|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Hey everyone who feels like poo poo right now. it starts with cleaning up the DNC from top to bottom
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 10:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 22:45 |
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Alright, so join the Democratic party, since you don't have much else as an alternative, and make it turn left. i'm a registered democrat  i didn't vote for hillary because she was a lovely democrat and my state is a safe-red
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 10:44
|
|
|
Antares posted:lol if you think they're going to find a proper message instead of trying to be the same but 80% as racist as the fascists. if the dems push even more rightward after this they deserve to lose
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 10:51
|
|
|
Islam is the Lite Rock FM posted:I'm gonna white guysplain away the affected groups (too many to keep listing) who will be hosed for a second: i'm not sure what you're on about, but if the dems chase republican coattails on racism and xenophobia, they deserve to lose fullstop them sucking up to monied interests like republicans already lost them this election
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 11:04
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:I just want somebody to tell me things will be okay. Failing that, what we can do to make them okay. But, if it's too early for this, I understand. we have to rebuild. we need a DNC that doesn't play favorites during primaries for one we need dems that understand that you can't win with fearmongering alone for two
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 11:15
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:Global things that are now hosed: only centrist dems liked the TPP anyway pity we're going to go into overdrive on destroying the environment now though
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 11:19
|
|
|
AShamefulDisplay posted:What about NAFTA? Trump went after it pretty hard during the campaign. Could a Trump led Republican Congress rescind on that trade agreement? if anything good comes out of a trump presidency please let it be this
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 11:35
|
|
|
AShamefulDisplay posted:"Anti establishment". Nevermind that Sanders was pretty loving establishment himself. keep trying to drag down an actually good candidate so you feel better about your shameful one
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 11:39
|
|
|
AShamefulDisplay posted:Lol yeah Bernie was a better candidate than Clinton Imo. Doesn't change the fact that he was a Democrat in all but name. Keep thinking your candidate was a revolutionary. he may have been a democrat (in the traditional sense), but he wasn't an establishment one. the establishment dems are convinced that stirring speeches like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG7w3Oey3xs win votes
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 11:43
|
|
|
AShamefulDisplay posted:What is even your definition of "establishment" at this point? an establishment dem is one who agrees with those in control of the democratic party (ie: the clintons) this isn't hard to figure out
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 11:46
|
|
|
Dmitri-9 posted:They aren't stupid. They are angry at clueless elites who don't have their best interests in mind and in their anger they elected a wild card. yep. clinton was the quintessential example of this. the leaked speeches already proved that she didn't have voters best interest in mind
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 11:50
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:well whatever it doesnt matter now cause we got president trump and you better hope you aint a gay cause if you are you're gonna die just like in russia hopefully other nations look at this and realise the truth: neo-liberalism breeds fascism
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 11:55
|
|
|
NoNotTheMindProbe posted:Hillary deserves to go to jail for being such a lovely candidate. I hope Trump actually sends her to Jail. she definitely deserves to be mocked for leaving her diehards high and dry when it came to concession time
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 11:57
|
|
|
Comstar posted:Whom is Trump going to blame when things go wrong? Because he will never take responsibility himself. how? they don't have a lick of control?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 11:59
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Get in a union, get involved in demonstrations and strikes. i can support this message the dems have really poo poo the bed wrt to unions, we need to reverse that
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Go out and play Pokemon GO while lit as gently caress on weed also gonna do this
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 12:09
|
|
|
if hillary was good for racial justice, why did she do her best to inflict trump on america? https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/796222841612042240?ref_src=tw she intentionally tried to get that demagogue nominated because she figured it would make it easier for her to win. she was wrong and inflicted a racist nightmare on america instead. bernie would not have done this to us
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 01:52
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Man, I had no loving idea the DNC was so powerful that they could rig not only the Democratic primaries but the Republican primaries as well! You'd think such a far-reaching conspiracy would be able to get the presidency, too! Unless that's just all part of "their" plan! she got what she wanted, and she lost. idiots like you were hailing this old leak as a brilliant campaign move! now you try to disown it she wanted to put america in that corner, a choice between her or a mega racist because she figured that would win the race for her. and she was dead loving wrong and we have to pay for it now
