|
Frosted Flake posted:What the gently caress is a "bad" person? In what world are you living where half the population are "bad" people? Most people are bad people. Probably the vast majority are bad people in some way or other. Especially the people with the power and desire to make things better. Convincing bad people to work together and achieve good things is the goal. Fullhouse posted:if you want someone to vote for you then your entire campaign can't consist of calling them stupid assholes and shaming them What's funny is that the Dems could have won even then if they had a message that was stronger, that could get them to grudgingly go out to the polls at least out of pure self interest, but they couldn't even do that.
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 01:01 |
|
|
Pomp posted:but when push comes to shove they don't care about the [other] people This describes the default situation for vulnerable and oppressed groups everywhere. Because why wouldn't they be? Why should you give a gently caress for anyone else when no is going to give a gently caress about you? That's not how people's minds work. If you want vulnerable groups to turn out for you, you need to give them a reason to care, and you need to include them. You can't just keep asking them to sacrifice for the benefit of others and expect them to respond with enthusiasm, even if the sacrifices are small, especially if those others have no intent of returning the favour.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Like, we don't generally poo poo on the feminism movement even though it was driven largely by racism and built many of it's successes on horribly lovely racist rhetoric, because feminists can become allies and in doing so we can help them (good, because their primary aim is good if not the underlying motivation) and get their help in return on racial issues (also good, obviously) and when we work together like that pursuing mutual benefits you suddenly get a feminism that is a lot less racist, and has a history of being able to rely on minorities for help and an actual desire to help them back.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Pomp posted:Did you just call protesting an easy Meaningless protest is super easy. Good protesting is hard, largely because it requires a lot of organization and negotiation and a lot of politicking during the protest, but uh, that's not the sort of protests we're talking about, which is currently "spend a few hours shouting and waving signs and then go on with your life as normal".
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Freaking Crumbum posted:i guess the most frustrating thing that this election proved is that you aren't going to get meaningful social reform that will have any real longevity if you don't get the buy-in of white men. Getting the buy-in of white women would have been enough, too, but we didn't do that either. You definitely got to get the buy in of white people of some sort, though, yeah, that's sort of a "no duh" situation, especially when you aren't exactly running with 100% non-white support.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:Bernie really can't run at 79, that's loving nuts, but otherwise I am 100% on board with this I think he could if he ran with a clear, decent pick for VP in mind. A Bernie/Warren ticket would pretty easily calm fears about him dying in office, wouldn't it? It's like, worst case scenario you get the first woman president. Mirthless posted:FWIW I still blame Bernie for losing the primary, he made some of The Dumbest decisions early in the primary, kind of like how Hillary made some of The Dumbest decisions late in the general. The whole year's been a shitshow for Dem campaigning. Both candidates were just groping around in the dark while Trump had a clear strategy he never stopped executing. We all mocked him because it was a bad strategy, without considering we didn't have any strategy at all. Oh, he done hosed up, and a ton of his supporters hosed up getting his message out too. I find it hard to blame him too much though - he was a goddamn independent running in the Dem primary who clearly before this election never had any intent for running for President. We shouldn't have needed him, and I think he did well considering the circumstances. All that said, I'm not sure he should run again. I think if he's willing to take a leadership role these next four years we can find someone that's even better instead of relying on a candidate who lost a primary 4 years previously, and I think he'd probably be all for doing exactly that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
gently caress I recognized the typo as soon as I hit submit and kept loving hitting the edit button but my internet is running slow as molasses today, hahah, it's pretty bad. I definitely did not mean Bernie/Hillary.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
HannibalBarca posted:Warren is no spring chicken herself. Bernie Sanders, Liz Warren, and others like them should be doing everything they can to recruit and empower people like them who are 20, 30, and 40 years younger to rebuild the Democratic party. Yeah, but I still feel like if they could find some sort of good VP candidate there would be a lot less concern about their age.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:honestly i still don't know what the gently caress warren was even doing this year Does Clinton's machine have a history of making things unpleasant for those who oppose her? It felt like they gave Warren power in Congress in terms of committee positions, with the understanding that if she got in the way and they won anyway it would all disappear. Who knows, though, in the end.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:You can start by not saying people who don't vote don't matter. The only time it's acceptable to say people who don't vote don't matter is if it's part of a pitch to convince them that they can matter and should matter while offering someone or something that is worth voting for. And even then it's kind of a risky proposal.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
We are going to have to work with people who supported hillary, and we don't want to alienate them any more than we do anyone else. But we do need to make them understand that her and her power structure are loving dead, and we do need to ignore and oppose anyone who tries to rebuild it in her image.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
