|
Welp, that poo poo happened. I finally recovered from my hangover and wanted to post in the Baloogan thread but it's already gone. My two cents is that the people saying the Democrats lost touch with too many middle class white males is probably correct. Also, peepaw Bernie was not the answer. Socialism does not sell in the U.S., never has and never will in our lifetimes. I'm glad C-SPAM is sticking around. Can't wait for the novels written about this.
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 09:51 |
|
|
The Kingfish posted:radical socialist Barrack Obama's approval ratings say otherwise. Obama is not a socialist. poo poo he's the definition of third way centrist.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:You and I know that. Can you think of any people who might not know about or understand this fact? I suck at detecting sarcasm.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:the only people who think socialism doesn't sell in the US are indoctrinated old people You mean the people who actually vote.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
One bright spot about President Trump, Ted Cruz is permanently hosed That's actually something I can enthusiastically support.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
ArgumentatumE.C.T. posted:I honestly think the source of the polls coming up worthless was ~10,000,000 people classified as Likely Voters that have voted in every presidential election of their life-- except this one. I think polling has proven to be inconsistent at best in 21st Century politics. You can't poll people who can't be reached.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
Augus posted:So will the 2020 dem primaries be done Republican style with 9 different candidates now or what? I'd be surprised if more than 3 Dem candidates emerge. Whose gonna have the money? Someone needs to start now to groom donors and I just don't know who that's gonna be.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 03:00
|
|
|
VirtualStranger posted:https://twitter.com/People4Bernie/status/796280444849307648 Yes, after it failed to take hold during the post Gilded age of progressivism, after it failed to take hold along with the bolshevik revolution, after it failed to take hold in the aftermath of the desolation of the Great Depression, after it failed to take hold along with the reforms ushered in by FDR, after it failed to take hold along with LBJ's Great Society and civil rights, after it failed to take hold during the upheaval of the Vietnam War, I'm absolutely positive that Socialism in the U.S. is ready to take hold and spread any day now; honest I swear it's gonna happen.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
Well What Now posted:Right now there's a real grassroots push for something that's to the left of the tepid wonky line that Clinton mumbled during the election. I'm willing to give a try unless you, radical meme, have a better suggestion. Not at all; I'm merely pointing out that there is a difference between progressive ideology and socialism. We don't need to be shouting for socialism, eat the rich, at every level of the government. It's looking an awful lot like Hillary lost a fair share of Obama voters because of both parties full embrace of globalism and Trump was the only one saying he was going to protect everybody's job; he's not but that's beside the point. edit; plus, socialism has just never taken hold here and there were plenty of times in our history that were more favorable to its rise. radical meme has issued a correction as of 01:02 on Nov 12, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Princess Di posted:Alright. Man I don't know. But, the first thing they have to do is find some younger standard bearers to rally around; they need people in the House and Senate to start pissing off both the GOP and more established people in the Democratic party; people who start making a name for theirself. It took Ted Cruz less than a year to piss off every Republican in the Senate and he made a name for himself doing it; he marked his territory and rode it all the way into the primaries. I really think that's the biggest challenge right now, the Democratic party needs some people to become a rallying point, other than Warren and Sanders who are both too old. I'm not against full socialism but it just doesn't sell in the U.S. Plus, any hope of doing anything legislatively is gone for the next 2 years at the very least. I don't care if it's the Castro brothers, Kamal Harris or anybody else, just find someone to rally around and I'm really sorry but, Bernie is not going to cut it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
In the spirit of getting all of the problems on the table up front, here's something to consider: That changing demographic that Democrats have been waiting on forever now; its relevance and very existence are completely at the mercy of the Census Bureau. The Census Bureau is a part of the Department of Commerce. Trump obviously gets to appoint the Secretary of Commerce. The current term of the Director of the Census Bureau expires in 2018; and Trump then gets to appoint the new Director. The GOP has been out to gut and completely reform the Census Bureau since way before 2010. I don't think there's any reason to pin any hopes on the 2020 Census as providing any relief in future redistriting or elections.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
Zythrst posted:So your predicting a conspiracy to falsify the counts? No but, you can be willfully dense if you want to. The GOP has had proposals on the table for the last decade on reforms they wanted to the Census. They've never been able to push them through and now they can.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
I've been reflecting on this since the 9th and this election is eerily reminiscient of the Nixon election. An irreverent con-man is elected over a cabable and competent opponent who lacked charisma. An election following an administration that elevated issues involving minorities; then, civil rights for blacks, now, civil rights for LGBT and of course, a black Pres. A leaving administration embroiled in a festering military action against the ultimate political boogeyman of the times; then, a communist client state, now, Islam. I could go on but, the parallels are numerous. I don't know what the gently caress this means for the future but, where's Jimmy Carter?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