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 02:04
|
|
|
Gail Wynand posted:Reminder that Hitler got into office with all of 33% of the vote and had a cabinet full of "mainstream" conservative politicians who were supposed to restrain him. Three months later, democracy was dead. People are not overreacting. maybe if the dems didn't do their damndest to help trump get the nomination we wouldn't be at ruin's doorstep. the hillary campaign unleashed cheeto benito on us and then flubbed it
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:You are still making this not about Trump, who is the Hitler is this Hitler analogue. oh it's about trump. and how hillary made him happen she arranged a caged death match with fascism/sexism/racism and got knocked on her rear end. quote:In the other thread, I was not trying the vote shaming thing. I'm asking you what was more important than a large bundle of human and voting rights. You still haven't provided an answer other than "its unfair to ask me that." you're still not getting it, like at all. the answer is not "it's unfair to ask me that" but rather "it's idiotic to ask me that". you got your answer from the populace, "the economy stupid", and you supported a candidate that completely ignored it. for me personally, it was the humongous amount of liberal policy (environment, unions, etc. etc.) hillary tossed aside and how obviously pro-wallstreet she was. but voters in general were worried about the economy, and hillary offered nothing more than the status quo. if hillary's loyalists had pushed her more she might have actually developed a platform and won.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
furiouskoala posted:As a Trump voter from a rural area, here is why Hillary lost. hey look, the top three could've been answered by an old man that a bird once befriended
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
i can't believe clinton lost to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPRfP_TEQ-g too bad she bit off more than she could chew
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
 are you hillaries still defending abuela? hillary did not lose because of racism, she lost because she was bad. look at all the democratic red meat hillary flat out ignored:* DAPL * Massive uptick in earthquakes in the midwest because of fracking * Flint * Ferguson * Maybe not say she wants to deport children? (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-child-migrants_us_55d4a5c5e4b055a6dab24c2f) are you going to honestly sit there and tell me hillary could not have addressed any of these things while still protecting racial justice? of course, the easiest thing hillary could of done was developed an economic message beyond "8 more years of the status quo!". you know, the status quo that has been grinding down everyone from every race for a long time? there were ways to advocate for both economic justice and social justice at the same time. hillary specifically chose not to do so because she was a corporatist candidate, not a democrat. by the way, hillary put her election chances over the needs of minorities in america. she encouraged trump's nomination and actually wanted him to be the republican nominee because she thought it would make it easier for her to shore up turnout.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 09:47
|
|
|
negromancer posted:That probably would have driven away even more white moderates, so we would have been in the same position. you keep telling yourself lies like that man. democratic turnout was depressed in all categories except old, rich, and postgrad. hillary could've offered some basic resistance to trump's ideas if she wasn't spouting delirious things like "america's already great" she was a terrible candidate instead of the safe pick she was advertised as. she was complacent and foolish and her choices during this election have brought us to ruin. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-democratic-party-deserves-to-die_us_58236ad5e4b0aac62488cde5
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 09:55
|
|
|
chumbler posted:Hillary is not responsible for people electing Trump. The people who elected Trump by voting for him or not voting against him are. You can't square this circle. A very large amount of people decided that their ideological purity was more important than the lives of marginalized people because Hillary was only 90% of what they wanted instead of 100%. she's responsible for not driving democratic turn out. she made a ton of choices that depressed our turnout and even drove a small percentage of democratic voters to vote trump (more than her positions drew republicans to her). you guys have been ignoring the basics of a campaign this entire election. people have been telling you you have to inspire voters and hillary specifically refused to do that. it was obvious since bernie's rise from practically unknown to having an arguable seat of power in what remains of the democratic party that economic issues were really loving important this election. hillary could've had an economic AND racial justice platform, but she chose to ignore the former because it conflicted with what corporate america wanted. you keep on going on about people deciding their ideology was worth more than minority lives or something, but that is a facile view. it is ultimately and singularly hillary's responsibility to attract voters if she wants to be president. she figured she could corral voters into voting for her by orchestrating a hillary vs ruin election. her weak platform couldn't draw enough of the democrats who turned out for obama previously though, because she specifically ignored them though, and now we are stuck with the nightmare candidate. can you imagine what would've happened if this election was JEB! vs hillary? she ignored them because she was a fool. that's also why she let an untested algorithm chart the course for her election campaign against trump. if she had run a stronger campaign we would not have had trump. if she wasn't intentionally fostering trump during the primary, we might not have had trump.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
