2019, Oklahoma, Alaska, West Virginia, Utah and Washington DC. So in each time period studied, that's 4 red states and 1 blue state. The lowest mortality rates of police violence from 1980 to 2019 were Massachusetts, Connecticut, Minnesota, North Dakota, New Hampshire and New York. Mostly blue states there. Overall I still think the numbers agree with me that life is better in blue states than red states, across many metrics, and especially those concerning civil rights and personal liberties, including health and education outcomes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:51
|
|
|
if you can't post without lovely sniping at each other, consider taking the night off.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:52
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:This is doomerism. Just straight up doomerism You are talking about people possessing a terrifying amount of police and military power with almost Godlike modern surveillance capability. If I am watching a movie, then I might imagine seeing the cold heart of an unassailable dictator melt with compassion in the face of an inspiring demonstration and hearing a great speech, but I'm not expecting it in the real world. What gets results is "could opposing this make me lose what I have?" In a modern and powerful democratic nation, that only includes getting arrested or losing an election.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:53
|
|
|
All I'll say is that "what would I do?" is a question people constantly ask themselves when studying the turbulent times in history and no one aspiration was to leave. If you think your only option is to leave I think you should take some time to study the movements before us and across the world how they achieved success and failure in the past. Things are not easy but you have many options.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:58
|
|
|
My main issue with direct action and revolutionary behaviour that scares the ruling class is that back in the day a lot of people inclined that way had military training and militancy. They also had many ways to hide their planning activities and organizing efforts. Today everything is under surveillance. Everything is monitored. There’s an extremely sophisticated surveillance panopticon coupled with extreme force available to the state to suppress any resistance or make it ineffectual. So how do you overcome that to get your goals without bringing down homeland security to utterly demolish you?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:58
|
|
|
Rigel posted:You are talking about people possessing a terrifying amount of police and military power with almost Godlike modern surveillance capability. We have a robust history of direct action leading to changes in this country. Prohibition and the civil rights movements are examples. Are you going to continue to pretend that isn’t possible?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2022 23:59
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:We have a robust history of direct action leading to changes in this country. Prohibition and the civil rights movements are examples. Are you going to continue to pretend that isn’t possible? Back then they didn’t have a mass media apparatus that can beam propaganda directly into everyone’s brains via social media and cellphones. They didn’t have cameras and tracking everywhere. They didn’t have sophisticated data mining operations that can flag you as a person of interest long before you ever run afoul of the law. They also definitely didn’t have an easy means to find you and you still had ways to cover your tracks. Now there’s camera networks with facial recognition technology that work through masks and sunglasses that can mass identify and profile entire crowds. There are a lot of near omnipotent sources of oppression today that were simply unthinkable or impossible the last time people agitated for major changes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:04
|
|
|
Have Some Flowers! posted:Again my argument has never been that democrats are 'good' on these issues, just that they aren't as bad as republicans are or want to be. Just being better is not good. Even in blue states, we have to get the talk from our parents about how to interact with police. Rigel posted:You are talking about people possessing a terrifying amount of police and military power with almost Godlike modern surveillance capability. True and voting is going to stop them how? Remember, the Democrats have willfully increased military power, the police, and civilian surveillance. Biden bragged about increasing funding for police! You want us to vote for the people who want to make the police, the military, and the surveillance state more powerful? Seems counterproductive
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:05
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Back then they didn’t have a mass media apparatus that can beam propaganda directly into everyone’s brains via social media and cellphones. Nah that’s not the difference. The difference is communities. Those were church and organization driven. Already existing communities decided to do those things. Not randos gathering.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:10
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:Abortions and LGBT rights in CA are only for those who can afford them? The LASD is publicly known to be entirely comprised of literal jumped-in neonazis, and they have infinite discretion to brutalize homeless individuals. At-risk LGBTQ individuals are substantially more likely to become homeless. So, yes. Rights are still only for those who can afford them in California
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:11
|
|
|
If we live in this oppressive panopticon why would voting work to enact change? If we're fully controlled then wouldn't they just take voting away if it stopped giving them what they want? How do you people hold that you live in an oppressive society that is constantly tracking you and keeping you from expressing your need for human rights and also "best thing I can do is go to work and vote every 2 years" in your heads and not just fall apart from that level of helplessness?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:12
|
|
|
Have Some Flowers! posted:Of course it would be someone in Cali who thinks they have it bad. quote:Rent is terrible everywhere, but I'll concede that housing and homelessness are especially bad in California, and that democratic policies haven't done nearly enough here. I can tell you that the Republican response to homelessness in my state is just to force them to move from community to community until they either die or move to California, so there's that. quote:Cali gas prices are the most expensive in the US, but still below what they probably should be to offset the externalities of climate change (compare them to EU prices). California, to its credit, is doing more than red states here. quote:I don't think you understand what the Covid response looked like in most red states. Only 3 red states, each much less dense in terms of its population centers, had death rates per capita less than California (Alaska, Utah and Nebraska), and every other red state's death rate per capita was much much higher. Additionally California's vaccination rates are much higher than any red state. What is your definition of covid response if not measured through vaccination rates and per capita death rates? quote:The entire central and western US is on fire this year so I think that one's beyond the scope of the democrats in California. But again to their credit, they're doing more than most red states about it. California uses slave labor to combat wildfires. Then denied the convicts who served in the program gainful employment. Once COVID hit there wasn’t enough slave labor to combat the fires. quote:In my state (Texas), we have brownouts and then have to pay 50x the normal amount for energy during our bi-annual hunger games events where either extreme cold or heat threatens our grid. It's awesome. Yeah, rolling blackouts and astronomical energy prices don’t exist in California at all. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:17