loquacius posted:I liked the Pappy O'Daniel vs Homer Stokes comparison better I don't think George Clooney and the Coen brothers are gonna save us here.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Here's a good article from a conversation between pollsters in the Trump and Hillary camps. Some excerpts; Fabrizio (R) and Benenson (D):quote:Fabrizio said that the campaign modeled a number of ways in which they could lose the popular vote by as much as four percentage points—they are currently down by about 2.5 million votes (nearly 2 percentage points) at this stage—and still win the Electoral College. Trump won the Electoral College with a 10,000-vote margin in Michigan, a 22,000-vote margin in Wisconsin and a 46,000-vote margin in Pennsylvania.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Joementum posted:The Power Rangers guy is at the DNC meeting saying Ellison wants to drive Israelis into the sea. As long as he doesn't argue for the reinstatement of DWS.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
Ace of Baes posted:Looks like Bernie might have his first post-election victory, looks like the DAPL is dead. Interesting; which happens first, repeal of the ACA or reversal of this decision? At least the protestors can rest through the winter and gear back up in the Spring.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:
Well it's really, really cold up there and there's no good hotels or bed & breakfast places close; it would be like going into a war zone and what reporter needs that. Plus, the protesters aren't white man children carrying guns so kinda of boring subject matter to start.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
Mister Fister posted:Losing the most winnable election ever certainly should qualify Hillary for something. More people in this thread need to get their story straight; was it the candidate or the message? One can plausibly justify socialism now, socialism forever; the other, not so much.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2016 03:19
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:What message? So twitter is your only news source? I see the problem here.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
Grondoth posted:It's both How did she, and her message, get 2.5 million more votes than Trump? Please answer this question before ever posting again in this thread. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2016 12:35
|
|
|
Fullhouse posted:lol if this was the conclusion the Democrats came to Chelsea is not running for anything, ever and rich people running for Governor of their state has been standard politics in the U.S. for the last 200 years.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:"neoliberal" is one of those words that's ceased to have any meaning to me because goons have thrown it around at a bunch of people they don't like for so long Just want to second this. My eyes glaze over every time I see it used in these threads because I have no idea what the poster is actually trying to say.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Grognan posted:should I just say third-way then? Because pro-business, anti-labor, anti-welfare, and anti-poor policies kinda all fall under that umbrella for me. Describing someone as a "third-way" politician might in fact be more accurate and descriptive.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i would suggest it's pretty likely that schumer (and other senior democrats) recruited ellison. I agree with most of this. I'd also say that it's impossible right now to know where the Democratic Party needs to be at in four years. If Trump, as President, completely abdicates all presidential authority to Pence and others, as I think he will, theres the possibility of a huge backlash against his completely false progressive, populist appearance. I think what's left of the middle class is going to be far worse off in four years than they are now. That could be fertile ground for the Democrats in presidential politics.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Also 2020 is dead. They actually think Trump supporters read newspapers?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Republicans: This psychotic candidate for state legislature has an (R) after his name, gonna vote for him! Perfect is the enemy of good.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2016 02:36
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:because there are, historically, a lot of real stupid angry mother fuckers itt. fortunately of late they seem to have gone elsewhere. It was a very good article. It made me sad. I liked this: quote:Pointing to citizens who voted for both Obama and Trump does not disprove racism; it evinces it. To secure the White House, Obama needed to be a Harvard-trained lawyer with a decade of political experience and an incredible gift for speaking to cross sections of the country; Donald Trump needed only money and white bluster. I liked Coates' imagery of Obama as a President that walked on ice and never fell. I truly believe that we will look back on the Obama Presidency as a golden age in politics; history will be kind to him.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
Stexils posted:obama dug his own grave tbqh, bailing out the banks while not punishing or reforming them at all and deliberately undermining a public option in the healthcare fight killed any enthusiasm for the democrats. he had a mandate and he pissed it away, no surprise the Ds got steadily voted out. im baffled that anyone thinks history will be kind to the guy who accomplished jack through his lack of leadership and gridlock Thank you comrade for your input. How's the search for true socialists to run against the Third Way traitors to the working man going? I probably should have just posted "lmao". radical meme has issued a correction as of 00:55 on Dec 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
