|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/852012022468194305
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 10:14 |
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:It is good that the defenders of the democratic party, faced with the democratic party making the active choice not to try to win a winnable seat, have determined a simple, cohesive defense for that action. tbf the seat didn't look winnable just a week or two ago
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:The thing that kills me about the refusal to even try here is that even if it's a pathetic failure, it gives you a testbed for your plans in 2018. You cannot buy an experimental platform like this: ridiculously pro-republican seat, ridiculously pro-republican state, phenomenally unpopular republicans above the seat in question, it's a perfect low-stakes way to try to answer the question "how can we best leverage this to our advantage." You send a signal to other would-be challengers in 2018 that the DCCC will have their backs, and you get a chance to iron out the bugs in your system as you try to do something none of the people involved have experience doing. that's true but the GA-6 election is coming up and the democrats are serious about that seat...so we'll see in around a week
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:He's not a "Bernie Bro" you horse's rear end and how would he be going against his constituents who voted for him despite his coming out in support of $15 and single payer? Did they vote for him without knowing about his support for those things? Did they vote for him thinking he didn't really support them? lol did anyone think hillary was gonna be tough on the hated banks after her secret speeches to goldman sucks?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Even Trumpists are now plurality pro single payer and other things, but we will still assume that you must triangulate the poo poo out of everything because that has been proven to work single payer polls are rediculously unreliable because based on the way you phrase it the support is somewhere btwn 10 and 90% also it's actually a really bad idea imo for either parties to touch healthcare because everybody really really hates changing the healthcare system and losing what they already have, if the dems get in power the first thing they should pass is an actual infrastructure bill
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Because hoping that the other side fucks up so bad that you win by default isn't a good strategy. Also because the people who run the Democratic party have learned absolutely nothing. we'll see how it turns out next week after GA-6
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Condiv posted:you see it as two separate messages, i see it as one. we have to fight. hillary did not fight hard enough in vital states and lost them. the DNC did not do the bare minimum in this election and they barely lost. dems have been running for a long time. running from their own platform, running from their own policies, and running from red states. i and a lot of other red state dems are tired of being told by the party that we don't matter. we want the dems to fight for us for once hillary fought so hard she literally fainted on national tv her problem was going after states she didn't need when she should have just locked down MI/WI/PA
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Why is the person who thinks that the Dems should write off everything south of the Mason-Dixon line trying to scold others for not voting D? I don't think any dems think that because there's a lot of safe democratic districts (AA vote getting gerrymandered into single districts lol) in the south and also pretty much every major city has democratic mayors
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:trump voters aren't rural, they're petit bourgeois the typical trump supporter is a white dude in an area with $50k-$70k median income but is surrounded by poverty and opoid addiction neighborhoods and is afraid they are next
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I loving can't wait for the Game Change book about her campaign, it must have been a dumpster fire internally. game change 2016 isn't coming out until prob end of the year but the book the article is excerpting from is out next week
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Fansy posted:Would they pay that much for Bernie Sanders? that's a good question because if they can taint berns with wallstreet speech $$$ maybe it reduces the power of his movement
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
I still like ron paul's thing where he goes "well if I have the $$$ it gets used for good and if the banks has the $$$ it used for evil" excuse
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
Wuhao posted:I'm considering picking the book up, sounds neat. What kind of advice did Bill offer? "Talk to white working class people"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
bill basically was being old school politics who relies on "instincts" and talking to people to figure out public opinion, whereas Hillary's team relied on models for everything The middle ground is polling, but Mook was super nervous about money even though he literally had like 100s millions so he didn't poll the rustbelt states enough before election day because the models were suppose to substitute for polls and feels, and yeah the models turned out to be wrong
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:millenials don't need to worry about retirement because either we'll have gotten past late stage capitalism or we'll all be dead in bread riots drafted into the trumpenstaffel for WW3 vs Canada and China
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Maybe that's what Obama was saving that political capital for? Actual capital? The Obama foundation actually it would be rly rly funny if michelle runs in 2024 or something and gets killed over the obama foundation
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
he should just frame it as wall street funding the ropes that will be used to hang them
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
the appearance of impropriety is often worse than corruption itself