chumbler posted:People deciding their ideology is worth more than minority lives "or something" is not a facile view, it is exactly what happened. Blaming Hillary for people not voting is trying to absolve the guilt of people who decided the outcome of this election on marginalized groups doesn't matter. it's a facile view because it's based in a nonsense inversion in the relationship between voters and candidates. candidates inspire voters to vote that's why we have candidates instead of just voting for party platforms. hillary failed to do what she needed to do to win as a candidate because she depended upon and expected dem voters to turn out in obama levels for her. but obama was inspirinng as all hell.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 10:33
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:By definition liberals in America are supposed to stand for the rights of minorities. By choosing to not show up to vote against an explicit threat against all racial minorities, Democratic voters showed that they care more about pandering than they do about the physical well-being of their disadvantaged brothers and sisters. They cannot and should not be absolved of this because minorities should never trust white liberals again and this is why. lots of democratic voters turned out for hillary, and the election was nearly hers. that should speak to the strength of democratic loyalty considering the lousy campaign clinton ran. but loyalty only buys you so much and in this case it wasn't enough. we needed to attract people who weren't interested enough to come out against donald trump alone (because if you think her campaign was about racial justice, well that's just silly considering her actions), and we had ways to do it. bernie's platform was a good way, and supposedly clinton was going to adopt some of that. but instead she just dropped talking about that entirely. and that cost her turnout. you can whine and say that's not fair all you want but that's the objective truth. not every person in the US is going to be a democratic loyalist. and that's fine, it doesn't make them bad people at all. but it does mean we have to pursue them if we want a strong chance of gaining and retaining office. hillary did not pursue anyone but loyalists with her fearmongering campaign, and so shrank her maximum turnout against cheeto benito
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 10:51
|
|
|
chumbler posted:None of that has any bearing at all on the fact that people who claim to be progressive knew full well what a Trump presidency and republican congress would mean for marginalized groups including white ones and decided nah, I'm fine with that. The party and candidate bear no responsibility for that. It is a purely individual failing. It is the height of a FYGM attitude and is textbook deplorable. yes they do. if you want to win, ever again you're going to have to get that through your skull. democrats aren't the only group we rely on to get elected frequently, did you forget the independents? what did hillary do to attract them? saying trump is bad doesn't make independents vote hillary, it makes them vote for their non-trump candidate.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 10:58
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I didn't say anything about Hillary's campaign being about racial justice. I'm saying that an absence of care about a candidate that runs on a platform of white supremacy makes you a horrible person and a horrible liberal and claiming such status is preposterous if you couldn't be bothered to perform the literal bare minimum of civic effort and vote to protect your minority friends, family, and neighbors. your candidate didn't put in effort and didn't inspire people to turn out. it's surprising you care about the plight of minorities and yet were wholly unaware that a lot of white people don't care about protecting minority rights. that's why you buy them off with other things (things that help minorities too!). that doesn't mean these people are actively against minorities, but you campaigned as if america had ascended into a racial justice utopia where white people were stalwart allies. quote:Again, this is not mutually exclusive with Hillary being a bad candidate or running a bad campaign and us needing to do better. This is about the fact that minorities are rightfully terrified that the white left will abandon them. We have already seen calls to form a white progressive party. We already had white progressives on this very board for the past year talk about how "identity politics" are a trivial sideshow to the true issues of class warfare. You might care deeply for minorities but there's a huge swath of white liberals who are only in it for the FYGM and this election showed that minorities are not safe from these people. You should consider why you don't think it's important to demonstrate to those minorities that they will still be protected, because right now nobody cares about them. as i already said, the democrats are not a party full of loyalists, you can't expect them to turn out just based on fear. and you can expect non-democrats to turn out for us based on an anti-trump platform. scared or not, that's the reality of the situation.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 11:15
|
|
|
kartikeya posted:This isn't about party loyalty, dude, it's about not electing a fascist and all of his rear end in a top hat friends to go gently caress the world, marginalized people first. It's not fearmongering, they made no secret of what they are going to do, and they are gleefully rubbing their hands together drawing up lists of exactly which things to gently caress and in what order. this was not a convincing enough argument! first of all, it was coming out of hillary clinton, least trusted candidate in america. second of all, people aren't 100% rational machines. you can cry all you want about how it should've been, but it wasn't and people were warning it wasn't for a long time. it was the economy stupid, hillary ignored that and if she hadn't she almost definitely would've pulled the number needed to protect minorities for another 4 years.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 11:19