Peel posted:Lastly when declaring that people shouldn't be angry or contemptuous of Trump or his supporters, recall that the Republican response to Obama was to immediately melt down about the socialist usurper, and this reaction delivered them the House, the Senate and ultimately the presidency. Perhaps a hard line against Trump, rather than increasing his support, would reduce it by demoralising his softer supporters and hardening opposition, particularly in the wake of his inevitable bungling. The exhortations not to oppose Trumpists are both based on an unsafe assumption and asking something inhuman of people in the firing line of the most repulsive figure to ever assume the presidency. Yes, exactly, the Republicans melted down and *still* didn't attack their own base (at least as far as I could remember) or the voters they needed to swing things - they attacked the guy they wanted to defeat. Attacking, opposing, and delegitimizing Trump is fine and desireable. Being contemptous of his supporters is just going to make them cling to him harder.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Shark Sandwich posted:So basically we have to have a civil war because the people who gave us abuela won't admit defeat I sort of wish we could elect our party representatives. I don't know how we get the equivalent of a Corbyn takeover here, and I don't see them giving it up at this point.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 00:04
|
|
|
sportsgenius86 posted:http://www.rollcall.com/news/opinion/im-a-coastal-elite-from-the-midwest-the-real-bubble-is-rural-america#sthash.hQsGH2Zt.rws7PPMx.gbpl Is rural New Jersey actually a real place even? Edit: What is this guy even going after? Is it just "don't blame the elites for loving this up, please, I'm one of them"? GlyphGryph has issued a correction as of 00:38 on Nov 11, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:Seriously it pisses me off when people suggest that we should lust for the days of when people died of ruined lungs and asbestos poisoning (but everyone had a job right?). We need to give these people a chance to enjoy the prosperity that others are getting to enjoy. Guaranteed minimum income. Programs to resettle people stuck in dead rural towns. Rebuilding of infrastructure. Bring them into the 21st Century; don't doom them to living in the 20th century forever. You need to speak to their actual interests and what prosperity means for them, and for a lot of them it does not mean "accumulating debt in a tiny rental apartment in the big city existing purely on the generosity of the government". Rebuilding infrastructure is good, sure, but again, a primary priority for not just these folks but everyone, something that the left always recognizes when it comes to minorities but seems to ignore here is: For a lot of them, they want to be respected, and to feel proud of who they are. They don't want to be told they have to give up everything they value about themselves to live the life someone else thinks would be better for them. If you want to bring them into the 21st Century, you need to give them a way to do that that actually takes their concerns and values into consideration - or changes them slowly enough that they can find something new to appreciate, Building windmill factories for them to work in, so they can use that money to support their families and accumulate wealth, however modest, over time, is one way to do that. Giving them a minimum income might help do that, but you need to be able to explain how because it's not immediately obvious. Moving them somewhere else seems like the exact opposite, and it's even worse for the people who don't want to move because now you're stealing away any chance of things getting better for them. Offer them something concrete, that actually applies to the things they want - don't expect them to figure out how your ideological generalist solutions will help them specifically. (and this is actually part of the mistake Bernie made in the primaries - he couldn't connect a lot of his genuinely good programs with concrete benefits for minorities. It's a flaw in his campaign and approach that we need to be fully aware of) We don't want to jump into an all new way of ignoring people in our rush to move leftward, by pretending we already know what they want without listening to them, or recognizing that they may have interests that are in fact varied and diverse and different from our own, or the same as our own but prioritized in different ways, or the same as our own and priotized in the same way but operating in a different context. GlyphGryph has issued a correction as of 19:09 on Nov 11, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
The DNC Chair Election: How you can get involved I put the info post about the DNC chair in a slightly more shareable form as a quick webpage. I'm sure there's a better way to do this, since that will die under any kind of heavy load, but I figure I'll do what I can to help and it at least lets me get the words out to my facebook friends and poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
iospace posted:So here's three people that we could tap for helping the party go forward: If the next step this thread could do is make decisions like this and agree on them, I could start pushing them along with the list on social media so people know what to say. That actually sounds pretty good to me but I've got no idea how this works. (Despite Dean being establishment in many ways, he also got hosed over by the establishment and got to see them turn his victory to mud, and I actually believe he's very capable, so I wouldn't want him in charge but i support seeing him involved if he wants in)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
comingafteryouall posted:Maybe we do need big donors, but their interests have to take a back seat. Which is why we're advocating putting someone other than Dean in charge and all agree he shouldn't be in charge. We want to give him a chance to do the part he's demonstrated he is good at, not a chance to lead. Dean should absolutely not be in a place to give any concessions to anyone.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
What does this even mean!? Ahahaha