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:Every time people bring up the 2016 primary and Hillary winning it I feel that it's worth reminding the disingenuous idiots that Obama, best campaigner and orator of the generation, literally only managed to barely tie Clinton in the 2008 primaries. the people weren't nearly as pissed at the status quo domestically in 2008 as in 2016 in early 2008 the big issue was iraq, not the various symptoms of wage stagnation and inequality for the dems
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
Bernie could have definitely won the primary even though it was a long shot, suppose Iowa went to him by a couple of points instead of a de facto draw (let's say 51-49), and Neveda goes to him narrowly after NH (51-49 or something, it was a 4 point loss in actual primary so not that big of a swing) then he goes into super Tuesday with like 3 of the first 4 states. Then all of a sudden the narrative is that Clinton is a weak candidate and this is 2008 all over again If this was a "normal" candidate Bernie pretty much won at that point but in 2016 he has a 50/50 chance of winning had he won IA/NH/NV (which he was pretty close to doing)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:i stopped watching the daily show after jon stewart left. i can't believe he'd give up such an influential position because there was no way he'd ever approach that level of relevancy ever again. does he even give a poo poo about bein relevant still? i thought he just wanted to retire and farm cabbage
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 09:32
|
|
|
Majorian posted:You made it a fight, idiot. I meant it when I said that bigotry has no place here. That includes transphobia. Don't come back. they aren't wrong tbh, parties are private organizations and they can run their primaries however gently caress they want if they want to cancel primaries altogether they can do that too
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:If they have a charter of rules for internal procedures, then they should be absolutely legally liable for not following them. sure, then legislate a federal law that says so
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
we should just let an a.i run the world like deus ex we can probably just run it with an R next to its name or something and it would win world dictator elections
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
idk if this is posted yet: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article147475484.html quote:But new information shows that Clinton had a much bigger problem with voters who had supported President Barack Obama in 2012 but backed Trump four years later. The problem wasn't mostly turnout: the problem was actually Obama voters who flipped to Trump Typo fucked around with this message at 16:09 on May 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
Famethrowa posted:Sure, they did have issues, but they still managed to drop bombs on civilians regularly Also the Syrian rebellion "worked" because a significant part of the army defected, if the army as a whole remained loyal to Assad the war would be over by now
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:Yeah this is a good point too that I didn't consider when I commented earlier. As the right wing essentially owns the US military we can forget that happening. The concentration of corporate power today is I'd say similar to that of early 1890s gilded age, populists and progressives equalized societies 100 years ago, it can happen again In the election of 1912 all 3 parties wanted to fight the corporations: the democrats under wilson wanted to breakup the trusts, the progressives under T.Rooservelt wanted to legislate new anti-trust laws, while the republicans wanted to more vigorously enforce existing anti-trust laws and this is after decades of corporate control of politics and blatantly corrupt presidents: the populists slowly took power from them against incredible odds, from making senate elections decided via popular vote instead being selected by state legislatures to passing Sherman anti-trust legislation and finally culminating in the new deal of the 1930s It can happen again, and 2016 already showed the power of rising populism and the willingness by both the left and the right to reject traditional political orthodoxies The Democrats are ready for a self-proclaimed democratic socialist and the Republicans for Trump, it's pretty obvious the Reagan status quo isn't going to last http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=15637 quote:The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. quote:Of all corporations reporting from every part of the nation, one-tenth of 1 per cent of them owned 52 per cent of the assets of all of them; quote:But in that year three-tenths of , per cent of our population received 78 per cent of the dividends reported by individuals. This has roughly the same effect as if, out of every 300 persons in our population, one person received 78 cents out of every dollar of corporate dividends while the other 299 persons divided up the other 22 cents between them. The person who said this isn't Bernie: it's FDR Typo fucked around with this message at 21:15 on May 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:lmao she's blaming the loving debate questions isn't that the exact same thing trump is doing
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:Citing the successes of an ultimately defeated movement whose historical situation is very much disanalgous to our own is kind of a cold comfort. They weren't ultimately defeated no, you would be right to argue that some of their progress was rolled back though Social security, the FDA, income tax being constitutional, popular election of senators, and the administrative state are proof of that. Despite a few generations of Republicans try to rollback on them they have never succeed quote:whose historical situation is very much disanalgous quote:You may as well be citing the Bolsheviks.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
the only significant federal welfare program that's actually ever being reformed was AFDC during the Clinton administrition btw, the Republicans tried and couldn't even rolback 60s era programs like medicare and medicaid. SS/Medicare are basically never going away because their beneficiaries are old white people who form the core of the Republican base and those people are smart enough to revolt every single time someone tries to touch their benefits
