Will the democrats change and represent their membership?

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Will the democrats change and represent their membership?

«‹›5 »

Will Perez force the dems left? This poll is closed.
Yes	33	6.38%
No	343	66.34%
Keith Ellison	54	10.44%
Pete Buttigieg	71	13.73%
Jehmu Green	16	3.09%
Total:	416 votes

[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

Again that isn't what happened. When Jeffords retired, Sanders talked to Senate leadership about running as a Dem and then declining. They agreed to that and did not recruit a challenger to run against him -- of which there were a few people who might have been interested in running, including two former Vermont mayors and possibly Howard Dean.

Okay so for you "clear the field" means "does not actively recruit challengers against so-and-so and throw institutional weight behind them". Like what the Democrats did for Tom Perez, for example.

It seems to me there's a pretty big difference between "clear the field" in this sense, and what other posters are talking about in the case of the Clintons. Namely, that Chelsea Clinton would be the recruited challenger with the institutional weight behind her, and not the other way around.

# ¿ Mar 20, 2017 22:52

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 13, 2024 20:15

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

The large majority of Bernie supporters did not have their brains broken so it's perfectly possible to like them generally while still disliking the ones who post in this thread.

Isn't there some tinpot dictator somewhere or a weapons manufacturer you're trying to get a consulting gig with? Go focus on that.

# ¿ Mar 20, 2017 22:58

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Ze Pollack posted:

The DNC not recruiting a challenger against Bernie is your proof the DNC colluded to clear the field for Bernie.

Yeah. I guess if the Democratic party usually tries to gently caress over popular candidates in favor of technocrats, then the handful of times you can point to where they don't do that, it sorta looks like collusion.

"The Democrats are so awful that this one time they just acted like a normal political party looks shady as gently caress." You know what, BI NOW? I agree.

# ¿ Mar 20, 2017 23:10

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

Arent you one of the leftists who think Dems should drop gun control and Qaddafi did nothing wrong?

Well I don't know wtf you're talking about with Qaddafi, but you've got me pegged on gun control! Smart leftists remember: shoot the rich first, then eat them.

# ¿ Mar 20, 2017 23:12

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

So has it crossed your mind that dropping gun control would be a massive boon to arms manufacturers?

Considering how weapons sales go up whenever Democrats start thinking about dying on the gun control hill again, no not really.

# ¿ Mar 20, 2017 23:22

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

I guess it requires an unbroken brain to understand that a rush of arms sales before an expected ban implies the ban actually stops people from buying arms.

Most of the "bans" Democrats try to impose don't actually do poo poo.

At any rate if you want to gently caress up a thread with gunchat try doing it in your own shittier version of this one, instead.

# ¿ Mar 20, 2017 23:35

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Main Paineframe posted:

The only people who saw the DNC chair election as "Sanders candidate vs Clinton candidate" were the leftist Bernie diehards, who made up a relatively small portion of the people who voted for Bernie.

Ah here we go again: nobody cared about the DNC chair election, Perez and Ellison are practically the same, etc. etc., but it's still really important that Perez gets the position.

FWIW I didn't see it as Sanders vs Clinton, I saw it as progressives vs whatever the hell Obama is supposed to be. And whatever the hell Obama is supposed to be, won.

# ¿ Mar 21, 2017 01:29

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

Who the gently caress could possibly have more beef with abuela than with the orange piss tyrant?

RATFUCKED

No one. Obviously.

But note the ease with which JeffersonClay switches between accusing progressives of wanting to rule the Democratic party with an iron fist and brooking no difference of opinion, then calling us hypocrites or deluded when we express some opinions different from the people we support. "Broken brain", indeed.

# ¿ Mar 21, 2017 04:52

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

It's almost like, he makes up his dumbass mind about poo poo first, then searches for anything that sounds like a reason to believe it? Whenever you agree with Ellison or Sanders or whatever, it's evidence you're an unthinking radical who sold his soul to the progressive wing. Whenever you disagree with them, you're either deluded, misinformed, or a hypocrite.

He's been running this same play over and over since December at least.

# ¿ Mar 21, 2017 04:58

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/gzornick/status/844005726590849024?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Hey JC explain to the class how this is actually good for your proposed anti-Trump strategy.

