|
Coolness Averted posted:The dems have never -publicly at least- admitted how uniquely dogshit Hillary was, especially in that moment. The closest we ever saw was sheepdogs like Robert Reich expressing concern in the lead up to the GE about how important it was for her to make concessions to the Bernie campaign to lure in nonvoters. hillary is still the most qualified candidate of all time and it was racist, sexist bernie bros who highfived each other while they voted for donald trump on bernie's direct orders that cost hillary the election
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 20:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 18:15 |
|
|
Teriyaki Hairpiece posted:Dems in 2017 - "Well obviously, Hillary lost because she was a loving terrible candidate. Anybody else would've won! It's all so clear in hindsight, we'll never make that mistake again" I dunno what dimension you came from but Hillary lost because of Russia and Putin
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 20:57
|
|
|
Tiktok won't get banned until after the election so that'll be their excuse this time.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 21:17
|
|
|
Morbus posted:I dunno what dimension you came from but Hillary lost because of Russia and Putin And the email drop, but yes the official line is that she was failed
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 21:19
|
|
|
Morbus posted:I dunno what dimension you came from but Hillary lost because of Russia and Putin And Bernie Bros
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 21:39
|
|
|
Does Hillary still own the DNC or did she sell it off for chump change at some point in the last 8 years?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 21:39
|
|
|
Lol literally Trump tariffs evil Biden tariffs good
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 21:47
|
|
|
bedpan posted:hillary is still the most qualified candidate of all time and it was racist, sexist bernie bros who highfived each other while they voted for donald trump on bernie's direct orders that cost hillary the election yep. it kicked rear end and was fun to do, also
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 21:48
|
|
|
it doesn't matter, the dnc isn't and never was an institution that would allow a candidate that threatened the party's donors with capital
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 21:48
|
|
|
Yeah the only proof you need of that is 2020. I'm almost 50 years old and I have never seen presidential candidates of either party collude in such a fashion to specifically undercut one candidate. Republicans didn't even do that to Trump, even though it was pretty obvious all the other nominees despised him from the get-go. The great irony is that Sanders is not some communist hell-bent on destroying capital. He's a capitalist himself who just wants to adjust the knobs a little in favor of workers, in many cases back to where they were in the loving 1980s. But he gets treated like Trotsky lol, at least he did until he gave up after biden's win. FLIPADELPHIA has issued a correction as of 21:59 on May 16, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 21:57
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:Yeah the only proof you need of that is 2020. I'm almost 50 years old and I have never seen presidential candidates of either party collude in such a fashion to specifically undercut one candidate. Republicans didn't even do that to Trump, even though it was pretty obvious all the other nominees despised him from the get-go. The republican primaries aren't rigged, OP
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 21:59
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure they're trying to make it impossible for that to happen again. But at least they were smart enough to realize a red team win is a red team win, and not blow it up because it was Jeb!'s turn
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 23:33
|
|
|
Javid posted:I'm pretty sure they're trying to make it impossible for that to happen again. But at least they were smart enough to realize a red team win is a red team win, and not blow it up because it was Jeb!'s turn I'm actually pretty sure they didn't. It was talked about but ultimately I think they came down on the side of actually being a democratic institution. As an actual political party with a project they do have a reason to accurately represent their constituents in a way the dems simply don't.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2024 23:38
|
|
|
it is, in fact, still Her Turn
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 00:10
|
|
|
this is shaping up to be the least surprising loss since the original Bush
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 02:04
|
|
|
ex post facho posted:lol there's always a tweet this is a weirdly classist tweet
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 02:20
|
|
|
Nichael posted:this is a weirdly classist tweet he's a democrat op
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 02:32
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:this is shaping up to be the least surprising loss since the original Bush Reading this I thought I'd look up to see what the popular vote split was since I knew Clinton won with 43% (Ended up being 43/37/19) The real shocker though was seeing the electoral map and checking out just how many places the democrats have abandoned in 30 years: 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 02:48
|
|
|
As much as I hate corporate Democrats, I think it's wrong to accuse them of abandoning places like Montana and Ohio. Living in Oklahoma myself, any dem attempt to better the lives of working-class people doesn't make any inroads with the fascists here. Our state officials regularly turn away federal money that would objectively make our lives better, purely out of spite. Our state superintendent turned away millions of dollars in educational grants from the federal government just to show how fascist he is. These rural chud states are not gettable by the Dems. Doesn't mean they shouldn't try, but these people would rather crawl over broken glass than vote for liberals, even if that means sabotaging their own lives and the lives of their kids.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 02:58
