|
So how are we supposed to get anything done when we have to pander to people like Condiv and Homeless Friend who want nothing but to punish Democrats? Film ourselves punching a brick wall? Show trials?
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 05:37 |
|
|
Answers that amount to "Bernie needed to be the candidate" tell me you don't care about policy, just about whether the candidate is likable. They're irrelevant to the direction of the party unless you want a dystopia based around reality tv.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:This but... Unironically? But then there's no problem with centrism as long as we have enough money spent on marketing, and no need for actual good policies, because we can just lie forever without consequences.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:You can't polish a turd, it's very hard to market Hillary and her type as the people's champion. Under this model, the problem is that we didn't lie enough, then.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
loquacius posted:The reason Bernie needed to be the candidate isn't that he is likable (although he is), it's that he has a clear and sincerely-held message. Centrism is not a message. Presenting yourself as in opposition against someone else's message is not a message either, even if the opposing message loving sucks. Okay, so now we're talking about eliminating the traitorous primary voters. Cool.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
loquacius posted:we get yelled at for doing this too though You said primary voters were the problem.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
The basic and fundamental problem here is that people don't want policies, they want slogans and advertising, and they have convinced themselves that doing so is being authentic to what people want. This seems really hard to reconcile with historical evidence.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
loquacius posted:I said the problem is that Dem primary voters have a certain tendency, where did you get purging traitors from out of that How do you get rid of the problem that people who care about politics care about what politicians have done, without getting rid of the people who care about politics? WhiskeyJuvenile posted:I think a big problem with single payer is that most people have coverage and most people with coverage are generally satisfied with their coverage situation, regardless of source, and saying "we're going to take away this thing you like and replace it with something better" requires a level of trust that I'm not sure you're gonna get. One possibility is emphasizing a public option aimed at small businesses and making healthcare more affordable for them, which sidesteps some of the issues around "welfare parasites" etc.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:They want policy goals not a thousand pages of wonk cumstains. Yes, you want slogans and don't care about anything behind the slogans. The New Deal should never have implemented complex programs like the WPA, they should have just relied on Madison Avenue and done nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Perhaps we could focus this towards the owners of app startups, then the republicans really wont be able to say anything mean Neurolimited, don't you have racists to do apologetics for? Homeless Friend posted:read again The New Deal heavily consisted of "thousands of pages of wonk cumstains", you know. And yet, somehow, it didn't kill the Democratic Party as the Volk revolted against the effete bureaucrats. Mysterious, that. Almost as if the average person is a whole lot smarter than you are, and is capable of understanding complicated things, especially with propaganda assistance.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Obscure high school trans bathroom issues and wonky home loan executive orders are not the sort of things that draw people to the polls. This is a pretty interesting example of why "going left" doesn't make sense, because people will say that Democrats need to actually protect minorities, but also that we shouldn't commit to protecting minorities because the majority doesn't care, and so the overall message seems to be that protecting minorities means letting them suffer and pandering to the majority.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:propganda, or otherwise known as: how to speak interact with fellow humans Why should people pander to you? The Kingfish posted:"The New Deal" Why should people pander to you?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
loquacius posted:this question says a lot about you honestly Right, so your answer is "rig the primaries". Also that knowledge is a bad thing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:17
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:It's obscure as hell on the national level. Just because you consider trans people contemptible doesn't mean the average person does, since the average person owns zero pointy hoods and at best one white robe. Homeless Friend posted:The majority of the population doesn't have autism b5. Why should people put the interests of an internet loser ahead of anything else when you do nothing but be a smarmy jackass? Would you magically morph into a human being instead of a blob that squeaks "autist! sperg!" if someone pretended you have value?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
loquacius posted:how is it that someone can even lose arguments while making up their opponents' points from whole cloth, I wonder You said that the primaries need to be rigged to guarantee people like Obama and Bernie win. You don't get that, because you buy into the narrative that the primaries were rigged or something, but saying "we need to control the candidates who run" is wanting to rig the primaries. You should probably think about what you say instead of saying "the people who belong to the Democratic Party are the problem because they are interested in politics" and "we need to control the candidates carefully to prevent the fuckers who care about what politicians have done instead of how sparkly they are from ruining things". Crowsbeak posted:If it did HRC would have won. Remember how losing blue collarswould return three moderates. No, it doesn't scan at all with the premise that there are 63 million moderate conservatives and they're outnumbered by leftists. It doesn't make sense.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Condiv posted:yeah, all those petrochem company employees who vote democrat. we wouldn't wanna lose all 3 of those Nobody in America cares about the price of natural gas, since they don't use natural gas in heating. This sure makes you sound knowledgeable and informed. loquacius posted:ok I uh loquacius posted:The problem is that Democratic primary voters, most of the time, will vote for whoever has the most stuff on their resume, and it turns out nobody else loving cares. loquacius posted:It's a tendency that can be overcome by the right politician (see: Obama winning over HRC in 2008; Bernie falling just short of it in 2016) and we have to consider who we want to encourage to run on what message very carefully in order to not end up with the boringest wonkest wonk and lose the GE again. We do not have to "get rid of" the electorate, wtf. Now, as a politoons poster you are probably too stupid to understand what you are saying, but I have highlighted it helpfully for you.