|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
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. This is just the logical end point of criticizing Clinton made you responsible for Trump winning. Maybe if a political party can't deal with any level of disagreement or criticism, maybe it's time to pack it in because you're unelectable. Christ as much as the Centrists keep claiming the left wants purity tests, they're demanding a Lenin-esque no critique of the Party once a decision has been made course of action
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
Majorian posted:The pro-Hillary folks here weren't exactly representative of her voting base. Upper East Side parasites don't post on here?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Oh, they do, but I was referring more to working class folks, and particularly people of color. They didn't vote for Clinton just to make conservatives mad. That's very true. Though enthusiasm for her among those groups did leave much to be desired.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It certainly did. Even so, economic populists need to start thinking now about how they're going to win the primary in 2020. Gotta make sure they engage those minority communities as much as humanly possible. Hopefully they'll have learned how to do this from some of the early Bernie stuff. But it's going to be hard to do of the Centrist wing of the party keeps screeching that raising minimum wage makes you a secret rascist/ sexist
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
galenanorth posted:http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/328405-clinton-campaign-plagued-by-bickering Jesus Christ this article is infuriating.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Haha apparently the DNC and DCCC really want to tell Ossof to gently caress off and refuse to support him too? So has GA 06 only got support from these idiots after they used supporting that as the excuse to moot help the guy from Kansas?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
Jesus Christ I want to read this book but I get the feeling it's going to piss me off more than the first two Rick Peralstein books did
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
Violator posted:Which book? I see a half dozen in Amazon that came out recently. The one that's being quoted right now, Shattered I think it's called
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
Larry Summers really is one of the most evil men to come out of Harvard. But this is pretty telling of the mind setv of these technocrats regardless of party, they're fundamentally opposed to idea of equality and democracy because they feel they have the right to rule as aristocrats due to their pedigree, and connections
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I think Obama was looking for whatever leverage he could possibly find with some fundamentally unhelpful neoliberal Democrats in Congress. That's not to say that Obama was right to keep Summers on, but I think he was more desperate for support than was obvious at the time. I think this is being far too generous to Obama when it's more likely he subscribed to NeoLiberal economics as well. His Grand Bargin being a big hint to that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Oh, I think he subscribes to neoliberalism as well. But Obama has never gotten very close with the Clintonista Democratic establishment. I think he finds Summers pretty awful personally, and I think he probably wouldn't sign on with that particularly grotesque comment. I would like to think he wouldn't either, or at least was smart enough to not do so. But his actions of pushing these awful reforms and half measures makes me think he doesn't disagree too strongly
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I know, and I know it's stuff that we all genuinely care about. But it's something that leftists have to commit themselves to keep repeating. A lot of people of color are suspicious of white leftists' commitment to helping anybody but other white people, and again, there's some historical justification for that. We need to keep reassuring them that we're not going to forget about helping them, and that we take challenges that underprivileged minorities face seriously. But as it has been pointed out these reasons for People of Color to not trust white leftists isn't because of the actions of white leftists but because of white centrists. White centrists worked to exclude black people from the New Deal and to limit how much they could benefit from the The Great Society. It wss the establishment of the AFL-CIO that excluded black membership. It was the radical anarchists and communists that fought for integrated unions. And when a poster brought these up a few pages ago it all fell on deaf ears and the usual gang of suspects that claim economic justice is racist were quite for that page and at least another before coming back up. So why are white leftists to blame for racist sins of white centrists politicians?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
But my issue seems to be that this "Oh POC can't trust white leftists because of these reasons" seems to be well a Centrist Clinton talking point they used to try and discredit all criticism from the left of her. One which now after her failure is being used by Centrists to discredit the attempt to swing the party left. Especially since these arguments that say that economic justice is rascist outs directly contradicted by the talking point of POC can't trust the left because of FDR and LBJ would have to also remember how every civil rights leader made economic justice a key part of civil rights and plenty of them were socialists that worked with white socialists. This argument has been grating on me for over a year because it's obviously bunk, but it's been accepted as fact
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 23:17
|
|
|
Jesus Christ how can anyone be this loving stupid!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
TyroneGoldstein posted:Comedy fact: We all (on this very board) asked the same goddamned thing 4 years ago, admittedly with amusement, about Romney's campaign in 2012. You're right, which makes this even more insane that they would make the same mistakes 4 years later.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:You know, Romney unironically is probably more similar as a person to Hillary than he is to Trump. Well even Obama said he agreed with Romney on 90 percent of things so there is that