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:As much as I hate corporate Democrats, I think it's wrong to accuse them of abandoning places like Montana and Ohio. Living in Oklahoma myself, any dem attempt to better the lives of working-class people doesn't make any inroads with the fascists here. Our state officials regularly turn away federal money that would objectively make our lives better, purely out of spite. Our state superintendent turned away millions of dollars in educational grants from the federal government just to show how fascist he is. And yet the people there were consistently voting democrat within both of our lifetimes. Obviously that cuts both ways. This map has Appalachia still leaning democratic as it had for a century at this point and what they had to show for doing so was to be one of the most poor and least invested-in regions of the country. Voting democrat obviously had no utility or effect on material conditions for them and I'd wager that's true for all of the places they've abandoned. I do hear what you're saying, that if you have a value system and politic that simply doesn't speak to people of a region then you probably aren't going to perform well there but the fact of the matter is that liberals in general and democrats in particular don't believe anything. They have no values, they have no firm beliefs, they have no political project, and they definitely don't have anything they want to accomplish. The reason they abandoned these areas isn't because their worldview doesn't match the people of that region, it's because they exist solely to fundraise and these regions are poor. It sounds like you've fallen for liberal messaging where the dems would just love to have Oklahomans in the party but gosh they're so darned racist and so stupid they just wouldn't fit in so I guess there's no reason to talk to them. But that's not the reason they don't talk to you. They don't talk to you because you have nothing you can give to them and they definitely aren't interested in giving anything to you.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 05:41
|
|
|
There’s also the fact that the electoral college assigning one color to each state as a whole is extremely reductive
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 06:01
|
|
|
The electoral maps of 1960 and 1964 are essentially inverted and it's not because Democrats abandoned poor areas. The south and rural west did not embrace fascism because of liberals. They embraced it because they are bigoted reactionaries who care about "border security" far more than healthcare and education. Lee Atwater admitted the whole thing in 1983 and they've just been shedding pretenses since then. Democrats helping the poor is exactly why a huge chunk of Americans initially switched parties- because minorities are among the poor and the thought of a black person getting benefits from the government is the one thing that all Republicans share a common hatred of. Yes the Democrats since Clinton have done a lovely job promoting the general welfare but let's not pretend that increased entitlements would ever win Montana back. And Montana is relatively wealthy, or at least has pockets of ultra concentrated wealth.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 06:08
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:The electoral maps of 1960 and 1964 are essentially inverted and it's not because Democrats abandoned poor areas. The south and rural west did not embrace fascism because of liberals. They embraced it because they are bigoted reactionaries who care about "border security" far more than healthcare and education. Lee Atwater admitted the whole thing in 1983 and they've just been shedding pretenses since then. If you bothered to craft a specialised method for each electorate you could win them back. Special election is not real no matter how hard you want to argue that some states are just inherently bigoted. Socialism is broadly popular among the middle and lower classes as long as you break it up into tasty chunks and provide it a la carte instead of providing a socialism set menu. The problem is the democrats actively hate and desire to impoverish workers so they will never offer a platform that would appeal to what used to be a safe voting block of manual trades.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 08:09
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:As much as I hate corporate Democrats, I think it's wrong to accuse them of abandoning places like Montana and Ohio. Living in Oklahoma myself, any dem attempt to better the lives of working-class people doesn't make any inroads with the fascists here. Our state officials regularly turn away federal money that would objectively make our lives better, purely out of spite. Our state superintendent turned away millions of dollars in educational grants from the federal government just to show how fascist he is. If only these dang CHUDS around me would quit personally holding us back from the good works of the Democrats, my lovely state could be thriving and solving systemic poverty just as effectively as California
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 09:04
|
|
|
cagliostr0 posted:If you bothered to craft a specialised method for each electorate you could win them back. Special election is not real no matter how hard you want to argue that some states are just inherently bigoted. Socialism is broadly popular among the middle and lower classes as long as you break it up into tasty chunks and provide it a la carte instead of providing a socialism set menu. The problem is the democrats actively hate and desire to impoverish workers so they will never offer a platform that would appeal to what used to be a safe voting block of manual trades. Red state parties also become safe sinecures for the most utterly useless party failchildren and grifters who are guaranteed to never have to actually be in charge of anything important, see Florida Dems. Although blue state parties also become sinecures for failchildren for the same reason.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 09:34
