Progressive Peanut Gallery: I plan to transform my town into a socialist utopia

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > Progressive Peanut Gallery: I plan to transform my town into a socialist utopia

«‹›8 »

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Important information for progressives in the upcoming elections!

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 00:58

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 22, 2024 10:05

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Goetta posted:

What is the background the organization that tries to pick out progressive candidates that I can't remember the name of? Grassroots something?

Also it would be cool if this thread didn't turn into another gimmick thunderdome

Grassroots Select

https://www.reddit.com/r/grassrootsselect

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MZGzbSWESE8t18GGzrgc2FfL0b5tz-vmNf-F_-w5yN4/htmlview?sle=true#gid=0

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 01:01

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Lord of Pie posted:

Here's a spreadsheet if you like spreadsheets
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MZGzbSWESE8t18GGzrgc2FfL0b5tz-vmNf-F_-w5yN4/htmlview

Oh do you have the spreadsheet, now?

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 01:03

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

I imagine this thread will be more active as old Bernie posters trickle in and victims of The Culling^tm return from their 6 hours.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 01:05

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Modus Pwnens posted:

Come back when you have some yard signs, you loving amateur.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 01:05

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Classic Comrade posted:

he lost

but then again he's still mayor of braddock.... and he better run again.

Who won the primary, anyway?

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 01:06

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

http://www.philcornell4ussenate.org/

As someone that's always liked Patty Murray this feels really subversive. :ohdear:

But I hey, gotta break free from the establishment bonds. :unsmigghh:

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 01:12

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

NumberLast posted:

http://www.philcornell4ussenate.org/

As someone that's always liked Patty Murray this feels really subversive.

But I hey, gotta break free from the establishment bonds.

Wow this guy's platform is killer!

I'll be doing some digging for interviews, but the good people at GRS seem to have approved him after their vetting process.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 01:19

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

My Imaginary GF posted:

forum.somethingoffal.com

If you were actually running.

And you actually used this dead forum as your official site.

I would be too impressed to ever be annoyed by you again.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 01:20

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

busydelicious posted:

Yay for a new thread! Thank you, Comrade for setting this up. I was pretty bummed to see the Bernie thread gassed. In this new thread, will we still get to discuss some Bernman stuffs?

I gots my voting ballot in the mail (yuss!) for the Oregon primary and I need to go through the voting booklet to see what progressives I want to vote for. I'm sorta new to OR, so I'm not super familiar with any local candidates.

...is it still cool to also hail satan here? 'Cause, you know, hail satan.

Hey, friend!

This spreadsheet has some progressive candidates that come pre-vetted!

You can look and see if you do actually like their platforms, but they're verified as being staunch progressives!

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 01:24

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

I've given up on local politics, because I'm moving from this town never to return this summer and because it's essentially a company town. :shrug:

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 01:30

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Classic Comrade posted:

i would keep the bernie references short n sweet but i don't think they have to be completely absent. but i'm not a mod. so.

i would also keep the hailing satan short n sweet and not spammy.

I'm hoping to maintain the chillposting that was a hallmark of the Bernie thread.

That would be nice.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 01:30

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Uncle Wemus posted:

Anyone good in minnesota? Other than Keith Ellison

Um...Rick Nolan

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 02:00

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Fast Luck posted:

it will be funny when the "general election" thread created 2 months before party conventions sinks off the first page. Personally i am not interested in distinctions such as whether Hillary and her emails are the subject of an fbi probe or whether Hillary's state department and email server are the subject of said probe, so subsequently I don't have interest in much of this subforum, which may be the point.

Yeah not sure what's up with that.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 02:47

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Krampus Grewcock posted:

gently caress yeaaah.

Also, seriously, I leave you guys alone for a couple extra hours and the thread gets gassed? What gives?

What are your thoughts on Cornell?

He seems like a bit of a goober but his platform is rock solid.

I kind of doubt he'd be able to beat Murray, but I might vote for him. Every vote he gets could scare her left.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 02:49

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Re Concerned Citizen's posts:

Yikes

But also:

Mr. Horrible posted:

Hello, comrades! I don't know about you, but I'm ready to get hens and eat the rich at a local level.

To be honest, I think money is the biggest threat to progressivism, not identity politics. If anything, identity politics are often a tool used by money and its agents to divert discourse.