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:The meager reforms that were able to be passed survive, in a sense, but the movement that made them and the political will to further them is gone. The early 1900s came at a time when the pendulum was swinging leftwards after decades of Lincoln and William McKinley's Republicans practiced Laissez-Faire capitalism to industrialize the country and was led by progressives who grew up in the era of union riots and poor people being crushed by said Laissez-faire capitalism. They didn't succeed easily either, but suffered numerous defeats: see William Jenning Bryan's 3 failed attempts at getting elected president. The boomers grew up in unparalleled economic prosperity and that's a major reason why culture and not economic populism succeeded, "god, guns, gays" and hatred of the liberal cultural elites were much more important than economic issues when everyone was doing at least ok economically and the richest people weren't much wealthier than the middle class. Then you had a once in 50 years politician who sold to the American people the idea that hardwork==success and that the government was the problem and not the solution. The Reagan majority combined cultural populism with libertarian economic ideas and was to dominate the US all the way up until today but is fundamentally rooted in the boomer experience, southern evangelical culture and the economics of the 70s-90s. It's just that we are on the tail end of that majority now just as Carter was the tail end of the New Deal Coalition. And coincidentally the current standard bearer of Reaganomics is just as ineffectual as Carter was of the new deal. quote:It will only be a matter of time before the will to maintain them disappears as well. The party that pushed for these reforms now mirrors the ideological opponents the early dems had to fight to get even the pathetic skeleton of FDR's reforms passed. Sorry, that is a total defeat. quote:There is popular desire to do things, sure, but the ability to actually harness it is essentially gone. The Democrats either refuse the call or actively dismantle anyone who tries to get genuine leftism, which further illustrates the degree of defeat in the left.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:
Right, the solution is new organizational structures: social media was incredibly effective at organizing both bernie and trump supporters in 2016 for example
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
also just more of my musings I think the cultural wars which defined us politics since the 1970s or so is burning itself out. The fundamental theme of said cultural war was a referendum over the values of the counter-culture of the 1960s vs the value of Nixon's silent majority and Reagan's moral majority. The most intense portion of it I think basically comes down to the question of whether America is a Christian country or not and I think liberals have mostly won at this point. The big issues: abortions, gays, feminism etc have more or less being fought over and the winners and losers determined. Liberals won decisively on gay marriage and repudiating the sexual morality of white protestant America. Rights for women are probably the best it's ever being in history (though we can debate about how much further it needs to go). Abortion turned out to be a narrow liberal victory and the roe v wade status quo is likely to remain for at least a generation. The only real big win for conservatives was gun control. I think the next set of cultural wars are already starting: and it basically comes down to nationalism vs globalism and is America a nation-state like France or is America a "universal nation" and an idea. Atm, immigration is the most clear demarcation line so far but overall I think this set of cultural wars is going to be much less disconnected from economics than abortion or school prayer was.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
tekz posted:He's loving garbage. you would have a beer with him so he's the best candidate
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:I mean Biden's bankruptcy bill was really, really, really bad though, and that was his baby Joe Biden is extremely well connected to the financial industry and every accusation made against hillary can be made against him with the exception of EMAILS but it doesn't matter nearly as much because joe biden seems like a nice guy who can relate to a white working class guy from PA whereas hillary can't pour a beer properly
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
I actually wonder, s charisma more important in an American election than say, a French election? Does it matter as much whether you would have a beer with macron or le pen as oppose to beer with clinton or trump?
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Actually, it definitely played a role. It made her seem like a supporter of free trade without accounting for the well-being of workers, and a proponent of deregulation. She didn't do much to help change this narrative going into the election - indeed, she helped cement it by saying that she was going to "Put a lot of coal workers out of business." Like it or not, her association with her husband's administration hurt her in those states that she needed to win. I'd say she was hurt way way worse by calling TPP gold standard than w/e memories of trade during the clinton administration
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
Condiv posted:but apparently you have to be a political scientist to realize correlation != causation there is absolutely a correlation, it's just a matter of how long it holds the average white working class american hated and still hates college kids making a mess and act like they hate america
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
Fiction posted:Backpedaling now? Also single payer in the states is doomed to failure without the Fed and is a great way for Dem leadership to shrug off any suggestion that they add it to the platform. California can prob do single payer: it has a bigger population and economy than Canada
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 10:14 |
|
|
in the future political scientists will name the political system of our generation tweetcracy: or rule by Twitter
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 20:51
|
|