|
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 | ||
|
JeffersonClay posted:No crowsbeak has literally said he doesn't give a poo poo about non-american workers and shouldn't have to, so kvetching about the Haitian minimum wage from him is pretty drat rich. ok i'll kvetch about it then. the front runner candidate for the dems specifically stopped haiti from raising its poverty level minimum wage and you defended her policies and pretended she would be "economically progressive" anyway.
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 16:16 |
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:"Front runner candidate from the dems" did this post fall through a 9 month time warp? The election is over dude. Your constant need to relitigate it is tiresome. it was the person the party all lined up behind not six months ago, and those people are still in power at the dnc. the fact that they could be so tone deaf speaks volumes about the current state of the party.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Clinton successfully lobbied the Haitians to pass a smaller minimum wage increase in 2011, and they passed the full increase in 2014. Have we seen any substantial improvement in the Haitian economy since 2014? We don't have any robust economic statistics past 2014. But the incomplete statistics from 2015 show slowing GDP growth, slowing investment, and significantly increased inflation. https://www.focus-economics.com/countries/haiti So the assertion that delaying the full minimum wage increase for 3 years caused Haitians to starve cannot be based on anything but your gut feels. Nonzero Haitian people have died of hunger before then, which would likely have been less had the full reise been implemented because people would have more money for food. But of course there wasn't enough ~~~growth~~~ for you Republican-lites, so more people should have been made to starve I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
Libs ignoring people dying in favor of complaining that their pockets aren't being lined fast enough is true for American politics both domestic and otherwise, it seems.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:No, like I said no one has any statistics directly related to hinger, so your assertion is obviously based on nothing more than your strong convictions. The data we have showing increased inflation and decreased GDP growth and investment is wholly consistent with the standard minimum wage models we have--it helps some people and hurts others, and the magnitude of those effects and which effect is larger is dependent on the specifics of the labor market and economy in general. So you have no idea whether the minimum wage hike has helped or hurt Haiti, you just want to whine about the primary, which is really stale at this point. It's not "whining about the primary" to correctly point out that the Dem leadership is still composed of politicians who will gently caress over their constituents for a buck because what are they gonna do, vote for Trump???
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Please point to the part of the 2016 plaform that the party gave to Bernie to write that you think is relevant to haiti's minimum wage. clinton refused to back a $15 minimum wage in the platform because she didn't want to turn off too many of the upper middle class Republican voters she was angling for. Then those people voted Republican anyway and she lost. That's a pretty good summation of the party's problems with the minimum wage and related policies IMO.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:It's too bad the leftists who stayed home didn't have your acute political sense. "Focusing on Trump" necessarily includes shutting down any chance that the candidate who ran such a garbage campaign that she lost every state in the Rust Belt and Florida or anyone in her orbit has any influence whatsoever going forward on party strategy or goings-on.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
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. Not everyone who stayed home because her campaign was uninspiring centrist garbage was a leftist because her campaign can have been multi-facetedly awful. If she had run a centrist campaign on centrist principles with conviction instead of trying to waffle between her base and "moderate" Republicans, she probably would have won because voters who were otherwise uninspired might have seen her as someone who would fight for them on her terms. Conversely, if she had run the same campaign structure but her speeches had had any form whatsoever of a populist tone and if she had actually owned up the the garbage about emails/speeches, she might have actually inspired young voters like Obama did. But she did neither. She triangulated herself and the whole party directly into the trash and now we have party leaders saying that people don't want change from that strategy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Portraying Trump as a bigot who would dismantle the pluralistic gains we've made was not an empty platitude. Putting Khazir Khan on stage at the DNC was not an empty platitude. I'm not sure you have a lot of credibility to suggest I don't care about minorities when you're constantly depicting attacks on bigotry as empty platitudes. They weren't. It was absolutely an empty platitude because Clinton would have absolutely continued with Obama's policy of killing people like the Khans and their son who live in other countries, because she's bought and sold by Lockheed Martin and the Saudis and needs to keep that military $$$ flowing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
Clinton campaigned on pluralism and peace while silently letting her surrogates scream down anyone who actually wanted her to stand up for policies that can actually effect those changes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I'm going to take Ytlaya's advice and try not to engage with the really dumb leftists. Explain to me how Hillary can bring the parents of a dead soldier on stage to speak while being responsible for some of the most recent heinous US foreign policy and not have it be empty platitudes. Explain how she could campaign on peace and equality while continuing to give sloppy handjobs to the Gulf Cooperation Council by bombing Yemen and funding Israeli apartheid.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Despera posted:Just a reminder most Americans aren't nearly as big leftists as the average D&D circle jerk. just a reminder like every post you made before the election was proven wrong in the most hilarious way possible
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:These are also the same people who cannot recognize any important difference between the GOP and Dem platform on immigration. So if they aren't arguing for open borders, what part of the democratic platform do they actually disagree with? What part of Bernie's immigration plan needs to change for them to stop calling it GOP-lite? If there's any process for admitting people and providing a feasible path to citizenship without just letting everybody through, that is by definition not "open borders."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
There might be latitude between the parties on immigration, but both parties agree on the international economic and political order that creates immigration and refugee crises in the first place. Thus its not worth it to point out how Democrats are marginally less lovely because they are still responsible for the crisis in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Wait, in what way are the Democrats, in particular, responsible for the crisis in the first place? The party becoming a blue-flavored copy of Reaganism ever since the late 80s has meant that even when Democrats had control over the government they did little to fix the underlying problems beginning to crop up with global capitalism like asymmetrical wealth distribution and increasing climate change.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Not trying to absolve the Dems; just saying, the machine was already running. Well that's kind of been the problem since then, no?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:
Obama didn't change any Bush-era policies on immigration until he was forced to by pressure from activists.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:This is pretty convincing stuff. Turnout wasn't down significantly, and it's not the case that Clinton failed to turn out liberals where trump succeeded in turning out deplorables. Instead, trump got a significant number of white working class voters to flip from Obama to him. The question we need to answer is why. probably because clinton's messaging on jobs (and thus peoples' impression of her policies no matter what it says on her website) was a wet fart whereas trump's was a wet fart that managed to make it sound like he cared even for a second about working people, which is something clinton never seemed to get the hang of.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:The key part of arguing that racism is irrelevant, or that it's only a posture people take up when they're poor, is that it allows people to pretend to care about other issues while still trumpeting the need for a Herrenvolk democracy rooted in the belief that the rootless nomadic coastals are the problem. That is, if bigotry is sincere among the working classes, then to be a populist is to necessarily be on board with racism, sexism, and homophobia. ignoring poverty like you guys do directly leads to the empowerment of racists. not everyone who understands intersectionality is a national socialist lol
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Tally another one in the "Bernout seeks to avoid conversation with insipid gambit" column. You are unequivocally the one person that this applies to most.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:So, Obama-Trump voters are middle class, not working class. Would ya look at that. Yeah, and GDP is growing great! Lets be real there is no such thing as the "middle class" at this point. There's the professional upper class who can afford to live in cities and there's people working sub subsistence wages to get by.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 13:35
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:It is pretty loving cool to realize that "eat the rich", for poo poo-for-brains college students like Fiction, now means violence against social workers, unless they happen to live in the authentically Volkisch countryside. There are plenty of poor people in cities too. It's just becoming increasingly hard for them to live there because the politicians supposedly representing them think everything is hunky dory now that their lobbyist handlers' businesses have recovered.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 15:18
|
|
|
Pretending the Democrats are anything other than a party for rich people who just don't want to openly hate minorities so they can keep good business is sad.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
Centrist Dems need to believe the middle class is still a factor in the economy even though the trade deals they helped cut and pass long since took away the jobs which created a middle class in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You are on the side of our Pufferfish-in-Chief, though??? Nah, that was the Hillary supporters who said she would beat him and also were party to trying to make him the nominee.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:So are you ever going to explain your class analysis where social workers are bourgeois? No I don't have to hold your hand and explain what words mean.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Do you admit that Hillary was uniquely unqualified to beat Trump compared to Bernie yet or are you following JC's logic that Bernies didn't vote for her hard enough so it's their fault?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:So when you said "professional class", you were not using Barbara Ehrenreich's definition, but one cooked up by the CSPAM brain trust? Nope. I meant people who can afford to pay off the student loans they needed to take to get a technical job that one can actually survive on.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:And these are the "upper class", the exploiters, the bourgeoisie. It's okay to admit you resent people who managed to graduate college. It'll help you heal. I am one of those people so I don't deny my bourgness. However I want to work to abolish class, so I rightly criticize the Democrats for being the party of people with money who don't want to be seen as racist.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
Fulchrum is mad that what he thought was a sure deal to prove those drat leftists wrong lost to the orange reality show man.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
Wow Bernie lost in the closed primary which failed to pick the winning candidate for the election anyway? Your candidate was a pile of centrist dogs hit, just admit it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 03:50
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:
The majority of nonwhite (young) people I know did not trust Clinton at all to work to help them in any helpful way. She did a terrible job of convincing anyone she would fight for them, and that's why she had such a poo poo electoral result. Oh and Bernie lost to her in one of the least democratic parts of an already undemocratic system. Anyone who thinks he would have done worse than or the same as Hillary is deluding themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:LOL progressive Dems successfully primaried Lieberman and then Lieberman ran as an independent and beat the progressive dem in the general. Yes, we know the democrats will sell out their constituents by torpedoing their candidates when the proles refuse to vote the party line. That's a time-honored tradition.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:LOL centrist dems successfully primaried bernie and then hillary lost big time to trump in the general That's, of course, the Bernie Bros' fault for not campaigning for HRC and spreading the gospel of Russian hacking.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
Just because Clinton diehards are easily trolled on the internet doesn't mean that it was Russia's fault that they all had nothing but venom for Sanders and his supporters. Even if there were "bots" pretending to be Sanders fans the Clintonites needed no help trying to isolate and split the party away from people they saw as a threat to their power. There was no "ratfuck." There's been a time-honored tradition since 2008 of Clinton and her supporters creating yawning rifts in the party solely by their own hubris and selfishness. This time it was just fatal to her.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
In other words unless you think Neera Tanden and Sally Albright are Russian psyop active measures, your analysis is as hilariously misguided now as before the election.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
JeffersonClay was a perfect example of how insufferably smug Hillary supporters were about her chances of winning all the way up until the election. Now it's the leftists' fault for not believing it was the Russians all along, a convenient blanket excuse for the Democrats doing everything in their power to not have to listen to their constituents.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:y'all sticking your heads in the sand. You are the only one doing this by repeatedly insisting any split in the party was Russian doing. And again I'll point to the 2008 primary and her team's shenanigans then to say HILLARY DOES NOT NEED HELP ALIENATING VOTERS.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:So Putin isn't engaged in a concerted effort to promote reactionary right wing governments across Europe? Are those all conspiracies too? It's a conspiracy to think that the only reason your beloved queen lost is because of Putin's efforts to destabilize the West. He may be doing that, but to think it's the reason for anything that happened this year is completely foolish. That sort of disinformation campaign can only inflame rifts that already exist, and boy howdy was there a big one last year that Hillary handled very poorly!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 16:16 |
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:JC has acknowledged Hillary's faults many many times. Never in any way that would inform future policy. He's already retreated to Russian trickery as a better excuse for his purposes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 18:56
|
|