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:It means Ellison is too But there's just so much wrong with it at so many levels. There seems to be an implication that white Rust Belt voters weren't part of the Obama Coalition which is ??? because I thought they were.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:Holy poo poo I just realized how bad voter suppression is going to get Real bad. Like really real bad. This is why it's super important to ignore the people who say "Well, we won the popular vote, so we should stay the course mostly!" We absolutely need to smash the next several elections in a big, big, big way even to pull ahead, and only then can we start to fix this poo poo, and it's gonna take time.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Okay, I skipped a lot of pages in this thread, so if anyone can bring me up to date on any news, plans, changes to the document, etc., please do. Meanwhile If anyone here is in MA quote:Democratic State Committee Meeting This is happening tonight. I am going to be working this week on trying to get information on all sorts of events like these for people in various states, so if you are interested in getting some info for your state please send me a PM so I can add it to the research list. If you include your hometown and county I'll try to add those to the list as well, and organize all this stuff in a new page on the website along with the other info. Unless anyone else in this thread has already done it, I am also going to start getting some communication tools together and trying to pull in outsiders and spread the message and maybe organize this motley collection of "we should totally do ****" into a "we are currently doing *****" type situation, so let me know if you're interested in that as well. It is driving me loving crazy that there's no way I can go to this (wife still recovering from surgery, can't get a babysitter for that night so I am taking care of the kids) so if there's anyone else here from MA who could go and speak for us that would be incredible.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
Apparently it's not just locally, and they actually had a meeting for discussing the future DNC chair yesterday (which I also couldn't attend, same reason) God loving drat it, I hate being trapped at home while poo poo happens. Please, look into your local party organization details - This is the week meetings are happening nationwide!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
Just saying, once more - if you can, attend your local meetings. It will be about ten thousand times more meaningful than an email or letter, and a thousand times more meaningful than a phone call. These meetings actually matter - and stay afterwards and talk to the staffers and come back with info for us on how to get more involved in the future. Zo posted:It took less than a week for the cspam election thread to go back to unironic "hillary is actually good" and "all men are misogynists" so i'm not sure if this rebuilding thing is going to work out exactly as planned lol And this is with all the Hill toxxers banned? Actually I suppose most of them bought back their accounts by now... ugh.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:So today I wrote like seven emails to various MA Dems saying "hey Keith Ellison is cool and good we should support him for DNC Chair." I hope you are going to the meeting tonight where everyone relevant is likely to be, since it is open to the public and this is possible going to be a serious topic of conversation.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
MeatwadIsGod posted:...these were leaked? I admit, I was thoroughly in "gently caress this poo poo I'm working out and drinking until election day" territory once the democratic primaries were over. What little I read of them was pretty disgusting, specifically the one where Clinton ends complaining about ethics rules in Washington and how you go to Washington to make money and how it's really sad and unfair how poorly the wealthy are treated by having to follow stupid ethics rules that prevent them from making even more money while they are there. Zikan posted:i agree with bernie and all and am heavily involved with the draft keith campaign. You sort of sound like the people arguing against "Black Lives Matter" because it should say "All Lives Matter" - the white working class is very specifically the group Democrats have stopped even giving lip service or anything but contempt too lately, they still give at least that to the black working class (but no more than lip service, haha). Are we really not supposed to say the name of the demographic we need to target, now? We've got to leave things in the vaguest possible "All Lives Matter" terms so as to avoid offending anybody who might not be included, even if we're simultaneously advocating policies to support them too? Maybe you're right, but I'm not going to take that kind of claim at face value. GlyphGryph has issued a correction as of 17:57 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
Majorian posted:A war with Russia was never on the table. That's pretty weird then because every time I listened to the Dems talk about it, it certainly sounded like an increase in hostilities was 100% something they wanted to get behind. Majorian posted:What parts of them were particularly revealing? That the DNC put its thumb on the scale in the primary (stupidly, since it didn't really need to), and DWS and her clique didn't like Sanders? The DNC putting it's thumb on the scale of the primary was a big loving deal and seems to have convinced a number of people to stay home, and the fact that they didn't need to makes it worse. It's a confirmation of the suspicions people had against Clinton and confirmation the system was rigged against them and their voice. How is that nothing?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It is, but it touches upon a broader point, which I think deserves to be underlined: yeah, of course the Clintons were/are corrupt. Whoop de poo poo. So is every other politician in Washington. The Clintons are pretty garden-variety in that sense, and compared to Trump, they're small potatoes. So it's a little weird that Hillary Clinton was somehow the poster child for corrupt pols. This isn't a defense of shutting down discussion by blaming concerns on sexism. quote:DWS got fired. (something that should have happened years earlier, but still, it happened) quote:I agree that the fact it happens all the time doesn't excuse it; it is something that should be cracked down on, severely. But the tenor among a lot of Bernouts during and after the election seems to have been that this was the biggest, most horrible instance of party nomination-rigging in history. It wasn't anywhere close. You're attempting to minimize completely legitimate concerns expressed by the people who were explicitly targeted, on the grounds that "everyone is doing it", "other people did it worse", and "they're too emotional and hyperbolic in their argument that it was bad". If you're critiquing "tenor" in an attempt to shut down anger and disregard valid complaints, yeah, no, that's not a valid criticism, it's just an attempt to deflect. GlyphGryph has issued a correction as of 19:19 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