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I love that having a cavalier attitude towards the problems of white people is wrong and bad but having a cavalier attitude towards the problems of minorities is just being pragmatic. i'm being an rear end in a top hat specifically because you are clinging to bullshit to justify hillary's loss. if we ever want to fix this situation, we have to have a clear view of what happened and "hillary lost because of racism" is reductionist to the point of being wrong and will lose us 2018. i don't like that white people have a cavalier attitude to the plight of minorities, but that's the way things are. pandering to economic justice wouldn't have stopped hillary from being elected or protecting minorities, but she chose not to bother with economic justice and we lost. trump offered people who have been suffering for a long time a pipe-dream, while hillary offered them an 8 year continuation of the nightmare. that turned out to be the stronger issue in this election. pretending the voters we lost to trump, or the people who didn't vote for clinton are irredeemable racists isn't going to win us anything in the near future and it might actually cement the country for trump. however, if we learn our lessons and come out strong in 2018, maybe we can survive somehow.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 11:30
|
|
|
kartikeya posted:I've cried quite a bit so far, it's true. no i meant cry
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 11:32
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I'm disinclined to keep talking in circles about moral judgements but this make me laugh because lmao if you think leftists will recover enough to win anything in two years time. It'll take at least eight years to find enough people to win back the Presidency and Senate and probably another ten afterwards to retake the House. That's assuming we can manage to get two presidents in a row one day too. glad you've given up. that'll surely help minorities more than trying to win something back in 2018 kartikeya posted:Well thanks for giving me permission to mourn a bunch of entirely avoidable deaths, I guess. you're welcome. i'm devastated too. it's too bad hillary was so arrogant or we wouldn't be in this mess. also too bad people viewed her as the "safe" candidate
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 11:46
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I mean I haven't given up in the sense that I support the same poo poo I supported before. I am simply saying that rebuilding a destroyed political party is gonna take a lot longer than two years. agreed it'll be a lot of work, but we don't know what can happen in two years. we can only work as hard as we can for the future we want if we're going to survive this
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 11:53
|
|
|
Mister Macys posted:Personally, I was picturing a poor Democrat family that voted in 2008/12 that stayed home (one of the six million) as my example. Plenty of room for interpretation, I suppose. it's cool she lied to people all the time otherwise that sure didn't hurt her chances
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 11:56
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I will be really honest and say that we do know what will happen in two years: the dismantling of every good thing that has happened since Ronald Reagan left office. that's what's likely to happen yes. but it could also fail to happen. remember what people were saying this entire election: "trump can never be president". he proved people wrong in the primaries and he proved people wrong in the general. so don't fall into the trap of thinking the future's certain, because if anything this election has taught us that's not true
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 11:59
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I think that's the difference between us. You took the lesson from Trump that the future is uncertain. I took away that the worst outcome will always find a way to prevail, eventually. that's not true either or we'd still be in feudalism living in pig slop. or we would already be extinct. don't give in to fatalism because of this surprising loss, that only helps trump
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 12:04
|
|
|
Blowdryer posted:http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/11/14/glenn-beck-tries-out-decency  case in point
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 12:07
|
|
|
PKJC posted:VP elect pence wants lgbt people to be extinct sooooooo how did we reach the point where lgbt people could get married? was it because the absolute worst thing is always guaranteed to happen? we've been dealt a major setback, but if we just accept death then we'll never get what we want. so don't embrace fatalistic garbage and instead work and work hard to reform the democrats into a powerful party that fights for racial, social, and economic justice instead of hiding its positions for fear that the fragile moderate voter will get the vapors
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 12:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 22:45 |
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:The progressives don't owe Hillary their vote but they do owe it to minorities to stand up for them by voting against fascism. i've already made it clear to you that this strategy doesn't work. it didn't work for hillary and it won't work for you. face up to the fact that hillary didn't do what she needed to to win. face up to the fact that shaming voters into voting for your side doesn't work, and give up on it as a political strategy
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 12:57
|
|