|
Frijolero posted:THERE WAS NO "HACK" A distinction without a difference. It doesn't matter if they exploited some code or human stupidity, they got access to information that they weren't supposed to have. And how can you possibly not interpret it as an attempt to hurt the Democrats politically? It was, in fact, exactly how it was used. Flip Yr Wig fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Feb 27, 2017 |
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 01:37 |
|
|
And if something bad does happen under your organization, you clearly make an example of it and make affirmative changes to show that it will not happen instead of a lukewarm response because it is more pragmatically convenient and helps your chances of winning/is the path of least resistance. Failing to do so can lead to a toxic, corrupt culture developing within that organization. Rodatose fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Feb 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
The thing is, if it was an attack on the Democratic Party then the solipsistic model of politics where everything is about the need to send Obama and Hillary down the memory hole to be incinerated is faulty, and that would force people to stop focusing on assigning blame.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:And if something bad does happen under your organization, you clearly make an example of it and make affirmative changes to show that it will not happen instead of a lukewarm response because it is more pragmatically convenient and helps your chances of winning/is the path of least resistance. Okay, so if someone offers a bad idea you publicly fire them and blacklist them. Or if someone writes an email that can be photoshopped easily or taken out of context, bam! Fired.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:the key to not getting right wing sources to depress left turnout by saying things like "hillary's campaign helped start birtherism" is for democrats to not engage in that sort of thing in the first place Ok done. I have used a magical time machine to make sure that Hillary's Campaign had nothing to do with Birtherism. Whoops it looks like nothing changed and you're still here parroting that lie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:THERE WAS NO "HACK" It was actually a coordinated series of phishing emails sent to various DNC staffers, combined with hacking attempts of the NSA and a general series of incompetent blunders of both the DNC and FBI, which knew of the hacks in 2015 and unsuccessfully attempted to warn the DNC. The ineffective cybersecurity of modern American institutions in general is deeply worrying and a more competent organization might've been more resistant, but state actors in general have the resources and manpower to push through any non-intelligence agency grade defenses as it is. Edit: The initial attack the FBI identified was also a direct hack, not from a phishing email, and is believed to originate with the same group that tried to hack various other governmental systems around the same time. Lightning Knight fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Feb 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
The Ender posted:...So, losing traditionally safe Democratic states like Michigan & Pennsylvania, that isn't a total rear end kicking, somehow? It doesn't make any sense to call 2012 a shameful near-loss and then call 2016 an unambiguous rear end kicking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
Another example is the suppression of the haitian minimum wage increase in haiti under the clinton state department. If this is just an isolated incident by bad apples, the state department under hillary should have sent a message by committing to fixing the mistake or pressing for some conciliatory worker-beneficial policy in haiti that could be used to say "we do care." Instead, when that doesn't happen, and the response is "the needs of business are too complicated for people like you to understand," then I think that has a downstream effect domestically when people don't take talk about that candidate supporting fight for fifteen as sincere.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Okay, so if someone offers a bad idea you publicly fire them and blacklist them. Or if someone writes an email that can be photoshopped easily or taken out of context, bam! Fired. are you asserting the leaked emails were fabricated?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:It's not peculiar to progressive policy but it's a unique issue for progressives because of the specific nature of how it manifests and the reasons why people don't get on board for certain progressive policy. The more I've worked with local campaigns (in provincial & federal Canadian politics), the more I've noticed this really terrible problem: the more vulnerable & beaten-down a household is, and thus in need of social programs to stay afloat, the more likely they are to just not give a poo poo about policy and side with whatever political body seems most hateful & nasty because they are embittered by their circumstances (and fair enough). Our riding candidate was just last week at the door with an unemployed fellow doing odd jobs to make ends meet, with no reported / taxed income... and he was completely opposed to increased taxes to create more comprehensive welfare & spur small business start-ups. Our worst canvasses are in really low income communities, even though such communities would be the ones to most benefit from a social safety net. :| The 1 percenters know exactly what they want and vote for it, while the really downtrodden are so angry that essentially vote to continue transferring what little they have to the 1 percenters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:It doesn't make any sense to call 2012 a shameful near-loss and then call 2016 an unambiguous rear end kicking. Considering the disastrous consequences of Republican rule I'd say that's a fair assessment
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:Ok done. I have used a magical time machine to make sure that Hillary's Campaign had nothing to do with Birtherism. Whoops it looks like nothing changed and you're still here parroting that lie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
I think it would be a good idea for the democratic nominee to not go on stage and proclaim Henry loving Kissinger her idol.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:are you asserting the leaked emails were fabricated? No, I am saying that the absolutist approach being demanded is bad in a variety of ways, such as being vulnerable to fabrication. Part of this is because it is being designed to satisfy conspiracy theorists, who cannot actually be satisfied.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
TheRat posted:I think it would be a good idea for the democratic nominee to not go on stage and proclaim Henry loving Kissinger her idol. Why? The average person doesn't care, so it's orthogonal to populism.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Why? The average person doesn't care, so it's orthogonal to populism. Because if you want idealistic young people to vote for you, you probably don't want to idolise a genocidal war criminal thundercunt.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Why? The average person doesn't care, so it's orthogonal to populism. The average Democratic voter does, though
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:are you asserting the leaked emails were fabricated? I wish people wouldn't quote effectronica so I don't have to see their replies like that one
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
I'm gonna take the side of "gently caress Henry Kissinger, it was a massive mistake to associate with him in any way." That's such a low hanging gimme fruit, to be like "nah, let's avoid bringing up this poo poo rear end in a top hat from decades ago in any way."