# ¿ Mar 21, 2017 05:02

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

You cretins are by no means a representative sample of progressives and that's why Keith Ellison has been calling you out.

It's funny how pretty much every progressive and leftist on this board hates your loving guts, and I've gotten numerous PMs from people agreeing with me after arguing with you in these threads, more than I have over any other single topic on SA ever, and yet it's just this board and you're super tight with "Bernie people" IRL despite being a patronizing fuckhead to every single one of them here. So weird.

# ¿ Mar 21, 2017 05:20

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

Wow your crazy poo poo has attracted "numerous" fellow travelers I am undone.

Well it does sort of undermine your contention that you're super tight with lots of Bernie people IRL and have lots of Bernie-supporting friends, get along well, getting laid every other weekend, by a different Berniegirl, and still find time to play video games and all along are still doing lots of drugs. Or yeah, maybe there's just something about SA progressives that we all think you're a centrist shithead dullard without a single interesting thought in his head, while the rest of them everywhere else find you interesting and cool. :shrug:

# ¿ Mar 21, 2017 06:12

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

7c Nickel posted:

You really need to stop trying to speak for all progressives and leftists, even just all the ones on this board, because you do not accurately represent them. I don't really have the same hateboner for him as you, and I know other leftists that don't either. We just don't want to have to relitigate the same poo poo over and over again.

It's more an attempt to sum up what his proposals and ideas mean to other people, many of whom he denigrates at any opportunity despite claiming them as allies, but you have a point and I will take your advice to heart, Games poster and occasional Hillary Clinton campaign defender 7c Nickel. (No really, though, I will.)

# ¿ Mar 21, 2017 06:38

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

I thought the narrative was Clinton lost because her squishy centrism didn't motivate enough democrats to turn out to vote. Is it too much of a logical leap to conclude that the democrats who stayed home because centrism sucks must hold leftist views? I don't see how you can present a coherent alternative without veering deep into no true leftist territory.

If you're arguing that there's no evidence that Clinton failed to turn out left leaning democrats I guess I agree.

most voters don't identify as "Democrat", "Republican", "Leftist", "Centrist" etc :ssh:

# ¿ Mar 21, 2017 17:48

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Ytlaya posted:

While the people who think Hillary is worse than Trump or is some uber-corrupt cackling evil person are dumb (the people in these threads I'm talking about should be obvious), I don't think it's unreasonable to focus a lot of effort on criticizing Democrats during our current situation.

No one thinks that and supposing that they do is a strawman made to discredit them and thereby justify ignoring them. Nice work - you're part of the problem.

# ¿ Mar 21, 2017 19:41

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

I'm going to take Ytlaya's advice and try not to engage with the really dumb leftists.

Kilroy posted:

No one thinks that and supposing that they do is a strawman made to discredit them and thereby justify ignoring them. Nice work - you're part of the problem.

told you

# ¿ Mar 21, 2017 20:27

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JC it's pretty clear you consider everyone posting in this thread including the OP to be a "dumb leftist" so I suggest you take my earlier advice and just not post in it. I mean you could also try just not posting at all, but we'll take this one step at a time.

# ¿ Mar 21, 2017 20:29

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

With half the thread calling out JeffersonClay on his dumb bullshit ideas all the time it's no wonder he keeps quoting a single poo poo post mentioning some "dumb leftists" and not by name.

But yeah, JeffersonClay has all kinds of "Bernie people" BFFs IRL, okay :grin:

# ¿ Mar 22, 2017 05:02

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Frijolero posted:

Pelosi on Anderson Cooper

We're doomed.

Democrats gonna sit on their hands in 2018 and hope the people vote against Trump instead of putting forth an actual plan and messsage.

Hey JC I take it back. Get your fat rear end over here and defend this poo poo.

# ¿ Mar 22, 2017 19:16

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Majorian posted:

But Hillary Clinton...holy poo poo. I've been disappointed with Pelosi on a lot of different occasions in the past, but I don't think I've ever heard her give such an outright stupid answer.

The "we are capitalists, okay" was probably worse, at least within the context of what she'd just been asked.

# ¿ Mar 22, 2017 20:21

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Majorian posted:

Ehhhh, maybe, but I can understand that a little bit more. While "We are capitalists" was a really bad answer, I can understand the Dems needing to say, "We're not socialists or communists," even though they should be moving in that direction, platform-wise, if they want to win a presidential election ever again.

