|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:You really can't say the Democrats don't appeal to most Americans when they consistently win the popular vote. What makes you think voting for a politican with a letter next to their name means you support the party behind them? I'd say about 90% of voters are "lesser of two evils" voters
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 04:19 |
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Yeah, that's enough for my point though. Think what Obama could have accomplished with a Democratic House in 2010. Think where we would be now. What did Obama accomplish with a Democratic House in 2009, other than crushing his own platform? Oh, wait, that was all the fault of the wrong Democrats. We need total governmental control by, uh, Democratier Democrats, and it needs to last forever, then we'll start delivering!
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:You really can't say the Democrats don't appeal to most Americans when they consistently win the popular vote. Let me rephrase. They don't appeal to enough Americans to get them to vote for the House and to a lesser degree the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Neither party appeals to most Americans, the overwhelming majority vote each year goes to nobody with nearly double the support of any alternative candidate. The Democrats managed to appeal to just over one percent more voters than Republicans did in the last election, if that's what vindication looks like to you enjoy the next four years
A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Dec 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:What makes you think voting for a politican with a letter next to their name means you support the party behind them? I'd say about 90% of voters are "lesser of two evils" voters This is also why voter turnout is so abysmally low.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:This is also why voter turnout is so abysmally low.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:I consider 55%-65% turnout to be quite good, actually, considering the vast majority of people live in states where their vote means literally nothing, and they know it. Hell, in the South, large sections of the population have literally *never* had a government that truly represented them. Jim Crow was not all that long ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:I consider 55%-65% turnout to be quite good, actually, considering the vast majority of people live in states where their vote means literally nothing, and they know it. Turnout used to be much much higher in the past. This is no excuse. Hell this election much of the states that had the lowest turnout were swing states.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
Goatman
Somebody fucked around with this message at 03:27 on Dec 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
Sun Wu Kampf posted:
Obama and the Grand Bargain?  Come on, don't be willfully dense. Inferior Third Season posted:I consider 55%-65% turnout to be quite good, actually, considering the vast majority of people live in states where their vote means literally nothing, and they know it. Obama raised the bar for campaigning, Hillary lowered it. Teriyaki Koinku fucked around with this message at 12:27 on Dec 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 12:24
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:On the contrary, democracy can't work like that, if each party entrenches at the extreme we're doomed. The only hope is that the extremes peel off and leave a strong enough center to take back control. So, Third Wayism, then? I think the past eight years culminating in this election should be the death knell of milquetoast incrementalist centrists constantly running away scared from their own policies while getting routed and overrun by increasingly extremist Republicans (first with Tea Partiers and now with out-and-out fascists). Sorry, I don't buy what you're saying in the slightest. What we need now is what we should have had since 2008: an authentic leftist that makes decisive impregnable ground forward and conquers the opposition instead of incremental steps that can be easily wiped away with a single conservative administration. E: Teddy and FDR gave us the Square Deal and New Deal respectively, not the Adequate Compromise. Teriyaki Koinku fucked around with this message at 12:42 on Dec 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 12:37
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Hell, in the South, large sections of the population have literally *never* had a government that truly represented them. Jim Crow was not all that long ago. In the South there used to be tiny pockets of republicans, then leftists, before and after the civil war. These were -always- on the rockiest, hilliest, worst land for farming cotton. Hill folk voted republican, meaning left leaning policies, but only at the most local level did they really ever elect anyone. They never made a difference, but they did exist and there have always been leftest constituencies in the South. It's just never made a difference.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:In the South there used to be tiny pockets of republicans, then leftists, before and after the civil war. These were -always- on the rockiest, hilliest, worst land for farming cotton. Hill folk voted republican, meaning left leaning policies, but only at the most local level did they really ever elect anyone. They never made a difference, but they did exist and there have always been leftest constituencies in the South. It's just never made a difference. All roads lead to Huey Long.