|
Classic Comrade posted:
maybe clay pell will come back
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2016 04:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 16:04 |
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:My bog standard democratic congressman is facing a primary challenge from a hyper-corporate candidate dressing himself in the trappings of a movement candidate. I'll post more about it ITT later assuming that's the sort of thing that belongs here (no real progressive candidates involved but still a Dem primary race). so your congressman is mike honda
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
mods rename this thread Gallery of Failure
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
 this is my favorite progressive, chicago mayor rahm emanuel. he's for affordable healthcare, good schools, and he has worked very hard over his life to elect progressives all over this country. i hope everyone will donate money to re-elect him for a 3rd term
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2016 05:44
|
|
|
Breadallelogram posted:Anyway there's a race for one of Iowa's US Senate seats this year. Tom Fiegen endorsed Bernie and is running for the D nomination but it's almost certainly going to Rob Hogg who stayed "neutral" for the pres primary and doesn't seem terrible. patty judge is probably going to win now, actually. imo hogg is better than judge and i will vote for him instead, but dscc is all up judge's butt. tom fiegen is loving horrible. he isn't really progressive, he just latched on to bernie. he has a pro-life background (which he plays down these days) and literally has been unable to say anything except sexist comments since his wife left him years ago. like in 2010 when he not-so-subtly accused roxanne conlin of having an affair with a lobbyist in the middle of a debate ("she's standing closer to the lobbyist in this photo than her husband..") or when he can't help but suggest that joni ernst won in 2014 because the election was a "beauty contest." he literally personally comments on articles on the des moines register website about rob hogg where he just calls him a corporate shill. and if you've ever seen him speak, he never loving shuts up about gmos and other bullshit. there is no candidate i hate more than tom fiegen.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
StrangeAeon posted:Fuckin' A, this is exactly what I wanted to exist. We need to keep this up-to-date at all times. beyond the earlier stuff here about tom fiegen, gary kroeger actually withdrew from the us house race. he's now running for the iowa house in district 60.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
C-SPAN Caller posted:She's not getting millenials. http://iop.harvard.edu/iop-now/harvard-iop-spring-2016-poll
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
legislating is difficult. getting a bunch of progressives in office who don't know how to legislate would lead to bad policies that discredit the left. i mean i'm cool with replacing moderates with progressives in safe districts, but replacing the whole congress with loving randoms is not only unachievable but also a terrible idea in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:Thanks for you are input, Rahm. sorry but brand new congress is dumb as hell. the more measured approach by groups like pccc actually works and isn't a dumb blunt statement about replacing solid progressives like nancy pelosi with whacktivists.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
Mr. Horrible posted:If I read it right then they're only talking about replacing people who aren't on board with progressive policies. So Concern Trollizen is, once again, concern trolling.  wrong
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
yeah so like 2 people in congress have endorsed bernie, in a "movement" made up explicitly of bernie volunteers and former staff, so how many do you think are considered "on board"?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:As I said, the value in this thing is developing an infrastructure for identification, vetting and running of progressive candidates into the future, which is one of their stated goals. THIS ALREADY EXISTS
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:bagl if you actually believe this what the hell do you think pccc and dfa are, exactly? this is literally the purpose of their organizations. Concerned Citizen has issued a correction as of 20:01 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:Okay great. What are you upset about again? the fact that you (and bnc) have literally no idea how difficult it is to recruit even one decent candidate, much less 400, nor that what you want has literally existed for over a decade except here with a flavor that extols the same gingrich-flavored citizen legislator horse poo poo that wrecked the california statehouse in 1990