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:Thomas Frank's book "Listen Liberal" was mentioned earlier but I forgot to add that Frank's portrayal of Democratic governance in Massachusetts is probably the most accurate assessment I've seen to date. What does he say about it?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:He says it has effectively been a test bed for the blue state model of governance and has produced an outcome that serves as a microcosm of national Democratic governance and it's outcomes. That's interesting and yeah I think you did this reproduced else where where even Republicans can contest the state like New York that had cultivated New York City and left the rest of the state to rot and decay
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:"we have just lost an election by overfocusing on the assumption that suburban white people will vote for democrats if sufficiently pandered to" It doesn't has to be Libertarians, but this is an exact loving problem we see with the "gently caress you, we don't need you to win" Democrats who continually fail and then blame the people they told they didn't need for them failing. It's pure narcissism
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Is the daily show really on the pulse of liberalism? I was under the impression that once Jon Stewart left everybody stopped watching. I stopped watching right around the time of Occupy Wall Street because Stray m Stewart was too busy making fun of people protesting against Wall Street's mass abuse
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I might be misremembering, but I thought Stewart was supportive of it initially, and then when it descended into a laughable shitshow, he started making fun of it. And given how dumb a lot of its elements became, he was right to do so IMO. It was actually after that asinine rally to restore sanity that I really stopped watching Stewart and Colbert; but from the get go of OWS he was complicit weigh the rest of the media in discrediting their criticisms of the status quo.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I don't specifically remember the "truth is in the middle" stuff, but okay, I can believe that. But the Rally to Restore Sanity was meant as a response to Glenn Beck's deranged "Rally to Restore Honor"; I don't think it had anything to do with OWS, at least in its conception. And it always seemed to me that OWS carried the seeds of its own destruction, and was already breaking down when the media started lampooning it. No leaders, no solid message, no organization of any kind - that all seems like a recipe for the most self-defeating elements of the left. It was a well-intentioned thing, and some good came out of it, but I don't think it had much hope of being anything but a laughingstock to most Americans. Jon Stewart changing his tone towards it wouldn't have altered that outcome. Well the deal with the rally to restore sanity was that it was entirely truth I'm three middle garbage and rejection that one side can be right and that kind of killed my enthusiasm for him and Colbert especially after coming of age during the Bush years
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
Condiv posted:right. having skimmed through it, counsel for the dems is still claiming the primary was fair, but that even if it wasn't that's ok because the dems charter is as binding as the campaign promises a politician makes. i personally would like our charter to be worth more than toilet paper to the democratic party, but they're arguing it's nothing but toilet paper right now So they leaned nothing from the O.J. "If I Did It" Fiasco
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
The Iron Law of Institutions. Some people would rather the party fail and maintain their powerful positions than have it succeed and they lose their positions
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Is it just me or is the GOP less vulnerable to this? I don't really follow their internal politics that much because their ideas are utter poo poo, but from the outside they seem more responsive to their rank and file than the Democrats. I don't know if they're less vulnerable to this as they actually have no problem using state power to actually maintain power by hook or by crook. And the Democrats are morons that believe fan fiction is real
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Oh sure, they'll weaken America to strengthen their own party, but what I mean is they seem less afflicted by a leadership which will happily gently caress over the GOP if it means they get to keep their power within it. I don't see that being as big a problem for them. Well you do have small things like the Suicide Caucus and the Establishment not getting along, but in the end the Republicans know what they have to do keep their base happy so they can continue to rob public coffers and benefit the rich and Democrats don't even care about hiding how corrupt they are anymore. And not doing things to keep their base happy. Never forget the chorus of moderate dems who all through the Obama years said gently caress you, we can win without you. But they just kept losing over elections
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Because they don't want to actually fix anything
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
VitalSigns posted:It's happened before. We imposed a 90% tax rate, broke up monopolies, gave a basic income to the elderly, and created the most prosperous and egalitarian* society ever seen on Earth. Here's where the bullshit comes in, it wasn't the working class that self destructed the New Deal over racism, it was the much vaunted Middle Class. Christ all you have too do is look at the number of Unions that supported the Civil Rights movement. That the hard hat workers in New York City were scum shouldn't have tarnished the entire Working Class. But it did because a certain class of Democrat wanted to jettison them so they could become the party of educated professionals and shrug off the working class and the policies that benefit them. We blame Republicans, but Rhett democrats were complicit and supported the destruction of the Unions. And even with that the poor working class still supports the Democrats by a clear majority and it is the Middle and Upper Classes that the Democrats try so hard to appease that hate them. Liberals so desperately need to push the narrative of racists being poor, rural and uneducated so they can ignore the racism that is rampant among the educated, urban, middle and upper classes. It's nut the poor who love law and order worship the police, it's the Middle class. Let's stop making excuses for the one part of society that fascism always appeals to by blaming the working class
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2017 04:02
|
|