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:In the South there used to be tiny pockets of republicans, then leftists, before and after the civil war. These were -always- on the rockiest, hilliest, worst land for farming cotton. Hill folk voted republican, meaning left leaning policies, but only at the most local level did they really ever elect anyone. They never made a difference, but they did exist and there have always been leftest constituencies in the South. It's just never made a difference. I was actually thinking more of, you know, black people, but yeah. The South has been a mostly one party state for as long as it's been the South.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I was actually thinking more of, you know, black people, but yeah. The South has been a mostly one party state for as long as it's been the South. Yeah. The South did go republican in parts for a while during reconstruction, but the red shirts (sort of paramilitary precursors to the KKK) put a stop to that first and then legal action followed to suppress the black vote. In a way it has been continued to be suppressed up to this day. The intensity of that suppression has changed, but it never truly went away. As for the South always being a one party state? Well, it's not really a state if I can be a pedant for a minute. It's a region. I also break up that region into two sub-regions: The South and the Peripheral South. I think of the South as the old confederate states during the civil war. However the Peripheral South to me are states that aren't part of the Solid South, or just those states voting lockstep for conservatives forever and ever. North Carolina is a good example of this. The culture is Southern, but not completely. It depends on where you go. There are also a lot of transplants for example. If you go out into the country it's pretty Southern as far as culture goes, but if you get into mountain country the culture is still conservative, but has a sort of Scotch-Irish flavor which is different from your normal brand of conservatism, though not completely as I of course can never give out definitive answers without saying, "Yes, but". Anyway, basically any state in the South that can be convinced to elect anyone besides a conservative now and again is part of that Peripheral South. They're swing states and therefor get more attention and all of the good and bad that comes with that attention. In the next few years you may see the Solid South crack and crack further. During this election there was shifting on Georgia, South Carolina and Texas. Sure it took some big hits for that to happen, but it's not impossible anymore. It depends on who is run in 2020 and beyond. Shrinking white majorities, black demographics that stay mostly the same and rising Latino numbers are causing shifts in voting trends. The youth down here are also not as conservative as their parents anymore. Still pretty conservative, but the internet penetrated the culture down here and exposed an insular and generally incurious people to other cultures in a way that had really never been done before unless you went into the military. Anecdotally among young people I encounter more people who proclaim themselves libertarians than Republicans. At some point if poo poo doesn't go completely off the rails Republicans or some sort of successor conservative party have to ditch white supremacy. The numbers just won't be there to win elections anymore. Trump won because Hillary is a bad campaigner and is hated, and even then he lost the popular vote by millions. Odds are after contact with reality, some scandals and not fulfilling basic campaign promises he'll have to spar with someone from the dems who isn't absolutely despised. One of the big reasons is because the South won't be able to carry them anymore. The white vote is constantly shrinking by about 1% year. Not everywhere equally, but last I checked it was constant. Conservatives rely on the South to win since the civil war and beyond and the South is changing in terms of demographics just like everywhere else, and it was never racially homogeneous like many other states. If the South cracks in a significant way any more they don't win elections without a new strategy. But if they ditch white supremacy there are tons of conservative black and Latino voters who'd love not to be lashed to the democrats for a party that at least doesn't actively abuse them. In any case, it used to be a one party region. It's mostly true, but not totally true. North Carolina was the most recent addition to cracking the South as a well of votes for the Republicans. If it weren't for Hillary at the top of the ticket there may have been more. Who knows? If I had to point my finger at something, I would point allllll the way back to a point where the South could've been changed. That was reconstruction. It was too costly, too unpopular and it ended too early The culture never changed because it was never forced to change in any meaningful way. Slavery was (mostly) abolished, but it was just replaced with a sort of feudalism with its landed white aristocracy and a sizable black minority being kept in check through legality and terror. Ice Phisherman fucked around with this message at 15:40 on Dec 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