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:Emphasis mine. yeah the group that endorsed zephyr teachout and actively works to break up the big banks and advocate for singlepayer is just too darn centrist.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:Like seriously, what is it you're so upset about? i'm not upset, it's just really half-baked and probably more self-destructive than anything. pccc and dfa spend tons of time and money recruiting progressives. and not just at congress, they run candidate trainings to find people to run at all levels then leverage their networks to get them money. and dfa has a grassroots activist network in many parts of the country, who they also invest in training so they can be more effective at getting people elected. they're both good organizations, i don't see what purpose bnc serves because i think they have no idea how difficult it is find people who are progressive, presentable (i.e. not insane), and also able to stop working and campaign full time for a position they aren't likely to win. i mean, the dccc is far better funded and has much larger professional staff and have trouble recruiting enough people for just the handful of competitive seats.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:I don't think Concerned Citizen is a gimmick. you don't need to be an expert at politics to see that congress being dominated by right-wing republicans isn't solved by primarying democrats that are deemed too moderate by whatever dumb standard people invent. and you don't need to be a historian to go back as far as 2010 and see how progressive fixations with defeating blanche lincoln, arlen spector, and joe lieberman ended up consuming scarce time and money while letting actual progressives like russ feingold go down in flames, and on top of that it totally failed in actually electing a single person to congress. the whole approach of bnc is fundamentally flawed.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
Woozy posted:you do actually need to know at least one thing about politics to understand that congress being dominated by right-wing republicans is not actually as big of problem as congress being dominated by right-wing democrats yeah because there's just tons of right wing legislation sailing through congress with democratic votes? what the hell are you talking about?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
Lord of Pie posted:Blanche Lincoln got crushed so bad, she wasn't going to win even if she hadn't gotten primaried. no poo poo. i loving hated blanche lincoln, but replacing a doomed center-right senator with a doomed centrist senator was a massive waste of time and money that accomplished nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
Woozy posted:what? yes there actually is. lol
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:I can't figure out what your position is. What do you suggest be done? if they had spent more time on, say, defending russ feingold and less on democrat fantasy revenge leagues they would have accomplished a lot more.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Woozy posted:who is the "they" in this statement and what is the "more" "they" are national progressive groups like moveon.org that invested tons of money and energy into defeating incumbent democratic senators, and "more" is preventing the loss of a mountain of progressive house and senate seats in 2010.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
Classic Comrade posted:ya i know in RI for example there's a buttload of stuff you have to do and a buttload of deadlines to remember in order to run for stuff it's actually not that tough in RI. you just need a campaign treasurer (who can be a volunteer that isn't an idiot), a campaign bank account, and you have to file a statement of organization and statement of candidacy with the board of canvassers. these are very short documents. then you need a trivial number of signatures to get on the ballot, usually small enough that you can get them in an afternoon just standing in front of a whole foods with a clipboard. if todd giroux can do it, anyone can.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
sheep-dodger posted:In a state with a registration system as bad as New York's, yes it is you dumb gently caress. first: lol @ this thread once against becoming the bernie sanders thread even if on principle i think that primaries should be open, calling it "voter suppression" is dumb. forcing voters to get an id, which can pose financial and logistical hurdles to some people, is voter suppression. checking the correct box on your voter registration, on a form that clearly spells out that you must be a member of a political party in order to vote in its primary, is quite possibly the most easily overcome obstacle to voting ever created.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
Lord of Pie posted:Please do not refer to the most prominent progressive running in the progressive thread, it is triggering you mean hillary clinton??
