|
TyrantWD posted:Trump had alienated a lot of the GOP donor base, and most importantly the Koch network. I wouldn't be surprised to see them dump over $1b into defending GOP control of all three branches of government in the next 4 years. Whoever the next DNC chief is, will practically be camping out on the couch of every celebrity and Silicon Valley millionaire. Because the libertarian billionaires of Silicon Valley are just going to hate Trump and the GOP enacting a bunch of right wing poo poo while wiping out regulations left and right. He definitely isn't going to have one of them in his inner circle either.
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 03:04 |
|
|
Fulchrum posted:If it was democratised people would have elected Jill goddamn Stein. Yes because Democrats by and large are crazy fucks who are wishy-washy about vaccinations, or believe in things like healing crystals and other Jill Stein insanity.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:* As a cringe-worthy story related to this, this one liberal girl I know posted on Facebook about how she now follows John McCain and Glenn Beck on Twitter after being so impressed by their anti-Trump views. Stuff like this basically supports my theory that in America how "liberal / left-wing" you are is defined not by the policies you support, but by how vocally you are against Republicans. If a person lays down a sweet burn on Republicans, they are perceived as being very liberal. Jon Stewart is a great example of this. Ask her how often McCain votes against something Trump wants passed. Maybe you'll get lucky and be able to clue her in to the fact that he's going to do what the party (Trump) says constantly.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
It's funny seeing people whine about Ellison not getting treated as the chosen one. How many of you people were complaining about Clinton getting that exact treatment in the primaries? Either way, you're bitching about a competition between two people much further to the left than even the majority of the Democratic party let. Zikan posted:if the democrats hadn't underperformed in urban centers in the rust belt like detriot, flint, and milwaukee clinton would be president now tho Michigan and Wisconsin also have some of the most aggressive voter disenfranchisement in the country, which the GOP want to apply nationwide and there's nothing that can stop them from doing so unless Kennedy sides with the liberals in the current cases working up to the SC. Even then they'll just tweak things and pass it again, only they'll make sure to do so close enough to an election to ensure maximum confusion and fuckery. Evil Fluffy fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Feb 8, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
This time last year the left would've been dancing in the streets at the idea of Perez leading the party and now people are crying he's an establishment puppet. Trump has broken people's brains.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:he's also prolly an outlier and you're conflating campaign money to the money needed to fund party building on a national scale. Trump also received billions of dollars worth of national media attention so any time people mention that he had no ground game they tend to ignore that he got more coverage for free than most candidates could ever afford to buy in the first place. Who needs a ground game when you're on every major news channel each night and being covered by a media that is renowned for being utterly spineless?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 05:55
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:What you basically have in this thread is 3 hardline Clintonites trying to gaslight everyone into thinking that Tom Perez and Keith Ellison are the same guy and those insisting on Ellison are being whiny little partisan babies. Ironic, given the few people doing the exact same WRT arguing Ellison is some break from the establishment while not even knowing what the gently caress they're talking about, like: NNick posted:I don't know if you are missing the point on purpose.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
axeil posted:Right, but presumably you'd still need some income for the other 305 days a year. Plus, that still doesn't account for how much it costs to run a campaign, even a small local one and the opportunity cost of switching your career from "whatever you're doing now" to "politician". When your campaign manager is your mom, you're not going to do as well as if your campaign manager is someone with at least some level of experience (but who requires money so they don't starve). "Bob can't be in the office for 60 days out of the year, I guess we should fire him since that's better than having direct access to the state government. They definitely wouldn't be able to retaliate against us in any way either." Maybe some companies are staffed/owned by people stupid enough to do so but the vast majority aren't.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
Convergence posted:Maryland's republican governor is actually pretty great and has a >70% approval rating, and is no threat because of the eternally blue legislature. He's one of the very, very few examples of actual functional fiscal conservatives (and not insane corrupt ideologues). He also loathes Trump. And how do you think that guy would govern if the MD legislature suddenly went red?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:you see NAFTA killed jobs which is why job losses didn't start until GWB's inauguration Pfft, facts. Next you're going to say something like manufacturing jobs are never coming back because it's cheaper* to keep them in China where multi-billion dollar factories and millions of trained workers exist. * until Federal minimum wage laws get repealed. Lightning Lord posted:"But Trump is surrounding himself with Jews! How can he be a white supremacist?" I really want to know what goes through Kushner's mind when he's in a room with Bannon and others. He knows full well that he's working alongside people who 75-80 years ago would've been happily sending him to the gas chamber and if he (and Ivanka) aren't trying to undermine Bannon and co to get their Nazi asses removed from the administration I'd be stunned. Maybe he figures Trump would protect him and his family from Holocaust 2: Alt-Right Boogaloo