Rexicon1 posted:They literally already do this everyday. They walk all over common decency and we are cowed by our loving meaningless "decorum". I'm so loving done with that. We are through the looking glass and you will never reach these people with facts or anti-propaganda. Yeah, but it's all hollow bullshit that's used to pivot reality towards their political ends. No one that doesn't gorge themselves on nonsense news like Breitbart or Fox News believes that they're glorious or downtrodden martyrs. If the Democratic party as a whole started to go after them like people have said in the past few pages then you'd pretty much see some previously unthinkable bullshit being justified. Right now the increasingly prevalent radical elements of the party are angling for the means to find justification (no matter how false) to entirely quit working with the Democrats and primary out anyone that doesn't tow the line. That's presumably being done to help ensure that some pretty horrible and discriminating legislation goes through in the next four years. There are still some Republicans that will go between parties to try to get work done. At least, when things are bad enough. Removing them from the republican party over the next four years removes some of the power the Democrats have left over the system. Which is an important thing to keep when the Republicans have seized control of almost every branch of the government. Either way, i'm ideologically against handing the Republicans poo poo they actually want. At least, when it's used to hurt other people. That sort of "persecute me! persecute me!" nonsense is called a persecutory delusion because on some level a person or group wants to feel vindicated for their false sense of persecution and beliefs. Once they go from just randomly screaming about how persecuted they are and actually have physical evidence that a large group is doing it it can enable even more toxic views and behaviors on their part. Never mind that your average voter is stupid enough to actually believe that there would be an equivalency in the conduct of the two parties in situations like that. Having a bunch of random people call them out is fine. Even politicians! Hell, we'd probably benefit if there were at least a few more pointing out the hypocrisy of the Republican party. But making that sort of behavior party policy just fuels polarization of the two parties into a form that literally could never work with each other and is in essence a form of toned down accelerationism. Archonex fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Dec 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
Teriyaki Koinku posted:
I call it "The Incremental Baby Step".
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
Yeah I wouldn't necessarily take low voter turnout as indicative of disgust with the parties or the system in general or whatever. For one, turnout the last few cycles has actually been higher than it was in the 90s. Maybe people were apathetic then but disgusted now? Also keep in mind all the crazy impediments to voting--it's a work day, polling stations are intentionally kept limited, etc. I mean, I voted in California and they tried to turn my vote "provisional" because I forgot to bring the mail ballot they sent me and they wanted to make sure I "didn't vote twice."
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
IM RETARDED IDIOT 'DARE' FROM TRIBALWARS
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
Archonex posted:Yeah, but it's all hollow bullshit that's used to pivot reality towards their political ends. No one that doesn't gorge themselves on nonsense news like Breitbart or Fox News believes that they're glorious or downtrodden martyrs. I truly respect your commitment to the manner of politics circa 1990; but its 2017 now and the head of the country, with control over the rest of congress and the judiciary, is a pussy grabbing tyrant bent on solidifying his interests and the interests of his peers. The republicans who would work with democrats (on the sludge legislature that they cook up, mind you) are getting primaried to hell by their caustic and radicalized base. The persecution complex of the base is at a fever pitch and stoked every day by treasonous piss imps of right wing media. They already believe they are being tormented day in and day out by the horrors of the unstoppable left wing. To say that "we can't confirm their biases!" assumes they have any basis in reality for their feelings. Everything about their existence is delusion from the poison injected by propaganda. Their biases are already confirmed by schizophrenic hallucinations of brainwashing. We are so far beyond the point of compromise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 09:38
|
|
|
Rexicon1 posted:We are so far beyond the point of compromise. Reminder: American Conservatism is literally a plot to bring back the Gilded Age. quote:On August 23, 1971, prior to accepting Nixon's nomination to the Supreme Court, Powell was commissioned by his neighbor, Eugene B. Sydnor Jr., a close friend and education director of the US Chamber of Commerce, to write a confidential memorandum titled "Attack on the American Free Enterprise System," an anti-Communist, anti-New Deal blueprint for conservative business interests to retake America for the chamber.[13][14] It was based in part on Powell's reaction to the work of activist Ralph Nader, whose 1965 exposé on General Motors, "Unsafe at Any Speed," put a focus on the auto industry putting profit ahead of safety, which triggered the American consumer movement. Powell saw it as an undermining of Americans' faith in enterprise and another step in the slippery slope of socialism. [...] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_F._Powell_Jr.#Powell_Memorandum
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 09:48
|
|
|
I always knew it was loving Nader's fault.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 10:39
|
|
|
This poo poo needs to seriously loving stop now. https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/813695241295396864?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:This poo poo needs to seriously loving stop now. if you spray paint the n bomb on something no matter the intent you are a racist
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