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
look i just feel like placing closed primaries in the same category as poll taxes and literacy tests is absurd. it literally tells you, right next to the party boxes, that you need to enroll with the party to vote in their primary. you have to actively choose to not vote in the primary. again, i think open primaries are better but this is hardly mt. everest here.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
did you know: mattiello supposedly threatened to sink raimondo's election bid in the general if she ran ads supporting gun control. mattiello probably would have preferred a republican governor.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2016 14:18
|
|
|
Classic Comrade posted:so you're another CC, are you another rhode islander too? former RIer. it's essentially a one party state, but RI is easily the most conservative state in new england. i think the state is eventually due for a political re-alignment to bring it more in line with the ideology of the rest of the nation. remember that gay marriage only barely passed through legislature, and only because the few gop assembly members voted unanimously for it while democrats were split. when the firefighters endorsed buddy cianci, they sent out mail pieces attacking elorza for wanting to teach atheism in schools. it's a hilarious state. i think the biggest issue in ri is the state is just outright corrupt as hell and the public unions, except for the teachers, are incredibly shortsighted. like if fung had won in 2014 i'm pretty certain it would be a right-to-work state now, but the firefighters and police either don't see it coming or don't care. it's actually pretty funny that gina raimondo is easily the most progressive governor that state has ever had. i think her basic viewpoint is enthralled to the cult of mba-type bullshit, though.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
Fast Luck posted:saw this posted but can't find the discussion, if any we talked about it in the dem thread but basically it's not that state parties are afraid of being punished or something. the structure is setup to basically facilitate very large donations to the dnc. the dnc is using that money to invest in field (voter turnout) programs in targeted competitive races. the state parties knew what they were signing up for when they did this. as i've mentioned before, state parties typically serve more logistical roles than actually campaigning, so sending the money to state parties doesn't actually make that much sense as they won't be able to really use it effectively.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
Fast Luck posted:so why are they sending the money to the state parties to start with, then (before having the state parties send an identical amount of money back)? that's just how the money laundering operation works, i guess? it's essentially a giant hole in campaign finance laws opened by scotus. there used to be a maximum to the amount you could donate to all federal accounts combined in a single year. scotus overturned that maximum, although they kept the contribution caps to a given committee. however, the maximums only apply to individual donors - state party committees can send an unlimited amount of money to the national party. so the scheme is basically people donate to the victory fund. the first $2700 of any individual donation goes to hfa, the next $33,400 goes to the dnc, and the remainder is split up among the state parties. since the parties are allowed to transfer money back to the dnc, it means those additional donations can be sent back to the national party to reinvest into targeted races. for the state parties, there's really no loss here. most of these donors were not going to give them money anyway, so they lose nothing and they just signed up to help the dnc fundraise.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
Fast Luck posted:Yeah so that all makes it sound like they're (the state parties) just a front for money laundering and evading campaign finance laws. Especially if equal payments are going back to the DNC from the state parties the same day they receive the money, that's pretty much just prima facie what that is, and they're at best circumventing the law but to any common sense minded person (as opposed to a weasel conditioned to examine technicalities) they're outright breaking it. Like, most "progressive" people would agree that big money needs to be taken out of politics and here the "progressive" Hillary Clinton and "progressive" Democratic party are in fact skirting campaign finance laws to get even more money in. Gross well it's not really "evading" campaign finance laws. the total amount of money in the democratic party doesn't change. the only thing that changes is where that money goes. this scheme could work just as easily without the committee at all, the donors could just write 5 or 6 checks instead of 1.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
Fiction posted:Are all the Bernie posters this boring and unfunny many are i appreciate the multiple posters who felt the need to give mr. horrible a mid-thread morale boost he was positively exasperated arguing over dumb poo poo with obdicut
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Classic Comrade posted:AHAHAHAHA 2018 can't come soon enough that's a good program though, it's not like it's a goldman sachs branch or something. ri really needs it.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:Yeah I'm pretty sure the issue was the forcing out of the daycare. yeah i mean there's limited space, i am obviously not a spokesperson for ccri but obviously they thought moving the daycare wasn't a big deal for the students who use it or the daycare itself. but ri desperately needs all the investment it can get, and the goldman program isn't really a money making activity. i don't really think it deserves criticism.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:HillaryDefenseForce.txt it doesn't really have anything to do with hillary
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 03:34
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:But what is Bernie doing for downticket races? nothing
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2016 07:38
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTZH0kVoPXM that amendment was rejected but the full platform draft that was approved includes $15/h minimum wage
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 16:04 |
|
|
dean was always a moderate democrat
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 18:37
|
|