logikv9 posted:donna brazile ain't sticking around anyway And... ?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
Thoguh posted:I'd wait a few months before claiming victory there. A lot of connected people are licking their wounds right now and/or symbolically jumping on the bandwagon with the hope stuff dies down shortly. Yeah the problem isnt getting them to bend the knee, its preventing them from weaseling their way back to the top as soon as eyes are off them. And Ellison as DNC chair is hardly a magic bullet, its just potentially an okay first step. Theres lots more barriers to dem success than dnc chair I think the criticism of him based on dem house members having actual work to do is pretty funny considering the circumstances. What is it he would be doing? GlyphGryph has issued a correction as of 20:09 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It's just important to remember that the Dems need to tailor their "we're going to increase your social welfare" message to the individual audiences within their coalition. Agreed, and this is one of my biggest worries - that even if the Sanders group pushes out the Clintonites, they are still going to get lazy and forget that many values are local and voters are inviduals and you need to pull as many people in as possible by selling your solutions and services to them directly and understand what they value.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Zikan posted:WHAT THE gently caress DID THEY DO WITH ALL OF THAT MONEY Nepotism and celebrities probably, who the gently caress knows
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Mister Fister posted:Boy i hope celebrities didn't actually get paid for this poo poo, that makes me even more mad. From what we know so far it looks like they spent more on celebrities than they did on hispanic outreach.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:Can we all agree that the Democrats are doing worse and worse because they don't offer coherent solutions to the very real problems millions of Americans face? Literally nothing else matters if we don't agree on that our something similar. This is one of MANY reasons they are doing worse and worse
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:Well, gently caress Luckily we only need to fix a few of them to turn things around and thats definitely one of the must haves.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
Yeah i mean its nice but have they seen the light, is this not actually as good as it seems, or are they really this spineless?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
Anyone know what a "DTC" meeting is?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 05:23
|
|
|
Peel posted:dnc reform step one: make sure every state party has a website and contact details that actually work Yeah loving tell me about it, this is loving horrible. I'm very, very lucky to live in MA - they apparently have this poo poo on lockdown. I'm trying to do some stuff with New york politics right now and poo poo don't even work - all the buttons just take you to the goddamn donate page, and the calendars are either broken or empty. Definitely gonna have to make some phone calls, this is pathetic. My tiny little town's Democratic party has a better website and more information than literally any source I've found in New York so far. GlyphGryph has issued a correction as of 05:43 on Nov 15, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 05:36
|
|
|
Souai posted:I would expect DTC to refer to Democratic Town Committees which are local dem groups mostly in Connecticut and Massachusetts. That would be it! Thanks. I'm checking event schedules trying to find Democratic party meetings in various states that are open to the public. Wow, hey, look, it's the bad guys!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 07:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 01:01 |
|
|
Majorian posted:Eh, I'd say that I agree more with Marx's later, more nuanced approach to market expansion and its relationship to international conflicts, as set forth in Capital, than his (considerably more-frequently cited) earlier approach in The Communist Manifesto. I do not consider myself a Marxist, but I broadly agree with Henryk Grossman's interpretation of Marx and the connection between mature capitalism, imperialism, and Great Power conflict. What many people want from a politician is someone fighting for them. If it's fighting for the impossible, that's only more admirable. If it's fighting for the possible that only fails to happen because of the opposition, even better - you can hammer them for "preventing jobs in the rust belt" or whatever. And in the end, this specific thing isn't impossible. Easy, no. Possible, yes. To the extent people want, probably not. To an extent that it improves the lives of lots of people, definitely. Majorian posted:They were. Now they're mostly nonexistent. If there's a silver lining to the cloud of last Tuesday, it's that the DLC's acolytes have pretty much been roundly discredited, clearing the way for better leadership in the Democratic Party. Well, I mean, Hillary herself was one of their most notable and prominent leaders, so even though the organization itself went defunct a while ago the people involved only had their fall quite recently. It's nice to get confirmation that they and Dean saw each other as the enemy though, makes more sense why Dean was driven out. (And they explicitly hated him because he wasn't down with promoting large-scale murder of foreigners, which Hillary obviously was) GlyphGryph has issued a correction as of 07:11 on Nov 15, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 07:07
|
|