Mnoba posted:if you spray paint the n bomb on something no matter the intent you are a racist Elaborate? I'm not seeing it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Elaborate? I'm not seeing it. It's a priviledged white creating a false sense of solidarity with black people by claiming he was called a "friend of the family lover." Starting to see why people don't take liberals crying racism all that seriously.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:It's a priviledged white creating a false sense of solidarity with black people by claiming he was called a "friend of the family lover." The sense of solidarity is just what they want you to think, i was going to say just bored middle class white people that want attention but what he said.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:It's a priviledged white creating a false sense of solidarity with black people by claiming he was called a "friend of the family lover." Still not seeing the automatic racism of having written the same word you just wrote, but since he did it with spraypaint he's a racist. MizPiz posted:Starting to see why people don't take liberals crying racism all that seriously. Look at you pretending you've ever taken racism seriously.  poo poo like this is dumb and bad, but anyone bringing it up as though it's a systematic issue is just trying to shitstir or create an excuse to dismiss real incidents. #Blacksrule Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Dec 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:Still not seeing the automatic racism of having written the same word you just wrote, but since he did it with spraypaint he's a racist. Tone police all you want, I'm not the one defending someone who's actively harming social justice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
You're both right: faked hate crimes undermine social justice and right-wingers latch onto these stories because they undermine social justice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Edible Hat posted:You're both right: faked hate crimes undermine social justice and right-wingers latch onto these stories because they undermine social justice. I don't think a white guy gets a pass for not being a racist for spray painting the word, but agree with you on the later these incidents are not "look no racism exists" like some groups portray.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
MizPiz posted:Tone police... defending someone who's actively harming social justice. I'm not sure where I tone policed, elaborate? He wouldn't need defended if people didn't make up strange and unnecessary attacks. Is it ok if I just accuse him of being a rapist out of nowhere? Would it be wrong if someone defended him?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
it's third grade rules all around, it doesn't count if you say "n-word" and it doesn't count if someone else said it first
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:I'm not sure where I tone policed, elaborate? white guy sprays racist word on barn, racism call strange and unnecessary. presidential candidate and campaign spreads racist memes and innuendo nothing to see here folks. I think Hillary losing broke your brain dude.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Mnoba posted:white guy sprays racist word on barn, racism call strange and unnecessary. presidential candidate and campaign spreads racist memes and innuendo nothing to see here folks. I think Hillary losing broke your brain dude. You said it was "racist regardless of intent" which is a weird and dumb thing to say. I dunno what the rest of your nonsense regarding the election is about, but it's probably irrelevant anyway. Edit- oh right, you think HRC started birtherism. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Dec 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:You said it was "racist regardless of intent" which is a weird and dumb thing to say. I dunno what the rest of your nonsense regarding the election is about, but it's probably irrelevant anyway. you just keep calling what i say different names, you do realize that makes you look dumb right? Also, the latter half you called me a liar when i brought it up a week ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Mnoba posted:you just keep calling what i say different names, you do realize that makes you look dumb right? Also, the latter half you called me a liar when i brought it up a week ago. You should probably stop posting things that are factually incorrect so often. "If you use this specific medium when writing the N-word you are DEFINITELY a racist, regardless of intent" is just a really weird thing to say and obviously untrue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
I know this thread ran out of steam a while back, but this is a pretty loving stupid conversation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:If I had to point my finger at something, I would point allllll the way back to a point where the South could've been changed. That was reconstruction. It was too costly, too unpopular and it ended too early The culture never changed because it was never forced to change in any meaningful way. Slavery was (mostly) abolished, but it was just replaced with a sort of feudalism with its landed white aristocracy and a sizable black minority being kept in check through legality and terror. Posting from my phone so I can't go too in-depth but Reconstruction was the one and only shot America had at "eating the rich" and breaking up the Solid South. I'm from Beaufort County, SC which is probably better known as "that place where Ohio goes on vacation", but during and after the Civil War you saw the plantations broken up and sold to the former slaves with plenty of new schools, and the county was run by black republicans all the way through to the eve of WWI, a full 50 years despite Jim Crow laws. The lesson I take away from it is gently caress half measures and gently caress the wealthy, we can always afford positive change as long as the will to change exists.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 04:19 |
|
|
So this happened: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRBsJNdK1t0 John_A_Tallon fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Jan 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 00:44
|
|