I was tempted to write up a big effortpost about ways we can use identity politics in our favor, but I'm worried that might be outside the scope of this thread... Are we talking only about individual candidates itt, or also general strategy?

This thread seems to be for general strategy as well as finer points so...Effortpost please!

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 04:56

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Quiet Feet posted:

My congressman is a Kennedy and isn't about to be primaried. He's supporting Clinton as a superdelegate which is lovely, but I suppose I could have it worse. I don't think the Republicans are even running a candidate against him this year.

I'm curious about town elections but I can't find any goddamn info anywhere. It's a town of about 45,000 so running for anything wouldn't be as easy as just putting my name on a ballot, and I'd sure as hell want to do more research before even considering.

You're gonna want to start going to locals.

I'm starting off small myself. Going to locals for the LD. They're looking for someone to run for state senate in two years - or so they said at the caucus - so now seems to be as good a time to start as any.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 04:59

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Classic Comrade posted:

hell yeah it is. it's pretty catch-all.

ideas/strategy are cool to talk about!!!

I mean, it's a peanut gallery.

Which means it's a place for progressives to talk about politics.

But it's in YCS, so best do so in the context of the current elections!

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 05:03

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Classic Comrade posted:

i was kind of surprised with how many bernie people voted for sestak instead, considering.

like... if ur already supporting a long shot, why balk at supporting another long shot?

Some people just legitimately don't like Fetterman.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 05:04

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Classic Comrade posted:

i gotchoo.

current elections can be the general framework of the thread

the speculative/strategy stuff is xtra

We're gonna take congress. :bernin:

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 05:05

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Quiet Feet posted:

I guess the Sanders campaign was backing Sestak? All I know about him was that supposedly he had a tendency to tell the DNC to gently caress off and let him do things his own way.

If that's the case, Fetterman's numbers say one of two things:

1) Fetterman has a lot of draw

2) Sanders endorsements aren't terribly strong

Honestly I lean towards the latter (though both are probably true).

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 05:07

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Classic Comrade posted:

i don't think he ever like super-openly endorsed sestak tho

like he never asked ppl to give him or anything

Did he not?

I seriously don't know!

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 05:24

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Concerned Citizen posted:

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

Nah he's apparently running in Minnesota now.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 06:33

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Concerned Citizen posted:

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.

Tom Fiegen did a reddit AMA where he talked about how we should annex Mexico. Like, in all seriousness.

I'm gonna try to find it.

Oh, he deleted it. You can either trust me (and my terrible memory) or not, but iirc the response here was that Mexican citizens should have the right to gain dual citizenship by "Swearing loyalty to the (US) constitution," and once enough of them do it opening up Mexican states for US statehood.

NumberLast has issued a correction as of 07:37 on Apr 29, 2016

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 07:30

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Mr. Horrible posted:

BIG DUMB POST INCOMING

When it comes to identity politics, I think one of the problems is that we are accepting the terms set forth by moderates and right-wing extremists. As an example, here's how one group of allies responded to Ted Cruz's comments wrt bathroom bills:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6ddblwBpvA

I don't mean to single these guys out, they're just the first ones I found with a handy bite-size clip of their coverage. But what are we actually getting here? Some head-shaking, some righteous indignation. Sometimes there's a bit of hand-wringing about how the LGBT community is being attacked so heavily by regressives. But what's missing?

1) Context. Did you know that there's a single law firm that has been pushing these bathroom bills? That many of these bills have language that is almost word-for-word identical to the text put out by this anti-gay organization? I'm trans and even I didn't know about this until ChickenArise posted the following URL to the trans megathread:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/alliance-defending-freedom-lobbies-anti-lgbt-bathroom-bills

So in other words, these are not legislatures independently choosing to pursue this issue. This is a coordinated attack on transgender people, carried out by an organization working from the shadows. An organization headed by a man who wrote a book called The Homosexual Agenda. So let's call them what they are: a deep-pocketed hate group that's interfering in the personal lives of minorities. This is an opportunity to showcase how unelected but moneyed interests work behind the scenes to shape our national discourse. That should never be accepted, and should be called out at every opportunity.