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:NBC is reporting that Ellison has offered Buckley a role in leading DNC operations in exchange for his support. Buckley is the (hopelessly doomed) conservative Democratic candidate who once drove around one of Lieberman's two Joemobiles. No but you see Ellison is the Bernie Cult's Chosen One therefore he's the liberalist liberal to ever liberal and Perez is a third way centrist stooge!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:https://twitter.com/NomikiKonst/status/832053927692627968?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw I'm going to be happy with either of them in charge and hopefully they push hard for younger people to get more involved. Barring the eventual nationwide vote suppression the GOP's going to unveil, getting a solid turnout for 2018 is going to be vital for keeping more states from going red and dragging the US further in to fascism.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 05:20
|
|
|
Didn't Australia just raise their minimum wage to $18/hr or so? I mean sure that requires living on an island that is nature's own hellish revenge against humanity, but still.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
While you people fight over how low of a minimum wage the Democrats should fight for because ~optics~ or whatever, keep in mind that killing the minimum wage entirely is the goal of multiple GOP powerbrokers.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:Everybody should be able to vote absentee, why waste time at a voting booth? Because it helps depress turnout, especially among Democrat-heavy groups. If higher turnout actually helped Republicans they wouldn't be trying to make voting as hard as possible. JeffersonClay posted:Because there are millions upon millions of would-be democrats just waiting for the party to be pure enough before they actually turn out to vote. Some people are actually dumb enough to believe this, yes. Raskolnikov38 posted:no? again the base of the party wants ellison and i, and i assume the others who think similar to me, would be very happy to see perez run for governor of maryland The tantrum-throwing far left is not the Democratic base no matter how badly you wish it was. That you're hung up on wanting a concession, while ignoring all the concessions in the 2016 platform, is even more of a reason why you aren't worth paying attention to with your goldfish-like memory. The DNC should not be some concession to whiny babies who immediately forget when they get something they want and are never happy unless constantly being catered to.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:You do realize that in an electoral democracy you don't win by scolding voters as if they're children, right? President Trump is living proof that you're wrong about this.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:Acting like every establishment Democrat is Joe Manchin is a huge part of the pickle we're in now actually. Like Perez isn't Captain Full Communism Now but he's hardly some sort of vile "centrist" technocrat either. Perez is further to the left than probably 90% of America but for that remaining 10% he's just barely to the left of GW Bush. BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I don't think anyone here is saying we need more Joe Manchins, dude. If having a few more Joe Manchins meant Supreme Court Justice Merrick Garland then I'd have absolutely taken that over running people further left who couldn't win their respective states. Having the majority and positions of power in the Senate while relying on people who only vote with you sometimes is infinitely better than being the party out of power and who ultimately has no say influence whatsoever, as we saw with the GOP ignoring Garland's nomination. This is something the "boooo blue dogs, gently caress them all, political purity now" people seem to forget. Yeah it ultimately meant having lovely people like Joe Lieberman but even that rear end in a top hat was preferable to literally any Republican and if Dean's 50 state strategy hadn't been abandoned then maybe the Democrats would have a couple extra seats in the Senate and majority control, meaning they could actually block Trump's insane bullshit instead of cry about it and keep saving the filibuster for the SCOTUS nomination while the GOP just confirms everyone else first.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Really? I thought Dean's fifty-state strategy was based around building up the party at the state and local levels, leading to gains not only in Congress (where the Dems were able to pick up districts in places like Kansas and Arizona) but also in governorships and state legislatures. It was. People don't seem to grasp that it also means you get blue dog dems in blood red states which is still infinitely better than literally any Republican or their dumb ideological purity.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I can't speak to Portman, but Feingold can be explained by Wisconsin hurtling rapidly towards being a garbage Republican state. It also has crippling voter suppression (due to said Republicans) much like NC and several other states that have been made to suffer under single party GOP control. And the GOP is fully intending to do the same thing nationwide now that they control all 3 branches of government.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2017 06:25
|
|
|
In a sane world this would be a strike against Ellison if it's true and not just Schumer being Schumer.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 01:57
|
|
|
Holy poo poo stop responding to Condiv's batshit insane rambling you idiots.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:Can we Pretty sure posts as level-headed and rational as this aren't allowed in the thread. Last point is especially important for people arguing over the dumbest poo poo possible, many of whom think Perez is some corporate puppet whore when this time last year he was a progressive darling. Cease to Hope posted:This is extremely unlikely because, as you said, there's no much difference between Ellison and Perez. Ellison and Perez are also friendly with one another. This isn't some blood feud where they want to beat the other person at all costs.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 04:30
|
|
it now or does Fans still need to hit Gaddafi Did Nothing Wrong for Internecine Bullshit bingo?