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Back then they didn’t have a mass media apparatus that can beam propaganda directly into everyone’s brains via social media and cellphones. Again, none of this makes direct action impossible, just hard. And nobody said it was easy. Nothing worth fighting for ever is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:24
|
|
|
FlapYoJacks posted:Yeah, rolling blackouts and astronomical energy prices don’t exist in California at all. Speaking of blackouts and energy, what are Democrats doing to stave off climate crisis? Climate crisis is/going to be the major factor in fascism and it's going to get worse. If we vote blue no matter who, we will be voting for democrats who will barely lift a finger to substantially change the way our cities are built or hold corporations accountable for disasters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:27
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:Speaking of blackouts and energy, what are Democrats doing to stave off climate crisis? Climate crisis is/going to be the major factor in fascism and it's going to get worse. If we vote blue no matter who, we will be voting for democrats who will barely lift a finger to substantially change the way our cities are built or hold corporations accountable for disasters. So the only things that may get done are via executive action. We also have that Supreme Court EPA ruling to look forward to next week, which is probably going to say that the EPA is not allowed to regulate greenhouse gases.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:30
|
|
|
It's extremely frustrating that some people urge us to vote blue no matter, but then the most powerful Democrat in the country says this: https://twitter.com/ValerioCNN/status/1540733208811122694?s=20&t=DsIdOSHkM6nZ_dS0qYDP6g Why vote for someone who doesn't want to make the necessary changes that would allow them to pass progressive legislation?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:41
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:It's extremely frustrating that some people urge us to vote blue no matter, but then the most powerful Democrat in the country says this: Man the DCCC could pay me a fraction of what they pay their entire PR team and I would do so much of a better job despite having absolutely no training in marketing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:43
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Jordanfabian/status/1540731554585989121?s=20&t=o9Hkx5MTWOjAm2aQ89tTjw They've had so much time to come up with a plan. They knew this was coming. Yet they don't have a plan
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:58
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:Just being better is not good. Even in blue states, we have to get the talk from our parents about how to interact with police. FlapYoJacks posted:“Doing slightly better” than a F isn’t good. I've argued my point for a while that I think that while the democratic party sucks, they're better than the alternative. Explain to me how giving more power to the Republicans results in better outcomes for the issues we've talked about. Is your position that accelerationism is the way to go? Or that if we pull the rug from the democrats, a more progressive third party will quickly rise up in the next 2 years or 4 years or decade to replace them in time to save us from the interim Republican supermajority? If you get exactly what you want, what does that look like, and how likely is it to happen? FlapYoJacks posted:Also, as far as blue states having a good COVID response, look no further than NY, which hid thousands upon thousands of COVID deaths in the nursing homes. With the most uncharitable reading of the excess death numbers, including omitting that NY was the first out of the trenches and has some of the highest population densities in the country, they still did better than Texas.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 00:59
|
|
|
I'm starting to understand why Trump was so enraged at losing to Biden.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 01:04
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:https://twitter.com/Jordanfabian/status/1540731554585989121?s=20&t=o9Hkx5MTWOjAm2aQ89tTjw Because the Dem leadership is basically Joe Manchin and Sinema. It’s all theatrics. They are the very conservatives that are good with all of this or they’d care. They don’t.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 01:06
|
|
|
Have Some Flowers! posted:I don't disagree with either of you on that. Better isn't good. But it is still better, and that's what your vote has the potential to do or not when you step into the voting booth in a two party system. Yes, it's still better, but not good. We need good. We are hurting. We've been hurting for quite a long time. And I'm tired. I'm exhausted. I'm tried of only settling for slightly better. It's slowly killing us and the only plan being offered to us by Democrats and people like you is to resign to a slow death. I'm done voting for a party that is willing to throw people like me under the bus for the hope getting into power. I'm going to put my energy into things that will actually help people like mutual aid. So yeah, I'm not going to vote for the democrats. It's not giving power to the GOP. The Democrats in power are perfectly capable of doing that themselves. Biden's resigned himself to inaction and Congressional leadership are telling people to donate to them. Why should anyone vote for them if they have no plan?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 01:09
|
|
|
I'm tired of debating people who believe that the GOP won't institute a national ban if they win Congress and POTUS in 2024. Even though Pence has said that was the goal. And to think the SCOTUS would block a national ban is just naive. To believe that the GOP or SCOTUS will show restraint and leave it up to the states is nutty. Seethe NY Conceal Weapon decision as an example.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 01:10
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:I'm tired of debating people who believe that the GOP won't institute a national ban if they win Congress and POTUS in 2024. In a world where the most recent abortion decision is now considered to be correct, then I don't really even see why a Federal ban would be a problem. The Supreme Court would shrug and go "well that is certainly an interesting way to go, but OK".
