|
Kalit posted:I understand that part, but I'm still confused on your claim of "a harder sell to voters in future elections". This statement to me implies that a significant number of voters will hold a grudge and not vote for Democrats in the future based on these broken promises. If this is not what you mean by that specific statement, I'm sorry for the assumption and you can correct me. I'm basing this claim on the record-low approval ratings among Democrats, and the subsections of Democrats like young people & Hispanic voters, toward the current Democratic president & Democratic congress. As I've repeatedly said, governing from impotence isn't attractive to voters, and politicians can do the okey-doke for only so long before voters are disincentivized from supporting them. I reckon that it'll be "a harder sell to voters in future elections" because voters can see through excuses at some point, and current polling suggests that this has already happened. But what does any of that have to do with your claim that I was only discussing leftist voters, which was the point to which I was responding?
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 20:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 06:56 |
|
|
Kalit posted:This statement, to me, implies that a significant number of voters will hold a grudge and not vote for Democrats in the future based on these broken promises. Do you think this is an unreasonable thing to believe?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 20:46
|
|
|
Kalit posted:I understand that part, but I'm still confused on your claim of "make the Democrats themselves a harder sell to voters in future elections". This statement, to me, implies that a significant number of voters will hold a grudge and not vote for Democrats in the future based on these broken promises. If this is not what you mean by that specific statement, I'm sorry for the assumption and you can correct me. How does Voter turnout increasing in general represent an electorate unconcerned with some arbitrary collection of campaign promises being broken? How many elections are you using as your sample and what basis are they rising, especially considering off-year elections?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 20:49
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:I'm basing this claim on the record-low approval ratings among Democrats, and the subsections of Democrats like young people & Hispanic voters, toward the current Democratic president & Democratic congress. Oh no, I misinterpreted what you meant in your response to me. When you stated Willa Rogers posted:This has nothing to do with my response to MP, which was rebutting the idea that "we on the left" are somehow responsible for getting legislation passed after politicians have won elections by supporting ideas popular among voters. I had thought you meant that broken promises affecting the turnout of the general voting populace had nothing to do with your response. Especially since you didn't address the correlation between broken promises and voter turnout in this response. I wasn't trying to make up words that you weren't saying, just a mis-interpretation. E: some plague rats posted:Do you think this is an unreasonable thing to believe? Past presidents have broken promises all of the time and voter turnout is at its largest. So..... it seems like breaking campaign promises isn't a big deal to most people, if they even remember them. E2: VVV I wasn't asking for any more clarity or explanation from you, I just wanted to clarify that I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth Kalit fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Jul 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 20:50
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Oh no, I misinterpreted what you meant in your response to me. When you stated Ok, now I'm even more confused about the answer or topic you're trying to elicit from me. Can you please make it clearer so I can respond in good faith?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 20:53
|
|
|
Bugsy posted:Yep, the ag is trying to intimidate everyone involved to show how chuddy he is. Has anyone cracked the code as to why all these people are so predictably similar?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 21:26
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Ah, sorry, I didn't realize you meant only leftist voters when you stated "And that will make the Democrats themselves a harder sell to voters in future elections". Thank you for elaborating on that. Please refrain from making a loaded statement like this. The confusion currently occurring between yourself and Willa is the exact reason precise language and arguments are prized.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 21:33
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:https://twitter.com/USFWS/status/1547929557986029570 Good idea. Yeah I'll make sure and do that when I'm not at either of my two jobs, freelancing or tending to my healthcare visits while the tires on my car wear down and my odometer hits 195,000 miles bird food bathtub posted:How many times does it have to be shown that what voters want means precisely zero point dick, while the wealthy class gets legislation they want basically at their whim, before the arguments that we need to keep working on voters finally dies the ignominious death it deserves? For me? Zero. Zero more times. BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Jul 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 21:47
|
|
|
Biden taking Manchin's deal to pass something right away. Schumer says they are sending the draft bill to the parliamentarian today. They are stripping the $300 billion in climate provisions. Bill will be the Rx drug pricing reform, Medicare out of pocket cost caps, boosted ACA subsidies/income eligibility, and $0 deductible and $0 premium ACA plans. Biden promises "strong," but unspecified, executive actions to try and make up for the loss of the climate provisions. Nothing he can do executively to replace the biggest parts (renewable energy, electric vehicle, and nuclear power subsidies) though. Manchin says he is open to another climate bill before the election, but wants a "good inflation report" and his pipeline before he will commit to it (in other words, probably never). https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1548020353812746240 Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Jul 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 22:07