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:The electoral maps of 1960 and 1964 are essentially inverted and it's not because Democrats abandoned poor areas. The south and rural west did not embrace fascism because of liberals. They embraced it because they are bigoted reactionaries who care about "border security" far more than healthcare and education. Lee Atwater admitted the whole thing in 1983 and they've just been shedding pretenses since then. The maps post-1968 are what they are because of the Southern Strategy and while the merger of reactionaries to business interests undeniably formed the base of the modern GOP, that had nothing to do with the democrats' abandonment of labor. The working class (minus the white reactionaries more motivated by culture than material conditions) is still a coalition capable of winning elections provided you actually do things for them. In fact the map in question is the last point before the democrats completely turned their back on minorities and the working class under Clinton. After this election no one could reasonably claim that the democrats represent anyone except well-off urbanites, and the subsequent maps show this. You seem to be saying that THIS democrat party could not win Montana (or OH, WV, KY, TN, MO, AR, or LA) back, and that's true, but my point is that THIS party is not THAT party from 1992. Nothing remains of that party and the party that exists today can't do anything to appeal to anyone, much less the states lost on this map, because this party cannot address material conditions and only exists to lose culture war battles in the very states we're talking about.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 11:22
|
|
|
The Dems basically abandoned material issues at the end of the Cold War and resolved to get by entirely on lip service because it's the end of history and they've already won, the rest is cashing in.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 12:24
|
|
|
All of your points are valid but I think you're missing my main point, which is that even if Dems pivoted to be more pro labor (lol) it wouldn't win back states that they were able to get 30 years ago. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it or try, and I'm also not saying the democratic party isn't full of useless shitheads, I'm saying that even their good overtures don't result in winning over chud voters and often (very often in the case of OK) those overtures are actively rejected even when there is no downside to accepting them. Performative rejection of no-strings-attached federal grants is something Republican politicians now regularly do as a means to win primaries and gain street cred for runs at higher office. No amount of "yes but Dems are terrible" (which is true!) will change the nature of the electorate, which is generationally brain poisoned by a heady combination of natural American contrarianism, loss of racially-based social privileges, and weaponized fascist media. FLIPADELPHIA has issued a correction as of 13:12 on May 17, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 13:08
|
|
|
Florida used to be a swing state. It can go one way, and it can go the other. The problem is Democrats institutionally are unwilling and incapable to actually try. Even Blue Texas is entirely cockamamie schemes without the slightest actual thought or useful effort.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 13:20
|
|
|
Florida also used to be one of the most affordable places to retire. This attracted a lot of older people, who tend to have lovely politics. Now it's extremely expensive so you have all of these lovely old assholes sitting on property with jumped up land values. It's just my opinion but I don't think that's made the state more receptive to progressive policy.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 13:29
|
|
|
the dems in FL completely abandoned any actual fight just this year they didnt even do a primary (lol) and in turn ceded downballot stuff like multiple counties/mayors to the gop these past few months these were all in dem strongholds they're entirely worthless and in many cases run almost identical freaks to the gop (they do however rail against 3rd parties like the greens)
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 13:55
|
|
|
bedpan posted:hillary is still the most qualified candidate of all time and it was racist, sexist bernie bros who highfived each other while they voted for donald trump on bernie's direct orders that cost hillary the election this except it was two decades of rwm convincing everyone she’s a bitch
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 14:02
|
|
|
"we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas!" - the democrats
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 14:03
|
|
|
it would be cool if we had a system where the democrats lose and the republicans also dont win imo
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 14:04
|
|
|
a fatguy baldspot posted:this except it was two decades of rwm convincing everyone she’s a bitch innocent sister Hillary never did anything to convince people she's bad, it was all a vast right wing conspiracy
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 14:04
|
|
|
the milk machine posted:innocent sister Hillary never did anything to convince people she's bad, it was all a vast right wing conspiracy sure man whatever
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 14:05
|
|
|
a fatguy baldspot posted:it would be cool if we had a system where the democrats lose and the republicans also dont win imo thats authoritarianism putin lover
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 14:06
|
|
|
like she’s probably actually a bitch irl. but would rather that plus competence in our highest ruling echelon rather than the senile pedo or the senile racist
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 14:06
|
|
|
yeah Hillary is a great and gifted leader. she would be leading us to prosperity if we had only listened to her and realized it was her turn
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 14:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 18:15 |
|
|
it was extremely rude for the Bernie bros to force Hillary to spend her life doing stuff that made people hate her. and then to top it off by making her forget to campaign in swing states? the misogyny is disgusting.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2024 14:17
|
|