|
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 | ||
|
VitalSigns posted:That would not warrant an invasion, no. Iran does not want to commit suicide and a nuclear first strike guarantees that they would die immediately after. No reasonably conceivable consequence of a successful Iranian nuclear program would come anywhere close to the horror that an invasion of Iran would be. To be fair, the only military scenarios I have heard pushed as a support of the nuke deal were bunker busts on enrichment facilities, not a full blown invasion. The overall establishment US Middle East approach is still pretty dire but at least some of the evolutions of the policy by dems has been 'for the better.' Note that I am not saying it is for the best. But this Team Progressive vs. Team Liberal faction split is becoming ridiculous. I have been dreaming of a progressive push for far longer than the primary candidacy of Bernie, but I am not going to let some small recent concessions fool me into believing that these gains represent the philosophical rejection of liberal tradition required to unseat the Dem Establishment. The aimless and often formless populist sentiment against government (and increasing apathy) and in favor of symbolic gestures against 'Establishment' should not be misconstrued, and solidifying a grassroots effort to create lasting philosophical shifts in the voting base will require much more than leveraging currents of dissatisfaction. Republicans have leveraged this through scapegoating and contrarianism, and while it wins elections, it has left them fractured and adrift... I fear what will come of these wins, as the destructive potential is huge, but I don't wish for another party to follow this path.
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 11:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 20:41 |
|
|
Arri posted:What right does the US even have to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons? We are literally the only country in the world that has used them, against a civilian populace no less, so I don't really see where we would have the moral authority to tell someone else no. If the mainstream beliefs about Iran were true, it would make sense. A destabilized state run by terrorists that have a stated intent of glassing Israel should not have nukes, as unaccountable non-state actors do not fit into a MAD scenario. Unfortunately these beliefs are not true and the state has strong control over the nuclear program. With that said, I still believe in non-proliferation as a noble goal and everyone should have been tripping over themselves long ago to help Iran develop its domestic energy program if their belief in non-proliferation were sincere.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 11:51
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:It's fascinating watching people flip out on JC when he humbly asks for evidence of their claims. It is even more fascinating to watch people react so strongly to people who are basically fairly representative of democratic party voters. I, too, wish it were not the case, but whatever echo chamber effect they have bought into coupled with a shockingly shallow understanding of poli-sci has lead to some incredibly bad/ironic analysis. It is just counterproductive, but fortunately it is just a few people on an unrepresentative forum who display tendencies of being unreliable party allies anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
fsif posted:Who is “you guys”? I never posted poo poo. To be honest it feels like the general tone deafness to identity issues that pervades 21st century reactionary politics, as a decent chunk of leftism grappled with the balance of class rhetoric with identity issues as leftism flowed to less homogenous regions. With that being said, this reactionary wave is its own brand of awful and has been entrusted to lazy shepherds.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 20:03
|
|