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:I didn't claim that an increased minimum wage had to be the "highest" political priority; only that it was an example of something politically popular that was spurned by [eta: congressional] Dems. If we want it to become political reality, then it needs to be important enough among the voters that they don't prioritize other issues over that one. That's why it's not enough to just do issue polling. You can't just ask people "do you support issue X, do you support issue Y, do you support issue Z" and then point to that as proof that the political process has been subverted somehow. When asked one-by-one, people may say "Yes, I support issue X" and "Yes, I support issue Y" and "Yes, I support issue Z" . But what happens when one candidate supports X but opposes Y, and the other candidate supports Y but opposes X? In that case, what decides the result* isn't which one got the most Yes answers, but rather which one got the deepest support: which issue did people care deeply about, which one was more likely to be a decisive factor in people's votes? Even if they say that they support both issues, they'll care more about some issues than others, and that's something that'll show through in their voting behavior (and therefore make an impact on the political stage). That's why minority interest groups, like gun lovers and Cuban exiles, can punch so far above their weight politically, even now that the NRA is bankrupt and on the brink of collapse. They have captive audiences of single-issue voters who care very deeply about the issue and are willing to compromise on practically any other issue as long as they get their say on their pet issue. And that's how the Tea Party got their way too. Although they were astroturfed and manipulated, the foundation of their political power was still their ability to turn out highly-motivated voters in large numbers. They didn't ask questions like "how do we get politicians to listen to us", they went and voted in their own politicians. Issues like climate change and single-payer are popular in the polls, but it's pretty clear they don't consistently drive voter behavior. *Assuming things like charisma, marketing, and political organization are identical, and that the election is being decided solely by the issues. Though that's a bit of a "perfectly frictionless surface" handwave, since those things always matter. People's votes are less issue-dependent than they like to admit, which is a reason why it's important to create a political movement, and not just work at individual issue advocacy. BiggerBoat posted:Blaming "the left" for not moving the democratic party into a more progressive stance is a hard sell for me. I'm very hard left and so are a lot of my friends. We're dead broke. I work two jobs (and freelance) and many of us raise kids or commute an hour to work as our rent increases. We're not rich political donors but we get out and protest, sometimes knock on doors, vote in primaries and often write our congressmen. I feel like this is completely missing my point. The job of the left isn't to move the Democratic Party left, it's to drag the voters left. If we can turn the eligible voting population of a particular Democrat's district into a bunch of raging socialists, that Democrat will be forced to either move left or be replaced. Rinse and repeat. Rather than focusing on convincing politicians, we should be focusing on convincing those politicians' voters. The right gets that, and many effective issue lobbyists get that. We need to get with it as well. The goal isn't to convince politicians, the goal is to convince people. Convince everyone. Politicians' ability to stand against their own constituents strong desires is actually fairly limited. Out of the entire Senate, do you know whose approval rating has risen the most among their own state's voters since 2020? As of March 2022, the answer was Joe loving Manchin, with a whopping double-digit increase in approval among West Virginia voters. Which isn't shocking, given that West Virginia's voters went overwhelmingly for Trump in 2020; it only makes sense that the same electorate would also be happy to see their senator frustrating Biden's plans. Manchin is just doing what his own state's voters approve of; there's not much point trying to convince him to turn left without first convincing West Virginia voters that they'd rather have a leftist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 22:32
|
|
|
I have to wonder how much of the current insanity within the GOP is directly related to 9/11, and how much of it would be going on today had 9/11 not happened.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 22:39
|
|
|
skylined! posted:Has anyone cracked the code as to why all these people are so predictably similar? Because they're all dullard coward NPCs who just want to be part of the ingroup at all costs. The same reason half the teenagers in my city have the same haircut and jacket Cimber posted:I have to wonder how much of the current insanity within the GOP is directly related to 9/11, and how much of it would be going on today had 9/11 not happened. America has always been a country of white devil slaver racist freaks, 9/11 meant they could just drop the mask they'd been halfheartedly wearing for a few years (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 23:07
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Biden taking Manchin's deal to pass something right away. Schumer says they are sending the draft bill to the parliamentarian today.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 23:28
|
|
|
Caro has been arrested again; I'm sure this will not come as a surprise to goons, it's been a long time coming.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 23:30
|
|
|