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Why [not praise Kissinger]? The average person doesn't care, so it's orthogonal to populism. The average person doesn't care, so why needlessly associate yourself with a war criminal?? Rodatose posted:I wish people wouldn't quote effectronica so I don't have to see their replies like that one here's a good one for ya.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Considering the disastrous consequences of Republican rule I'd say that's a fair assessment No, it's confusing the margin of victory with the consequences. If all that matters is republicans lose then 2012 was a glorious victory because it doesn't matter how close some of the swing states were.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
TheRat posted:Because if you want idealistic young people to vote for you, you probably don't want to idolise a genocidal war criminal thundercunt. I think if welcoming Kissinger gets people who use c*** as an insult to not vote, that's good because they're misogynists or British, neither of whom should be voting. Now, if you're willing to admit that populism isn't all that and a bag of chips, that's an important step forward negated by your use of misogynistic insults on a constant basis.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I think if welcoming Kissinger gets people who use c*** as an insult to not vote, that's good because they're misogynists or British, neither of whom should be voting. Now, if you're willing to admit that populism isn't all that and a bag of chips, that's an important step forward negated by your use of misogynistic insults on a constant basis. yeah, if we learned anything, it's that the democratic party can afford to tell people "we don't want your vote."
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
Organizational accountability? what do you mean hold the department accountable for shooting an african american child holding a toy? you're discounting all the good work they do. where do we stop from there if we fire a police officer? soon you'll be suggesting that we put all cop's in work camps...
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:The average person doesn't care, so why needlessly associate yourself with a war criminal?? Well, it pissing off people who wear white hoods when they go out at night might be worth the moral stain of doing so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:I think if welcoming Kissinger gets people who use c*** as an insult to not vote, that's good because they're misogynists or British, neither of whom should be voting. Now, if you're willing to admit that populism isn't all that and a bag of chips, that's an important step forward negated by your use of misogynistic insults on a constant basis. You think saying 'oval office' is more offensive than praising Henry Kissinger.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:No, it's confusing the margin of victory with the consequences. If all that matters is republicans lose then 2012 was a glorious victory because it doesn't matter how close some of the swing states were. Except all that matters is not just that Republicans lose the presidency, but also state governments and congressional seats, and the failure of the Democratic Party to recognize that their post-2008 strategy was not producing gains in Congress or state governments was quite bad. You might disagree on what strategy is needed to produce more Democratic governance in more places but I don't think it's up for debate that at present the Democratic Party is massively weaker than it's been in a very long time and that something must be done about that before we're eaten alive by fascist Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:The average Democratic voter does, though No loving way, if voters were that attuned to policy then Hillary would have won in a landslide and Democrats wouldn't have a messaging problem
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:It doesn't make any sense to call 2012 a shameful near-loss and then call 2016 an unambiguous rear end kicking. I was referring to the stretch of political disasters under Obama, not simply the election he did win. You got bodied. I don't really care who you run; the right wing in America has gone to crazytown, so you need to actually be able to beat them, and your current strat isn't working. You're basically just that kid feeding mid lane, unable to adapt to the fact the one trick that scored you first blood a long time ago ain't working anymore. You can learn from that or just get snarky in /all chat and blame poor game design & bad bans.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
No Butt Stuff posted:yeah, if we learned anything, it's that the democratic party can afford to tell people "we don't want your vote." So the Democratic Party should abandon women and focus on misogynist men, in the belief that they can convincingly hate women more than Republicans do. Turns out you don't need aliens for the events of The Screwfly Solution to happen, just letting Bernie voters decide policy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
TheRat posted:Because if you want idealistic young people to vote for you, you probably don't want to idolise a genocidal war criminal thundercunt. But enough about Winston Churchill.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
The Ender posted:I was referring to the stretch of political disasters under Obama, not simply the election he did win. You got bodied. I don't really care who you run; the right wing in America has gone to crazytown, so you need to actually be able to beat them, and your current strat isn't working. You're basically just that kid feeding mid lane, unable to adapt to the fact the one trick that scored you first blood a long time ago ain't working anymore.  I appreciate this post. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:But enough about Winston Churchill. Yes. More than enough.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:So the Democratic Party should abandon women and focus on misogynist men, in the belief that they can convincingly hate women more than Republicans do. Turns out you don't need aliens for the events of The Screwfly Solution to happen, just letting Bernie voters decide policy. yes it's clearly either/or.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
So centrists really like Henry Kissinger? I guess that makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:You think saying 'oval office' is more offensive than praising Henry Kissinger. It is. It's possible to admire Kissinger in the way you'd admire Richelieu or Talleyrand or Pope Alexander, but it's not possible to use c*** without being a misogynist or a Brit or a loving idiot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
No Butt Stuff posted:yes it's clearly either/or. It is. You either are anti-women or you are not. There is no way to be both simultaneously so you can attract and welcome he-man woman-haters without becoming unashamedly evil.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:It is. It's possible to admire Kissinger in the way you'd admire Richelieu or Talleyrand or Pope Alexander, but it's not possible to use c*** without being a misogynist or a Brit or a loving idiot. Can't say I'm surprised, but I will say I'm disappointed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:It is. It's possible to admire Kissinger in the way you'd admire Richelieu or Talleyrand or Pope Alexander, but it's not possible to use c*** without being a misogynist or a Brit or a loving idiot. hrm. if someone held a gun to a woman's head and said if you didn't say the word 'oval office' he'd pull the trigger, would it be possible to say it without being a misogynist? JeffersonClay posted:But enough about Winston Churchill. I agree?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 01:37 |
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:It is. You either are anti-women or you are not. There is no way to be both simultaneously so you can attract and welcome he-man woman-haters without becoming unashamedly evil. You are either for imperialism or you aren't B5. oval office is just a word. Kissinger is a man complicit in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:47
|
|