2) A refutation of false claims. Transgender women are the victims of sexual assault, not the perpetrators. In fact I've been unable to find a single case of a transgender woman sexually assaulting anyone, much less in a bathroom. But so far, I've only seen a single news organization highlight this point:

http://abc11.com/politics/transgender-sexual-assault-victim-says-shell-defy-hb2/1296062/

Even then, they gave McCrory a pass when he said this was a "new issue." That is a boldfaced lie. The first transgender American to publicly discuss their transition fought in World War 2, and garnered a fair bit of attention and media coverage in the 1950s:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Jorgensen

This is not a new phenomenon, but once again by failing to provide that context the news and even advocates are inadvertently giving legitimacy to their opponents. This issue is not "some people think you have to use the bathroom that matches your birth certificate because they think it will cut down on sexual assault," it's "a hate group is secretly workshopping its discriminatory legislation around to local and state governments to use as a wedge issue in a cynical attempt to get votes by pretending this is a strange new phenomenon, when in reality this issue is over 50 years old and should have been addressed a long time ago." And you can take it further from there: if we knew transgender people were a thing in the 50's, why didn't we start working on it? Why didn't they teach kids about gender dysphoria, so that we could identify the problem and get treatment before they killed themselves (something over 40% of all trans people attempt)? Why was this reality hidden from children growing up before the 21st century, and why did we as a society do nothing to address this very real issue?

How bathroom discrimination is discussed is part of a larger pattern in our national discourse, which is to keep falling for the Golden Mean fallacy. SMBC Theater had a pretty good parody video of this a few years ago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGArqoF0TpQ

Right now, both sides of the debate are usually a regressive social conservative and a moderate liberal. Neither party is interested in discussing the money angle, because they both want the status quo. This framing of the national discourse as a dialog between the socially left and right wings of social conservatives is, obviously, a false narrative. Which is why when we discuss identity politics issues, we have to keep hammering home how important the role of money is in all of our political issues. Off the top of my head, here are some ways in which money plays a part in bathroom bills:

1) Money in politics is not only about bribery. The organization pushing this legislation has a wide reach because they can buy the time and energy required to get it in everyone's hands. And unlike the other side - the HRC, UCLA, etc. - they're doing it while hiding from the public. Why isn't it mandatory for the origin of this legislation to be disclosed to the public? Well, because moneyed interests from out of state know it's bad PR to be caught with their hand in the cookie jar. And in a country where bribery is legal, it was bound to happen that parties other than industry lobbyists would start sneaking around with pre-written laws for power-hungry pols to crib from.

2) Trans people are already handicapped economically, making it hard to fight back. Trans people have some of the highest rates of unemployment and homelessness of any group in America. Given that there is no protection against discrimination for employment or housing in many parts of the country, that's to be expected. And since many health insurance companies won't pay for any of our approved treatments - we're talking thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars - we're on average poorer than even people with the same take-home pay that we get. Without the support of non-profits, we'd be hard-pressed to defend ourselves from a bunch of rich regressives.

3) The only pushback that has made a real difference so far is from the 1%. If it wasn't for large corporations and rich artists boycotting the state, North Carolina would only have a handful of protesters on their hands. McCrory and company have been blindsided because they assumed they'd be able to push the trannies around with impunity, but they weren't counting on the capital class to take a stand (they usually don't, after all). In a country where wealth is concentrated into the hands of a few, the concerns of those few are the only ones that are seriously considered. Whether you're for or against bathroom discrimination bills, that should give you pause.

tl;dr - show the receipts, expose them for the lying amoral hucksters they are, then bring it back to class war

(feel free to pick this apart and show me why I'm dumb and wrong, by the way)

Awesome and interesting post! I love learning about how much of a shithead I am and how I can be a better ally. :hfive:

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 07:32

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

empireofcrime posted:

gently caress you Reuters.

https://twitter.com/ReutersPolitics/status/726056978267648001

Only good comment on there is from the person with a Gravity Falls profile pic. Way to go, buddy. :hfive:

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 15:40

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

hemophilia posted:

The weird thing is it doesn't take very much to draw a line from banking hegemony to certain kinds of discrimination, like you know securing mortgages, or the housing crisis from you know 8 years ago having lots of minorities and non-minority but none the less low income families caught in the loving crossfire. It's really weird.

Banking hegemony leads to unscrupulous practices, which predate the habitually marginalized which (surprise!) tend to be racial minorities.

Two or three degrees of separation, depending on how you count it.