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:B5 stop talking to yourself, the point is the majority of people don't have insane hyper attention to every detail. I both can and can't believe this concept is astonishing to you. But nobody said they did. You are claiming that slogans are what matters, and people don't care about concrete policy, probably because you've got the brain of a squirrel and, with any hope, the lifespan of one too. I am saying that complicated policies have had very high levels of public support, because the average person is smarter than you are, not having rotted their brain with GBS.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:You contested my claim that people want overly detailed wonk policy. So your claim, fixing your post to what you probably meant, is not that "people will reject complex policies", but instead "people don't actively seek out complex policies", which seems really relevant and meaningful. You gonna tell us it never rains but it pours next?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Why the gently caress would I do that? I can make someone do that for me after I win. Who the hell cares if I can't give you 15 pages of statute up front?? Well, for one thing, you assume everyone falls for con artists completely instead of being aware that the person is a liar.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:Then you don't know how American politics work. It's about easy to digest symbolism. No, Americans aren't subhuman idiots. Sorry, but if you want to insist that Americans are all stupid, that's fine, that's the essence of any populism, that you can hustle the rubes endlessly, and you'll just have to be brought down before you end up getting your fool self into more trouble than you can handle.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:Offering detail is fine, opening with detail is just plain retarded. You act like I'm stating the obvious but the democratic party couldn't figure this one out. Who ever said that, though? You're just looking for a fight without the chance of risking your useless carcass.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:And this is why Democrats keep losing, they keep trying to appeal to the rational voter. This nation isn't made up of a bunch of Spocks dude. Well, that's the thing. If Americans are creatures of the gut who need to be controlled by technocrats, in your opinion, you are not a leftist and you need to be opposed by actual leftists. So you need to be honest with yourself instead of thinking leftism is just elaborate flimflam artistry done with noble intentions. Furthermore, I don't actually believe everyone is a moron, because unlike you I don't cringe in fear at the thought of sunlight and so I can tell you that people are quite, quite capable of having opinions on things and they do have opinions on things and they like to share them. Sorry your belief that you're part of an elect elite is self-aggrandizing bullshit, but you'll live. Homeless Friend posted:You seemed astonished by the claim that people don't want to be unloaded on by some politician with a million fine points, thus starting our journey together. Maybe you should take a leaf from my book and assume malevolence before stupidity. Or gently caress off back to your ickle forum and never come out again.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:39
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:People vote for people who address their grievances and they don't give a poo poo if their politician is lying about some specific piece of policy. You do that, and your family may do that, (or they may lie to you because they don't want you throwing more tantrums and breaking the furniture again) but arguing that everyone does that seems rather arrogant and presumptive, almost as if you believed you alone an interpret der wille des volk. Condiv posted:you really honestly want to know? in my ideal world, massive taxes on anyone making more than 700k a year. like 95% income tax above that. i also want to boost the hell out of the capital gains tax and i want a tiny tax on trades to gently caress over HFT. but i'd be happy with the taxes needed for a public option and getting universities affordable again. also money for infrastructure redevelopment jobs cause they're falling apart and initiatives to stop police from being able to kill black people on a whim. Okay, and how do you respond to the line of attack that raising the capital gains tax will discourage businesses from investing and growing because they'll make more money by sitting on it? Or the simplified "raising the capital gains tax kills jobs"?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
Majorian posted:That's not what he's saying, though. What he's saying is that the Dems need to take a page out of Bill Clinton's book (shocking, I know): feel their pain. Let the voters know that the Dem leaders aren't just going to respond to Rust Belt job losses with saying, "Well, NAFTA created more jobs than it destroyed, so..." Because while that's technically correct, it doesn't exactly demonstrate empathy. No, what he's actually saying is that Americans are too stupid to care about policy, ever. That "I feel your pain" was enough, and Slick Willy didn't need to do anything, just engage in a performance of doing things. Majorian, instead of inventing pleasanter, smarter arguments for people to pirate off of you, you need to find something that won't get you exploited.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
There's this really interesting tendency where "populism" is totally divorced from the historical People's Party/Populists, who were formed around a wonkish argument about the necessity of an inflationary monetary policy that was put together and promulgated by farmers. In fact, there were multiple such groups, and lengthy public debates over Greenbacks versus Free Silver. I guess Americans have just become stupider since the 1880s though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:b5 you're so hateful Calling people autistic as an insult isn't hateful, but being mean about a forum they post in is. This is obviously a Bernout idea of morality. Majorian posted:I'm guessing he won't agree that that's what he's saying. Plenty of people, like The Kingfish, have rejected the idea of having policies at all, but instead suggest having slogans. They refuse to admit that this is what they are doing, but we can either allow them to define reality, or empirically conclude what they believe from their actions. PS: Having worked in union shops for the last couple years, most of my coworkers felt there was a lack of substantive support for labor rather than a lack of words supporting labor. They want policies, not proclamations. thechosenone posted:Has anyone here been using the historical definition of populism here besides you? if so, would you care to share the definition you use for populism? Populism, n: A political ideology aimed at sewing together the fingers of the poster thechosenone so that the people are free from his posts while he tries to cut the stitches off. So named because of the popularity of this course of action.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 05:37 |
|
|
Majorian posted:I think they're thinking of left-populist pieces of legislation, like the Pure Food & Drug Act, Sherman Antitrust, etc. The point, Majorian, is that the idea of "hurr durr let's scam people into voting for us with Donald Trump impressions" is a historical aberration, and I am pointing this out in the hopes that there are some people who are not yet lost. Homeless Friend posted:Nothing hateful about pointing out most people don't experience excessive attention to detail, as many of those with autism do. So, how much did you giggle when you wrote this, and did you jump up and hug yourself when you finished?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 23:59
|
|