|
People need to stop saying this is a symbolic role and thus it's dumb for two similar people to run for it. DWS's fuckups and Dean's success is pretty solid proof that's not the case and if two people with similar views think they're the best pick, good. They're both far to the left of what we'll have had and it'd be hard for either of them to gently caress up harder than DWS did.fsif posted:Well yeah, but that's a different argument. I agree if they keep clinging onto the old leadership and don't embrace the obvious leftist streak of its most energized voters, they'll flounder around and be less effective than they should be. Hopefully, we can primary these people. Perez isn't "old leadership" and the amount of twisted reality poo poo in this thread is ridiculous. People are crying about him being a Clinton stooge because she considered him for VP for fucks sake, in addition to idiots constantly parroting nonsense about him and ignoring when they're corrected (repeatedly). I'm fine with either of them, but the "PEREZ IS A FUKKIN OLD GUARD CENTRIST BANK LOVIN TRAITOR" people are just as bad as the "ELLISON IS AN ANTI-SEMITE AND HATES THE JEWS" assholes like Dershowitz. Evil Fluffy fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Feb 25, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Can you people who think Ellison as chair would've magically ended corporate donations and other personal wishlist stuff stop posting and actually go read about what the DNC chair does? Because it's not "dictate to the entire party what it will and will not do" like you seem to think. Though going by a lot of the No True Scotsman posts here, I'm not sure some of you think much beyond "I want thing gimme thing now." Also Ellison backed down on corporate donations as well. Blocking it would be great from some purist political view, but in reality you'll just kneecap your party. XyrlocShammypants posted:Maybe they felt Perez was more qualified and their personal experiences with him led them to support his run. Oh wait no it can't be that it has to be that a minority part of the Democratic Party is so amazing and threatening that backroom smoke filled rooms were assembled to put arch conservative Perez in power and Red Belly Ellis at his side like salacious crumb. But if they don't hand the party over to a vocal minority that sits far to the left of the majority of the party and instead go with someone with better appeal, including to non-insane leftists, it won't give babby what they want.  Main Paineframe posted:They did have a candidate lined up from the beginning. Ellison had a number of prominent establishment endorsements before he even officially entered the race. Literally the only reason these people don't consider Ellison to be an 'establishment' pick is because he was Bernie's chosen one and they're a bunch of disillusioned bernouts. Ellison had Chuck loving Schumer as one of his earliest and biggest supporters. I've said before, Bernouts are the same as Paulbots. They didn't want Ellison because of who Ellison is, they wanted him because Bernie supported him and just looked for things to like afterwards, while trying to find things to hate about Perez. And unlike these posters who're complaining about him, Perez has actually done things to help people. Majorian posted:You can probably quantify it as fairly close to the amount of people in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin who voted for Obama, but didn't turn out for Clinton. And their feelings on the matter should probably count for something. I'll honestly be surprised if WI and MI don't have historically low turnout in 2018 if their current laws remain intact. Clinton actually focusing on those states might've been enough to make a difference but Wisconsin and Michigan have some pretty hosed up, NC-grade voting suppression poo poo going on and if the 2018 elections don't continue making them worse (and on a national level now) I'll be surprised because literally the only hope against that stuff now is if lawsuits against Wisconsin actually get Kennedy to agree that they go too far, which they should going by his (theoretical) requirements mentioned in an older voting case.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 00:07
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:Hillary clinton did worse with hispanics and afams than obama. The flipping of arizona, georgia and possibly texas didn't happen (in addition to losing florida and NC; the latter was able to elect a dem governor at the same time). The demographic certainty pollsters talked about had far too many assumptions that proved false. NC's election of a Dem governor was entirely because McCrory was utterly loving loathed and even then he barely lost. The NCGOP also enacted a bunch of changes for the election that were done specifically to target minorities and other Democratc-heavy voters. How do we know? Because they did a lot of work collecting information about voter demographics and habits and used that information to explicitly target activity that was Dem-heavy in voter turnout, like souls to the polls Sunday voting. If NC, among other states, wasn't controlled by a party that actively works to ensure as few of those people can vote as possible some other races there might've turned out differently as well. That McCrory (barely) lost was still a bit of a shock and as a gently caress You on his way out the NCGOP gutted the governor's authority and now the new governor is stuck suing to undo the GOP's blatant power grab. Lightning Knight posted:We very literally do not need to directly appeal to Trump voters in any meaningful fashion to establish a meaningful foothold in the government again and eject the Trumpists, and that you're chomping at the bit to denounce political correctness and extol the virtues of going after Trump voters is immensely telling. When you see someone posting about how awful it is we get hung up on 'political correctness' and especially about race/gender, it's because that person just wants to be an rear end in a top hat and not get shunned for it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