But the more important point is you shouldn't have to bring it 'back to racism.' Yes, institutional racism is a problem but using it as obfuscation to defend a practice that hurts a different group (and in this case one that tends to encompass the group used as obfuscation) isn't just wrong, it's pretty dumb.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 15:43

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

empireofcrime posted:

I don't appreciate all the lovely insinuations that goes into an article like that. A combination of people's disdain for Clinton and some degree of horseshoe theory nonsense(Trump and Sanders are practically the same person).

I have a friend that thinks people hate Trump because the media tells him to, and that the media hates him because they'll lose money if he wins (or something). I tell him about Trump's racist and violent rhetoric and all I get is "I don't believe that happened," which is pretty :cripes:

. But he also voted for Bernie.

Point is, there is crossover among people that are just generally anti-establishment while being fairly apolitical, like my friend there.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 15:46

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

hemophilia posted:

When this happened, nobody should have been lauding her because you can swat that horse-poo poo down with a soundbyte's worth of words. That's my main point. It's not complicated or convoluted, it's so offensive I can only assume people were blindsided by the audacity of it.

I just heard it, thought "That's stupid," and moved on with my day. I came back to people celebrating the comment and just :psyduck:

'd my way to bed.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 15:49

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

empireofcrime posted:

Sure, but like with the Bernie Bro thing it's painting all Sanders supporters with the same brush.

Oh, I know. It over-generalizes. What I found weirdest about the article is that it seems to be approaching the issue with the assumption that Bernie supporters will support Trump.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 15:51

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Classic Comrade posted:

@ fiegen

Fiegen is p bad, yeah.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 16:13

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Breadallelogram posted:

Grassley is probably going to win reelection anyway.

I'm sorry. I feel the same way about by terrible rep.

Dave Reichert!!! :argh:

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 16:17

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Goetta posted:

A big problem will be the need to weed out the actual crazies that both naturally tend to gravitate to fringe causes and have their crazy-fueled enthusiasm to put themselves out there to run for office and make public appearances and whatnot.

Yeeup.

Which is what kind of took me aback in a bad way when I saw Fiegen on that spreadsheet. Not as well-vetted as I had hoped...

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 16:18

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Classic Comrade posted:

maybe we should make a new/edited version of that list? supporting sanders does not equal being a progressive. for example donna edwards endorsed clinton but she seemed like a very cool and good candidate (who unfortunately lost).

I'm down to try it!

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 16:22

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

C-SPAN Caller posted:

Don't see why not, plus bernie too since you know, stuff he does matters for this movement.

Wait you wanna hail Bernie?

Neat.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 16:23

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

Woozy posted:

It's not weird at all. The voices making that exact argument were rapidly silenced and devoured by idiots shrieking about privilege. Like there's just no way to pretend anymore that left identitarian politics aren't fundamentally a project of reconfiguring existing power structures to be more "inclusive" without disrupting their basic purpose. For as long as I've been an activist the story was always "oh, we have to resist this sort of universalizing narrative about economic power because otherwise what's going to happen is we're going to reproduce various systems of oppression within a Marxist opposition that only sees class." But now more than ever its just obvious what that strategy actually amounts to: widening avenues for entry into the ruling class for women and minorities, so long as they'll agree to a basic neo liberal platform and work to diffuse and manage radical opposition within the communities they've been appointed to represent within the mainstream political discourse. It leads to Obama, basically.

"Equal rights for our community...'s affluent members to step on the necks of the poor."

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 16:26

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

hemophilia posted:

If you were to make a 'test' to identify good progressive candidates what kind of positive traits would define that term, and by what negative traits wouldyou idenitify 'crazies' and national socialists and poo poo like that

That's a fantastic question and I have no idea :ohdear:

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 16:26

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

My Imaginary GF posted:

How the gently caress you store solar power for night, you fuckwit? Nuclear is the only loving sustainable, viable, and actionable energy generation policy which advances the cause of environmental justice.

There are a lot of ways. I talked to the CEO of a company in New York that actually 'solved' that problem on a small scale, and some of my friends at Boeing are working on off-shore long-term energy storage units.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 21:16

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

GlitchThief posted:

You store the solar power in energon cubes, genius.

e: Actually that stuff might be proprietary :ohdear:

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 21:23

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 22, 2024 10:05

NumberLast: Jun 7, 2014

empireofcrime posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b11ZU2HceDg

I don't think I've ever seen a more apt analogy.

# ¿ Apr 29, 2016 21:56

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > Progressive Peanut Gallery: I plan to transform my town into a socialist utopia

«‹›8 »