|
JeffersonClay posted:His fingers are in the pie, along with every other elected republican, and if we force them to throw trump under the bus their coalition will shatter regardless. Maybe. Or perhaps using a shaky evidence provided by the deep state under questionable circumstances to oust a democratically elected president (who is still very popular among large swathes of the country) will cause a lot of people to collectively flip their poo poo and embrace someone even worse. It's hard to say for certain. quote:Right, this scandal is actually worse than Nixon's Take a shot everybody. Also LOL you know nothing of Nixon's scandal(s) if you think that's actually the case.
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 02:12
|
|
ratfucking
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 04:41 |
|
|
By your own logic we loose nothing by going further left (it's a net zero). So why not do it anyways so we can at least get better policy proposals out the whole deal?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:We must seek common cause with moderate republicans to work against Donald Trump. Also, anyone who says shouting Trump Bad was not a winning strategy must be purged from the party immediately. *poses for a selfie with GWB* (Seriously though. gently caress Democrats for spending the last 2 weeks rehabilitating the image of that mouth-breathing war criminal.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:IF Trump has destroyed himself it will be with this Russia scandal. And the only way this Russia scandal destroys him is if it takes him out of office. Which I'm not convinced is a good thing. Impeachment is a bad move no matter which way you slice it. At best you get president Pence, who's just as crazy as Trump but less stupid. He also would have significantly greater support from the establishment which means that that he'd meet less institutionalized resistance to his agenda. Then you have the possibility that working with the deep state to remove a democratically elected president will lead to significant backlash. Particularly if the charges against him are bullshit or even just too vague for the average person to grasp. The right could flip its poo poo and embrace someone even worse the next time around and considering that the Democrats still haven't learned anything from the last year odds are this person will win too.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:I disagree to an extent. Trump is a logical conclusion to the GOP on it's current course for the past generation. We must work to not only undermine Trump but to anhilate that party. The problem with this is that Trump is in many ways also the logical conclusion to the failures of the Democratic party. Even if we manage to conjure up another 2008 style blowout in 2020 it would only be a matter of time before we end up with Trump 2.0. We need to start thinking longer term than just beating Trump. That means not only fixing the Democrats but actually doing something about more systemic issues like money in politics, gerrymandering, union rights, voter suppression, etc. Anything less and we're just dooming ourselves to repeat this cycle forever until the whole mess becomes unstable and collapses.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:(that said, we're still doomed. 2018, we won't have the right candidates. 2020, the establishment is going to continue marching down the path they want to head down and trump's going to get back most of the johnson/mcmullin defectors while the democrat side will still be depressed as they run NOT TRUMP [aka Hillary/Biden/M. Obama/Cory Booker] instead of somebody that can tap into that populist anger and walk the walk) Oprah 2020! 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Fiction posted:Hey effectronica can you move your insane projection posts into another thread where no one has to see them. You haven't put him on ignore yet? Edit: People, come on. You all realize he's trolling right? He's basically the reason the ignore button was built. readingatwork fucked around with this message at 05:33 on Mar 8, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 05:31
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:2) Total political opposition to every single thing Trump proposes or does. Don't do this. Just because Trump does something doesn't make it automatically bad. This attitude is now you end up opposing your own ideas and looking like complete hacks.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2017 13:47
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Like, seriously, can you think of a single positive thing he's done since taking office? Yes, he killed TPP. I realize your opinion on that might be different but for me that's a solid point in his favor. Seriously man, don't do this poo poo. That attitude is how the right completely lost it's loving mind. We need an intelligent, principled opposition right now to deal with the mess we're in. Turning the Democrats into a mindless pack of reactionaries constantly screeching about whatever left wing Benghazi is popular this week won't fix anything. It's not complicated. If Trump proposes a big public housing deal then cautiously applaud the decision. When the details come out and they're terrible THEN you can go ahead and rip it to shreds. Doing anything else screams "I'm a hack. Don't take me seriously." to anyone not already on your team.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2017 16:42
|
|
|
z0glin Warchief posted:It kind of feels like they're taking what they think the final bill would look like and campaigning on that, instead of putting forward a simple idea ("paid parental leave for all") and carving it down to the final passable bill after seizing power.* If feels this way because that's exactly what they're doing. Most major policy ideas have already been heavily negotiated with various donors/interest groups by the time politicians start discussing them publicly. Imagine Obama going to Blue Cross and working out a deal where he won't push for single payer if they agree not to spend millions blocking the bill altogether. It's yet another way that money in politics makes it so we can't have nice things.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
Frijolero posted:Yes. Also, unemployment may be "low." But there's still plenty of jobless folks, not to mention the historic levels of income inequality. Also, the employment numbers hide the fact that a lot of people are underemployed and still making less than they did pre-recession.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 16:41
|
|
|
Hillary Clinton did not run on pluralism. She gave vague platitudes to the concept of "working together" but aggressively avoided advocating for anything concrete. What was her plan to create a more inclusive society exactly? Put dirty cops in jail? Shut down the prison industrial complex? Give Reparations to the descendants of slaves? Of course not. She had no plan, even on her "strong" topics like race and gender.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:2). You are willfully misreading my posts if you think I want democrats to move toward the center. There is literally no other way to read your posts.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2017 23:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 04:41 |
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:Like? The new deal itself, for one. That said I don't think the risk of that is as high as neoliberals are making it out to be. Younger generations are much more enlightened than those of FDR's time and wouldn't tolerate the kind of poo poo. Plus left wing leaders are largely aware of this history and are uninclined to repeat it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 00:34
|
|