|
Ogmius815 posted:To quote the teevee: “ooooo someone’s going to get laid in college.” we will win America back by our stalwart refusal to stand for a solitary goddamned thing, out of our fear that someone might make fun of us for caring if we did why no I have no idea how a senile reality TV host beat my ideal candidate and ushered in total republican dominance over all levels of the federal government, why do you ask
|
#
¿
May 23, 2019 05:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Except it was just bullshit edgelord posturing. yes, yes, you are confident everyone else's political views are as hollow and based solely on trying to look good as your own. nobody is shocked. now, do we move on to you actually engaging with the question "what about putting a pro-segregation guy in charge strikes you as putting the brakes on a descent into fascism" or do you continue to while about how the goddamn alt-left is just virtue signalling when they say the Democratic party should act as if black people are equal to whites.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2019 05:49
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:And then on November 4 2020 everyone will stand and clap for the noble, principled leftists that demonstrated their strength and importance by ... enabling the reelection of Donald Trump. But at least then, as was proven by the 2016 election, everyone will rally behind the furthest left candidate in the next election. *checks polls* oh consider what it means that your "value of power" is possessed solely by the voter and the republican politician, while the democratic politician must always be a helpless, spineless, cringing supplicant. who dare not take action on what they claim to believe, for fear they might hurt the feelings of a professional carrion-eater.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2019 06:10
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:The democratic politician doesn't have to be a helpless, spineless, cringing supplicant. But that person still has to win the democratic primary so I can vote for them in the general. If they don't win the primary I'm left picking between two inferior candidates with one (the democrat) being better than the other. we expect around the same quarter of you to defect to the republicans as you did the last time the Rational Moderate lost the primary to an outsider, tbh. fortunately, both for civil rights and the country in general, most of the White Moderates (tm) who were so angry at that rabble rouser King for behaving so damned indecorously have a saving grace: they genuinely believe in nothing, and only engage in politics as a team sport. they will follow where they are lead, because the alternative is standing for something. and being told by the guy on the cartoon show "oooh, somebody's gonna get laid in college." evidently this is something these people fear. I know, weird, right.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2019 06:42
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:There’s another possibility of course. Which is that the far right pretty much always falls in line and votes for the GOP, even when the GOP isn’t quite on the same page. That’s smart of them, because it’s resulted in a lot of their agenda coming to pass. in this version of the universe are the blue dogs who actively ran against the ACA in 2010, got massacred for it, and proceeded to usher in ten years of right wing governance marked by a Democratic president trying as hard as he could to cut Medicare and Medicaid the left's fault? or was their running against the blessed ACA also the best policy because it's what democrats decided to do.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2019 14:49
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:This is just nonsense. Democrats in general didn’t run against the ACA. In fact lots of them knew that voting for the bill would it their seats in danger. Even if it were true, why would running against the ACA be bad? Do you admit that the ACA was a good law? unsurprisingly, you will find that a socialist thinks "that's bad because it's socialism" is both stupid and wrong as a reason for something being bad. this is a phenomenon you refer to as "purity testing" and everyone else refers to as "believing a thing is true." did you forget the blue dogs who ran against the ACA in 2010, as a thing that should not have come to pass, on the grounds it was socialism, actually. and, despite this sensible, reasonable compromise with their republican electorate, got wiped out down to the man.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2019 15:48
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:I’m not even sure what you’re arguing here. What should democrats have done differently re: health care in 2009? They didn’t reach a compromise with republicans, they passed a huge bill with zero republican votes. let me remind you. Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:in this version of the universe are the blue dogs who actively ran against the ACA in 2010, got massacred for it, and proceeded to usher in ten years of right wing governance marked by a Democratic president trying as hard as he could to cut Medicare and Medicaid the left's fault? you have made it clear that you believe the Left's opposition to the ACA is wrong, because the Democrats passed the ACA, and therefore it must be good. so I am curious what your take is on the Democrats who ran against the ACA as both socialism and wrong, got wiped out, and in so doing ushered in the Why Won't Republicans Let Me Cut Medicare years of the Obama administration.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2019 16:04
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:First, that post was germane to the discussion of the Supreme Court’s recent abortion jurisprudence. The strategic voting remark was merely a useful framing device for helping the reader to better understand how that jurisprudence has shifted and is likely to continue to shift. "if you don't vote for anti-abortion democrats, the republicans might take away abortion" is a threat that relies on the person you are menacing forgetting the first half of the sentence the second you finish saying it.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 18:31
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:No the danger is being created by the political activities of one of the two parties. the explicit rationale of the establishment wing of the democratic party, op remember. vote for Democrats, to preserve abortion rights. also, if you expect Democrats to support abortion rights, you are being an insolent child, who needs to sit down, shut up, and take what you are given.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Democrats, well known as the anti-abortion party full of anti-choice extremists. Ogmius815 posted:“We can’t be held responsible for the consequences of our actions because we’re the good guys.” Okay. quick turnaround on that one, huh
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Do you understand the difference between maybe, hypothetically agreeing to “constitutional restrictions” and overturning Roe (I.e. what we are loving talking about)? remember a few hours ago, when "what we are doing cannot be bad, because we are the good guys" was the argument of idiotic, self-serving cowards. good times.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 22:33