Cimber posted:I have to wonder how much of the current insanity within the GOP is directly related to 9/11, and how much of it would be going on today had 9/11 not happened. They have been on this project since 1964. 9/11 may have accelerated some parts and slowed down others, but it didn't change the shape of it. Hell, just look at the John Birch Society. That's a very clear intellectual precursor to Qanon.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2022 23:41
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Caro has been arrested again; I'm sure this will not come as a surprise to goons, it's been a long time coming. We're never gonna get that final LBJ book now
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 01:01
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:
I don't think I did but maybe. So sorry if I did. My question was maybe along the lines of how, exactly, that can be done when most people who vote democrat are for all intents and purposes, basically powerless? What, should I constantly espouse the virtues of far left thinking at my job, knock on my neighbors' doors about it and ruin every party and family get together I attend with my altruistic insights of far left policy? Post harder about it on FB or something? Craft some Super Posts here in D&D that resonate to the rafters? I can't compete with the RWM machine, its money, its reach and its influence no matter how much poo poo I talk, how true it is or how many letters I send and most people are, plain and simple, worn out and overworked in general and with politics in particular. I can't even reach people within the party I usually tend to vote for among the circles I frequent. I'm not shy about sharing my opinions when the subject comes up, defending my positions or the reasons why I think the way I do but I'm not Martin Luther King over here either.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 01:10
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:I feel like this is completely missing my point. The job of the left isn't to move the Democratic Party left, it's to drag the voters left. If we can turn the eligible voting population of a particular Democrat's district into a bunch of raging socialists, that Democrat will be forced to either move left or be replaced. Rinse and repeat. Rather than focusing on convincing politicians, we should be focusing on convincing those politicians' voters. The right gets that, and many effective issue lobbyists get that. We need to get with it as well. They do it all the time, though? There's a ton of popular policy that Dems will actively fight against(healthcare and legal weed are the easy examples) and no amount of constituent enthusiasm(within electoralism, anyway) will make them do it. The most they will do is campaign on it then immediately forget the issue the second they win the primary.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 01:39
|
|
|
One piece of good news tonight, which is that the terrible deal Biden was trying to make with Mitch McConnell regarding a judicial appointment for federal attorney swap is dead https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1548072934949892107?s=21&t=so298Dv6GdYlZhA1MplvPg
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 02:23
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:If we want it to become political reality, then it needs to be important enough among the voters that they don't prioritize other issues over that one. Why wouldn't the Democrats just say "no" to a theoretical leftist takeover? They don't have to run fair primaries, nor respect the results of the primaries they do run. Even if you do somehow sway all these voters, what are they going to do in that situation? Vote Republican?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 02:50
|
|
|
It’s gotten harder and harder for me over the years to believe that much of any substantial leftward traction at the federal level is possible without first directly addressing the RWM ecosystem. Especially with certain demographics. I bring this up, because I think it directly affects the plausibility of pulling voters to the left. And even if you’re not talking full blown Republicans, there’s a trickle down effect IMO into how GOP talking points shift the overall Overton window amongst otherwise mostly disengaged voters. I used to experience this back when I still tried to talk to my parents about their right wing politics. As others have mentioned in this thread, Americans have been conditioned to just hate or be skeptical of certain leftist goals (socialism, m4a, etc) for all kinds of reasons. So even when I would take the long, patient, personal relationship based approach to discussing politics, and get them to see that things like “being able to see a doctor” aren’t huge communist conspiracies, it doesn’t take much for RWM to get their hooks right back into them and undo any ideological progress made. It’s really hard to compete with that machine as an individual once someone is plugged into it. A lot of these are sales principles. Sometimes repetition can do more to shape someone’s views than the actual ideological point being made IMO.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 02:55
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:One piece of good news tonight, which is that the terrible deal Biden was trying to make with Mitch McConnell regarding a judicial appointment for federal attorney swap is dead Dont worry it's not because Biden thought better of it. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 02:59
|
|
|
Why the hell would Rand Paul want to block McConnell's friend?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 03:19
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Why the hell would Rand Paul want to block McConnell's friend? According to the article, literally because it was supposed to be his turn to pick a judge for Kentucky and McConnell went over his head to make the deal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 03:20
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:Dont worry it's not because Biden thought better of it. Scuttling a horrible decision not because it was awful but because the Republicans forced him out of it for insane internal reasons? Maybe they weren't lying about this being a continuation of the Obama admin!