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 01:15
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:I'm tired of debating people who believe that the GOP won't institute a national ban if they win Congress and POTUS in 2024. Personally I think the political reason to end the filibuster and start passing poo poo is to force Republicans to dare and take it away. Republicans aren't experiencing any consequences because there is no way for them to do so thanks to the deadlock and they always control the conditions of their wins and losses. There is a ton of frustration about how the Senate disproportionately benefits Republicans, but not a lot of talk about getting their strategy of "doing very little beyond stonewalling Democrats" to bite them in the rear end. These people don't have to stay Republican voters but that seems to be a foregone conclusion by Democratic leadership and a strategy that requires a lot more work than they're willing to do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 01:25
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:and the only plan being offered to us by Democrats and people like you is to resign to a slow death theCalamity posted:I'm going to put my energy into things that will actually help people like mutual aid. theCalamity posted:So yeah, I'm not going to vote for the democrats. It's not giving power to the GOP.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 01:44
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:https://twitter.com/Jordanfabian/status/1540731554585989121?s=20&t=o9Hkx5MTWOjAm2aQ89tTjw Honestly starting to wonder when Biden starts becoming in danger of being primaried at this point
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 02:10
|
|
|
Have Some Flowers! posted:This is just a fatal misunderstanding of how a two party system works and what the meaning and value of your vote is. We would flay the democratic leadership for such unstrategic behavior, but then turn around and exhibit it ourselves in the name of pointless spite? C'mon. You assume that I vote for the democrats. I don't outside of certain candidates. You also assume that my vote holds the same amount of power as theirs. You also assume to know the value of my vote despite not knowing what state I live in. It's a red state. With how the president is selected, my vote don't matter at all. Due to gerrymandering, my vote is severely diluted. And hell, because of how big this state is by population, my vote for Senator is even more diluted compared to a small state like Wyoming. Even then, I still do vote, just not for democrats. We would flay democratic leadership? When has that ever happened? Because Democratic leadership has been the same for a while. Pelosi has been in leadership in some form for two decades. Steny Hoyer has been in leadership since 2003. Dick Durbin has been Senate Majority whip since 2005. Schumer is a relative newcomer becoming Senate Majority Leader in 2017 with the resignation of Harry Reid, who had been leader for the Dems since 2005. Which makes sense given the length of terms for Senators. The only time there's been a huge shakeup in party leadership was when AOC won and then the Dems fought hard to keep that from happening ever again. What would punishment for the Democrats look like? How would we punish them? What tools do we have at our disposal to punish them? What punishment should the democrats get for completely being unprepared for this moment DESPITE having two months to get ready? Do we keep rewarding them with power even though Pelosi recited some poetry and sang a song after the decision was made? What can we do to push Biden to support expanding the court? Should I support a politician who said that abortion rights aren't a priority for the party as recently as 2017 and then went on to say that ideological causes will lose the Democratic Party conservative voters, you know, the voters who support anti-abortion? Pelosi and Clyburn recently campaigned for an anti-choice, pro-gun Democrat in Texas. Should we keep supporting them for that? Will the party continue to support anti-abortion democrats? Why should I support a party that enables the GOP?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 02:12
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Honestly starting to wonder when Biden starts becoming in danger of being primaried at this point Never. They'll burn down the party UK Labour-style before letting that happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 02:14
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Honestly starting to wonder when Biden starts becoming in danger of being primaried at this point I would love to see that happen. It honestly needs to happen if the Democrats hope to win anything in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 02:16
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:I would love to see that happen. It honestly needs to happen if the Democrats hope to win anything in the future. Because whoever does it will be excommunicated from the party going forward
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 02:18
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I’m just wondering who, if anyone, is willing to defy the party to do this I don't know who would. I doubt any big names we know of would since they would want the party to not fracture over it. But causing a big wave might be able to shake the Democrats out of their lethargy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 02:19
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Never. They'll burn down the party UK Labour-style before letting that happen. Idk, it worked on LBJ!
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 02:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 15:39 |
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:The most important election was 2016. We just saw why. If Clinton won in 2016 the same thing would still be happening. -Dems don't win the Senate -GOP hold Scalia's seat open -Kennedy puts off retirement -2018 Senate map is a bloodbath for Dems. GOP picks up MT, WV, OH at least and holds NV, AR -RGB still dies, seat held open for remainder of Clinton's term -Clinton loses re-election -At some point Kennedy decides to retire -GOP President has 3 open seats and Breyer can't retire
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2022 02:47
|
|