In this case, though, there's just no excuse for giving "Hillary Clinton" as an answer. There is no better way to communicate "We learned nothing from 2016" to the base.

It's not just that she said "we are capitalists" it's that she went on to catalogue all the various ways that capitalism has been loving people over for the last 40-50 years, spent 0s describing what the Democratic party has done to fight that (though in fairness, that's about how much time it takes to describe it), and ended with an appeal to return to the regime of the 50s and 60s. It was loving awful, especially coming from the putative leader of the party right now (she is, or at least is supposed to be, as the leader of the Democrats in the House).

But yeah it's a close call. It's tough with Pelosi figuring out what the most tone-deaf boneheaded thing she's ever said is, because there is so much to choose from.

# ¿ Mar 22, 2017 21:06

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Ah there we go with Breitbart again. "Everyone who disagrees with Fulchrum reads Breitbart." :rolleyes:

# ¿ Mar 23, 2017 04:56

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

So Obama helped, but not enough? I guess that's possible, but the narrative that Democrats were punished for moving to the right is plainly false.

JeffersonClay posted:

It doesn't make any sense that the electorate would punish the democrats for moving to the right decades ago by picking the first opportunity after they move left to punish them.

You have got to be the most clueless fucker I've ever heard of.

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 03:32

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

It's going to be great getting blamed for 2018 by dumb fuckers like you.

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 03:33

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JC are you a rehabilitated libertarian? You need to drop the idea that humans are mainly self-interested, rational actors. You also need to jump off a cliff.

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 03:35

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

7c Nickel posted:

How do you square saying that with the idea that it was definitely Hillary's "neoliberalism" than sunk her?

I don't see what that has to do with it. He really just needs to jump off a cliff :colbert:

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 04:58

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

Then it follows that they'll blame trump for conditions getting worse under his tenure and these voters will inevitably return to the democrats, who need change nothing to win the next election. Haven't you completely undercut your original point here? Voters can't be punishing Dems for bill Clinton's welfare policies if they don't understand policy and just retaliate against the party in power when they don't like present conditions.

Yeah, and the Democratic leadership you're so keen to suck off at every opportunity has done next to nothing for them either, and there is no reason to think that will change next time they're up, especially if you're any indication of where their collective head is at. So best case scenario is we keep going back and forth between two broken parties with nary an inspiring much less realistic vision for the future among them. Keep going, that is, until one of them seizes power in a way that the other can't wrest it back anymore which may have already happened and still you're over here hemming and hawing about how much change is too much change like a gibbering idiot, which even then wouldn't be so bad except for the fact that it's people like you who are going to get the rest of us killed. Seriously, you don't live near a cliff or a bridge or something? Have a look around, would you?

Kilroy fucked around with this message at 07:13 on Mar 24, 2017

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 07:10

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

Holy poo poo a lot of dumb leftists ITT can't tell the difference between a reducto ad absurdum argument and an unironic endorsement of the absurd conclusion.

It's an absurd idea that you unironically endorse every chance you get. You've made an entire thread devoted to the idea that the principle strategy the Democrats should employ in 2018 is "TRUMP BAD" and you concern troll about moving left whenever someone brings it up, alternating between claims that it will lose votes and that it merely won't pick up any. We know you don't think the Democrats should move left, so what remains is either a move to the right, or doing nothing.

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 18:50

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

Actually that thread was about how democrats should tie Trump to the shittiest aspects of capitalism like Wall Street and environmental destruction but I guess it's too much to expect you to read for comprehension in the midst of a raging tantrum.

And then that gets them into office, maybe, and then what? They keep sucking Wall St. dick and implementing environmental half-measures? The sort of theater you're talking about, without concrete changes to policy to back it up, counts as "doing nothing". It may help get elected in the short term, but without policy in place to help people, even the best-case scenario is that we're right back here with Trump Jr. running for President in 2028 and winning to the consternation of Serious People such as yourself and the surprise of almost no one else. The rest of us want to reorder the Democratic party so that it can do some good, and people like you who think we're better off rearranging deck chairs and trying to wring another zero-mandate victory out of the grimy mop of triangulation, frankly you've got poo poo ideas to the extent they can be called "ideas", and the earnest persistence with which you advocate them doesn't endear you to anyone. You lost, badly - move aside and quit being a pain in everyone's rear end.