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 03:21
|
|
|
Wow, petty internal politics for the win!
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 03:22
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:They do it all the time, though? There's a ton of popular policy that Dems will actively fight against(healthcare and legal weed are the easy examples) and no amount of constituent enthusiasm(within electoralism, anyway) will make them do it. The most they will do is campaign on it then immediately forget the issue the second they win the primary. I get where Mainframe is coming from but I think the outcomes they're expecting are only possible in a world where voter policy wants actually translate into what's voted for which is not true if we just look at observable reality. We're a representative democracy, voters don't vote on policy they vote on the people who implement it and there is little option besides voting to try to get rid of them and that's fraught in it's own way. Krysten Sinema is a good recent example of this. She made her career from the left, originally took office on left wing policies, and now everyone who supported her has buyers remorse since while they have influence they have no control and she has gone wildly off track from what won her support at the start of her political career. She will probably lose her seat but even that's debatable because she could easily end up being the lesser evil. Voters have influence but they don't have control. Moving them left is good but I don't expect it to lead to increased leftist policy, I expect it to lead to angrier people as they don't get left wing policy. Public options and universal healthcare are very popular with Americans, Democratic policy on universal healthcare has moved backwards during the same time it's become more popular with the public and that popularity with the public is partially Obama and Bernie's fault so it's got to be more than just moving voters left.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 03:40
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Scuttling a horrible decision not because it was awful but because the Republicans forced him out of it for insane internal reasons? Maybe they weren't lying about this being a continuation of the Obama admin! Now you reminded me of the Grand Bargain and I'm loving mad all over again. Having to rely on the frothing maniacs of the Freedom Caucus so Obama didn't just burn down the house for warmth on a cold day. That must have been one of McConnel's few losses. Was he even leading the party in congress then? Mitch: "Don't you guys get it? He'll gut Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid and who knows what else forever in return for some tax hikes we will reverse at the first opportunity, leaving the welfare state up to its nostrils in poo poo!" Freedom Caucus maniac: "That means he'll get to say he WON and passed something! No deal!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 04:04
|
|
|
Polls have shown for years that Democrat voters are way to the left of Democrat politicians. It ain't done poo poo.Sephyr posted:Now you reminded me of the Grand Bargain and I'm loving mad all over again. Having to rely on the frothing maniacs of the Freedom Caucus so Obama didn't just burn down the house for warmth on a cold day. It's kinda lol that at this point even Republicans are suspicious about how Democrats seem so eager to present their wallets for inspection and screw over their own voters. Ghost Leviathan fucked around with this message at 06:19 on Jul 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 05:31
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:If we want it to become political reality, then it needs to be important enough among the voters that they don't prioritize other issues over that one. This post keeps rattling around in my head, obviously since I already wrote one response to it, but I realized what's bugging me. It starts on the assumption that people vote for policy or I guess the possible future where moving them "left" gets them to vote on policy and I'm not sure that assumption is correct. Even engaged voters vote along identity and partisan lines. I think what you really need is both, politicians who will put forward the policies the left wants to see and a way to convince people to identify with those politicians. That could be through seeing ourselves as all communists or leftists but that well is pretty poisoned. So building people into single issue voters and presenting those politicians who deliver on those issues is probably the way to go, it seems to be one of the ways the Republicans pull in people still while being an ugly badge themselves. Lol oh, as I write this I realize it's universal healthcare. That still feels like the one that someone could get elected on with the right charisma, it worked once already. Also I've got to call out that all three right wing examples are also supported by money and how it helps. The Cuban American exiles are famously middle and upper class and the politically motivated have used that to take a lot of positions in government. Gun lovers have the gun industry. Also rereading a few times we do see a lot of the same things, I think the big difference is that I think it needs to be more of a two pronged approach because just moving voters left is just going to get us more mad voters than left politicians since lesser evil will keep winning. Gumball Gumption fucked around with this message at 06:26 on Jul 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 06:17