THORIUM posted:I love the "take it elsewhere" response Yes, I breathlessly await the last desperate attempt of all true partisans to suck the last drop of cum out of Sanders' shriveled, impotent, circumcised dick believing it to be the golden nectar that will save a dying, it's not, and ailing, it's not, Democratic Party. Suck harder brave soul, your country needs you.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2016 09:54
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:You, uh, are aware the Democratic Party doesn't have control of any branch of federal government, right? And also that the Dems are basically non-existent in the majority of state governments? And also that 'the most qualified candidate of all time' just lost to a carnival barker? Yes, and obviously that change is an old, white, self-proclaimed socialist, Jew, from Vermont that isn't even a Democrat. And, there are so many solid socialist legislators that have been elected to State and Federal positions over the last 100 years. How could I have not seen it, the future was staring us in the face the whole time and we all missed it. It's so clear now.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2016 10:05
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:He also didn't believe in a ground game, which the lack of one cost Hillary the election Even Trump supporters in these threads usually conceded that Hillary would take advantage of the Obama machine and it's ground game. It's infuriating to now learn that she didn't.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Y'all got owned by the dumbest people on the planet. Insult to injury. PolitiFact rates this True.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
paranoid randroid posted:oh my loving god The Republicans were right all along, everything was Obama's fault.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
Ace of Baes posted:WRONG. How can we possibly know if he's wrong? If one or the other of you is wrong, the only way to show it is through actual attempts to get more left leaning, socialist candidates elected. If your right, then great, I'm all for it; find some young, charismatic, very left leaning candidates and run them for election. Test your theory and get some more left leaning people into government. It hasn't worked yet, except in some very particular states and enclaves. Outside of New England, Minnesota, California and a few other places it just hasn't happened. This time around, a lot of hope was put into the return of Russ Feingold and he got curb-stomped again; Hillary got more votes than he did in Wisconsin. By all means, test the political waters with more left candidates and I really, honestly hope it works; but it hasn't yet.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:It was especially frustrating because all he had to do was commute the death sentence, but he was probably thinking about re-election. The President has no power or authority to commute the sentence or pardon someone convicted in a state court proceeding under state laws.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
Nerses IV posted:Why is Russia supposed to be our enemy again, like nobody gave a gently caress about them when they were shooting down airliners but now we're ready to gently caress them up because the IT guys for the DNC are incompetent products of nepotism? Seriously? The current sanctions were a direct result of their moves in Crimea and Ukraine; it's pretty ballsy for any country to just annex whole areas of sovereign states and not expect any pushback from the West. Plus, even before that, Russia was using it's enormous oil and gas reserves to outright blackmail Western Europe into submission. Add in the fact that Putin has jailed or assassinated political rivals and is basically a dictator, with the acquiescence of the Russian people, you get a scenario where Russia is really not anybody's friend or ally; everything for Russia is a partnership of convenience. The only thing worse than a Russia under Putin will be a Russia under the hard right wing ideologue that takes over after him.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Grammarchist posted:American Prospect has a longform up that explores attitudes of the white working class that are ideologically fluid. There is support there for progressive ideas like higher taxes on the rich to help poorer communities, but these are also tied with an institutional distrust of government with all the "run it like a household" this implies. As a result, the GOP has an institutional advantage there for as long as that attitude holds and for as long as the Democrats were visibly in charge. So yeah, genuine economic populism has potential, but it'll require direct localized dialogue with these communities. Does that article have more than 140 characters? edit: this is sarcasm
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
RENEGADE CUCKSKY posted:
There's a lot of truth to the bolded part. Unfortunately, there's not a lot of rabid racist paranoid delusional hatred on the left, like there was and is on the right that created the current political climate. Your base has to be absolutely scared shitless and desperate to accomplish the sort of wave election that elected Trump and that sort of desperation just doesn't exist on the left; mainly because most people just don't understand how modern politics affects their lives. Trump's policies are going to have to actually hurt a lot of people before they are going to be convinced to become active.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 09:51 |
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I think it might actually be possible because of how they barley crushed Sander's disorganized campaign in the primaries. i think if we organize from the ground up we can take over the structures of the party. Your missing his bigger point. The Sanders/Ellison wing of the party can take it over if they want to but, where do you go from there? Exactly which states do you think Ellison or Sanders could be elected in outside of where they live? Which swing states is an Ellison or Sanders going to appeal to? I'll give you Michigan and Pennsylvania, maybe, but from there, is that sort of progressive politics going to play in Florida, Iowa, Ohio or Wisconsin? Is it going to even take hold in Oregon, Colorado, Washington or Nevada? Sure, take the loving party over, that's the easy part; the hard part is governing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 22:15
|
|