Harrow posted:I guess my whole thing is that I think people are overreacting to Perez's election. He isn't as progressive as Ellison, but he also isn't, for example, Chuck Schumer. It seems like a lot of more progressive Democrats who were paying attention see this as a disastrous choice and I really don't. Someone let me know why I'm wrong if I am, I guess. The people complaining the loudest about Ellison losing don't care that he's got backing from some of the biggest establishment assholes like Schumer, they just care because Bernie liked Ellison therefore he was their chosen one and if Perez had been backed by Sanders they'd have rallied behind him just as quickly. Kilroy posted:In fact if that backlash results in the GOP dropping it like a hot potato that just further illustrates my point that the GOP are more responsive to their base. Or to put it another way, the GOP has a base at all - as opposed to the Democrats who don't really represent anyone as best as I can tell. Reminder that the person responding to Trump's SOTU is Steve Beshear. If the GOP actually kills the ACA (or makes motions to do so) without something to replace it, not just HSA and high risk pools, it'd be one of the few things that might actually gently caress them. But that's assuming the people stupid enough to vote Republican last year while assuming the GOP and Trump wouldn't actually dare to kill their coverage aren't dumb enough to buy whatever lie the GOP sells them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 08:40
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:For everyone concern trolling about Sanders supporters being shiftless anger addicts who just want to destroy the Democratic party, well, this just happened: For those who've forgotten, this is the kind of stuff Sanders was talking about if you want to be taken seriously. "I'm here, gimme or I leave" isn't going to work. Putting people in office and holding them accountable does (and you can primary them if you feel they failed and/or someone else will do better).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
^^^ I'd have been surprised if they didn't miss/ignore Sanders' message tbh.Kilroy posted:Eh, doing both is better though. There is no doubt that establishment DLC Democrat types will gladly take this energy and activism and use it to get elected, while doing nothing in return to keep that level of engagement up or grow the party. They are parasites and that's the nature of a parasite. That's why primaries exist. They'll have a hard time keeping their seat if that same energy gets turned against them in the primaries where turnouts are lower and thus a small engaged group's impact is that much more significant.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Harrow posted:This is astonishingly unlikely. Seriously, if that's the metric for Democrats not being dead in the water, then you can call it right now. The Democrats don't have a ghost of a chance at taking a majority in the House until after 2020, and that's only if they can wrest some state governments out of Republicans' hands. To put things in perspective, the GOP has to lose save races in states like Texas for either chamber to flip, while also not winning races that are already going to be in their favor of flipping. If the Dems can get POTUS election level turnout while the GOP gets regular midterm turnout that might be enough to win more than they're going to lose, but taking either chamber of Congress in 2018 would require 2008 or maybe 2012 levels of Dem turnout.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Reminder: this is what Ellison backed down from his pledge to ban lobbyist donations to endorse - to have the DNC vote on whether to ban lobbyist donations. Even if he was chair he wouldn't have the power to unilaterally make that decision. yellowyams posted:it worries me that they think crumbs like this are what progressives want. the deputy thing feels patronizing when everyone was looking towards the vote to determine whether they had a place in the party. i can't convince a single millennial that they should stick around. like those things are better than nothing but they're not going to convince leftists they should stay in the party and struggle with the power dynamics to address the issues they need to address when they can just run their own party and have their voices heard without being undermined. If they can't accept that they aren't the majority bloc in the Democratic Party and that makes them leave it only ensures they will never have any relevance in politics ever. It also means that they ignored what Sanders has repeatedly said or they simply don't care.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2017 05:21
|
|
|
XyrlocShammypants posted:No one expected bush Obama or trump four years before the election. No one will predict the next winner 4 years out this time. Barack Obama's 2004 DNC was literally followed up with "this guy's going to run for president, probably in 2008" by media outlets. Nobody who saw his speech and paid even the slightest attention to politics was surprised when he ran.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 03:04 |
|
|
Postorder Trollet89 posted:Yeah but their status as residents is either legal or illegal. The right wing shortened it to remove 'immigrant' as a means of de-humanizing those people. Accepting and using the term just further reinforces the notion that those people are less than human. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 17:48
|
|