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:Now you reminded me of the Grand Bargain and I'm loving mad all over again. Having to rely on the frothing maniacs of the Freedom Caucus so Obama didn't just burn down the house for warmth on a cold day. Every time I remember the Grand Bargain it makes me marvel at just what an incredible show of cynicism and genuine absolute malevolence it was on Obama's part. The turnaround from the sheer hope on display in 2008 is just shattering
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 06:51
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Polls have shown for years that Democrat voters are way to the left of Democrat politicians. It ain't done poo poo. You do have more progressive candidates. Bernie, AoC and the rest of the Squad winning along with many local left leaning candidates. Legalization of weed, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 08:04
|
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:Why wouldn't the Democrats just say "no" to a theoretical leftist takeover? They don't have to run fair primaries, nor respect the results of the primaries they do run. Even if you do somehow sway all these voters, what are they going to do in that situation? Vote Republican? They do respect the results of their primaries. Bernie Sander lost Michigan.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 08:05
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:https://twitter.com/SenFeinstein/status/1547603700859801606 I mean let’s be clear, Feinstein is wondering why custard and ice cream taste different, and her handlers and office are doing poo poo. She’s not cognizant. I’m not trying to poo poo on your point, but acting like people like her are effectual in anyway is part of the problem imo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 08:09
|
|
|
Yeah like I wouldn't take the fact that blue dog dems maintaining a controlling stake of the democratic party doesn't mean things aren't getting better. More progressives win every election cycle. Even just 10 years ago the idea of a self-described socialist being within striking distance of winning his party's primary and going on to Fox News town halls to standing ovations at the end would be absolutely unthinkable. It's just we're ready to see actual progressive policies put in place, right now. Nelson Mandingo fucked around with this message at 08:23 on Jul 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 08:10
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:They do respect the results of their primaries. Bernie Sander lost Michigan. You do realise why Iowa lost the first primary status, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 08:29
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:They do respect the results of their primaries. Bernie Sander lost Michigan. Yeah you might want to have a look at what happened in Iowa in 2020 if you're planning to make this argument!
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 09:31
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Yeah you might want to have a look at what happened in Iowa in 2020 if you're planning to make this argument! I wasn't familiar and couldn't remember so I googled it. Looks like Buttigeig barely won. https://www.desmoinesregister.com/s...ieg/4856850002/ It also looks like the system they tried to implement was a complete disaster https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/12/iowa-caucus-dnc-report-444649 I don't see anything here to support the implication that the DNC put their thumb on the scale to defeat Bernie. Ghost Leviathan posted:You do realise why Iowa lost the first primary status, right? I assume the bed making GBS threads described in the politico article, along with the demographic/non-representitve arguments laid out in the article. Is there another reason?
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 09:44
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:I wasn't familiar and couldn't remember so I googled it. Looks like Buttigeig barely won. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ0506A9S-8 Bernie received the most votes, that sounds like a win to me. The Intercept posted:THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE refused to cooperate with investigators and was “directly involved in the development process” of the infamous Shadow app ahead of the 2020 Iowa caucuses. That’s the conclusion of the former U.S. attorney leading the investigation into what went wrong during the first-in-the-nation caucuses, as relayed to the Iowa State Democratic Party in a closed-session meeting last week, according to a transcript of the meeting obtained by The Intercept. https://theintercept.com/2020/12/23/dnc-iowa-caucus-app-shadow/
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 09:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 06:56 |
|
|
this seems like we're heading toward relitigating 2016/2020 primaries. let's not do that for the umpteenth time
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2022 10:03
|
|