So yeah, that quote in your av perfectly sums up where you stand, whether you're willing to come to terms with the fact of it or not.

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 19:15

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

Kilroy posted:

You lost, badly - move aside and quit being a pain in everyone's rear end.

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 20:10

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

If the smart leftists want to make a list of dumb leftists I should ignore, I would appreciate it.

democratic-party.txt

(it's all the leftists :ssh:

)

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 21:45

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

I'm pretty sure the person telling us to stop engaging dumb leftists (you) was himself a leftist.

Doubt it but whatever. "All leftists except Ytlaya" then, and I guess anyone else who concedes a point now and again to your long-winded rear end, enough for you to deign them worthy of engagement.

KwegiboHB posted:

JeffersonClay, have you ever actually talked to anyone from the rust belt about the problems they face?

Well he's really tight with heaps of Bernie people IRL, according to him, so yeah probably. You just have to understand that the patronizing fuckhead JeffersonClay you see on these forums is actually a totally different person IRL, and that's why he can speak with authority on the state of the left in America and what the plan should be for them and the Democratic party going forward. Trust. It's only because all the "Bernie people" or whatever the gently caress on SA in particular are so mind-bogglingly stupid that he has to be such a condescending prick, here. It's our fault - honest.

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 22:12

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

I agree, the ACA is worth defending because it's a lot better than nothing. People informed about policy recognize this.

Talk about strawmen :rolleyes:

# ¿ Mar 24, 2017 23:03

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

It was on his website, but he didn't talk about it much at all. He threw out plenty of bullshit bromides about cutting the deficit too.

He mentioned it during one of the debates you idiot. It was a big deal. Here, let me reiterate:

JeffersonClay posted:

Kilroy posted:

You lost, badly - move aside and quit being a pain in everyone's rear end.

# ¿ Mar 25, 2017 04:41

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Also,

at the guy who constantly defends Hillary's commitment to the 2016 platform with "well she put some poo poo on her website", then claiming public option wasn't a thing because Obama didn't talk about it enough. Just :lol:

You're horrible at this, JeffersonClay.

# ¿ Mar 25, 2017 04:49

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

JeffersonClay posted:

Trump is obviously significantly worse than Obama because his administration has caused undocumented women to stop reporting rapes in LA. Whitewashing that by trying to blame Obama is loving gross.

Tell us more about how dedicated to the platform Hillary was and how a public option was just a thing Obama said that only naive idiots believed :allears:

# ¿ Mar 26, 2017 04:15

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

*sees the democrats thread got a few new pages*

"Hmmm I wonder if one of JeffersonClay's likely dozen or more posts elaborated on Hillary's steadfast commitment to the platform, versus Obama's single payer being a prank that only naive idiots (leftists, probably) actually believed?"

*checks thread*

"Nope, just larping as a moderate Republican, as usual."

# ¿ Mar 26, 2017 21:51

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Raskolnikov38 posted:

lets all just take a moment to appreciate that the guy yelling at leftists for supposedly parroting right wing talking points has been basing his arguments on the past page on the stereotype of a foreign horde on our doorstep

It's not actually surprising, since the only ideology centrism can lay claim to is "power for its own sake", so once Trump proved you can still get some power by being racist fuckhead, of course centrists like JeffersonClay are going to take another look at it.

Funny how right after the election the narrative was that the Democratic party will have to choose between "economic justice" (i.e. the purported left) and "identity politics" (i.e. centrists paying lip service to social justice). It's looking more and more like Democrats will have to choose between having both social and economic justice, or sticking with centrist cowards like JC who are running from both.

# ¿ Mar 26, 2017 22:00

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Golly JC you sure are getting a lot of mileage out of that one Ytlaya post. Perhaps you should reconsider that cliff I was telling you about and let Ytlaya post in your stead.

# ¿ Mar 26, 2017 22:04

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 13, 2024 20:15

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

Crowsbeak posted:

You know JC's avatar is really fitting him right now.

# ¿ Mar 27, 2017 00:59

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Will the democrats change and represent their membership?

«‹›5 »