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:So behold the great leftist argument: the GOP wants to take away your rights, but the liberals have vaguely formulated their position in a way which leaves open some possibility of compromise with the GOP in the future while making clear that would require a significant change in the GOP position in order to get off the ground. Therefore, in order to prevent such hypothetical future compromise, we shall abandon the barricades and allow the GOP to do whatever they want right now. That’ll show those liberals! alternately, we could vote for people who represent our desires, and not vote for people who tell us, in no uncertain terms, that they do not, and have no intention of doing so. this strikes me as a more effective way to preserve abortion rights than proudly, openly proclaiming your desire to throw abortion rights under the bus in exchange for Literally loving Nothing.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Hmmmm. That’s perceptive! I wonder if anybody else could stand to listen to that. remember to vote for the person in the back of the mass saying "we will not, under any circumstances, attack the wall," though otherwise how will we ever attack it
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2019 20:30
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Yes but telling that same minority that no, they can’t have any relief whatsoever from their abhorrent leadership, because “we gotta take down this WALL, man!” is brave and right and good. hell yeah, you show that trans woman who's boss for thinking the Dems aren't on her side
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2019 21:49
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I made my post knowing you were trans. You’re one of the most famous posters on this forum. somehow I did not expect a thread about protest voting devolving into how the true oppressed minority are centrists. and yet, in retrospect, this outcome seems so blindingly obvious.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2019 22:07
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:What percentage of Louisiana women support that law? Sometimes electorates want dumb stuff. vote for democrats to preserve rights. unless we believe it will cost us to preserve your rights. in which case you will get nothing. one hell of a GOTV campaign you got there, man
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 23:14
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I think you misunderstand what the "democratic leadership" is, or what a political party is. a political party is a group that joins together in order to pursue political goals, OOCC. what does it mean when leadership of a political party tells you "we do not share your goals, and will actively work against them."
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 23:25
|
|
|
the funny part is that, ostensibly, there is an answer to what the affluent moderate will give up in order to achieve left wing policy: their tax dollars except for as Nastidon can attest, the split second you start talking about impacting their wallets to do good for society at large they are suddenly Very Concerned (tm) about how the left is going too far, and we need a more sensible, republican-friendly set of policies. not because of anything they personally believe, heaven forbid! they just Have Concerns in a way they never do when democrats sell out minority rights. King got them as a demographic dead to loving rights in 1963 and everything they've done in the last 50 years has been in the service of trying to obscure the base and obvious truth that if you wait for them to say the time is right to act on principle, you will still be waiting when the seas swallow you.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2019 23:06
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:That's actual very helpful in that your ideal isn't a complete lack of bias and equal opportunity for those that seek the democratic nomination for president, but just that it benefits your preferred candidate. Would you find it acceptable if someone swapped Bernie/Biden in your second paragraph? there is a fascinating disease in the liberal mind they consider having political goals, and seeking to accomplish them, to be a kind of cheating. as wonderfully exemplified in the people who asked the question "do you want a left wing tea party" as though the question had any answer other than a YES so loud it would pulp their worm-infested brains. god, imagine the horror of being in power and being able to put your political goals into action, as opposed to being undercut at every turn by white collar professionals terrified of cocktail hour with the De Vos family becoming awkward. what a nightmare scenario that is, for people who have learned to believe Process itself is the only thing worth respecting or seeking to protect.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2019 02:47
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:And wouldn't you know, the republican primary electorate nominated Romney in 2012. lovely pick given the circumstances, definitely. you are operating under the ludicrous delusion that the second is not part of the first, out of a pathological veneration of the status quo. your politics has no goals. your politics has no enemies. your politics cannot succeed, because your politics has no conception of success beyond "nobody is actively yelling at me, personally." which is why, asked point blank what your politics offers to the people you gleefully throw under the bus at the first sign of republican resistance, you can come up with no argument beyond whining about how DARE your inferiors not respect the Process.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2019 03:29
|
|
|
loving magnificentYeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:remember. vote for Democrats, to preserve abortion rights.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2019 15:51
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Who have you been arguing with? ogmius and kingnastidon, primarily. while it is clear your sympathies lie with that group, you have been refreshingly unwilling by comparison to them to say "welp, 50%+1 of the country is against gay marriage, time to cram all the gays back in the closet"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2019 18:47
|
|
|
Marxalot posted:What's stunning is that despite a bunch of people who seem to be all about ~the facts~ and ~logic~ their fundamental loving assumption there wasn't even true he is lost to us forever, now, but I will always appreciate Fulchrum arguing that the reason Kerry lost in 2004 was the queers getting too big for their britches to vote for him. the Democratic Party cannot fail, you see. it can only be failed when people expect it to do a solitary goddamned thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2019 19:25
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:It's really a shame about the probably-for-the-best blanket anime ban outside the anime forum, because there are a lot of posts like this lately in D&D and CSPAM and the time is now, people suffering from ideological depression: its time to watch Legend of the Galactic Heroes. this is Correct Thought
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2019 21:31
|
|
|
karthun posted:Ellison's carreer would be over as DNC chair and now he is winning state wide elections in Minnesota and will run for MN Gov in 2024. you see, it was actually a good thing that Haim Saban ran an aggressive "Don't Let The Paki Win Or I'll Cut Funding" campaign to prevent a Muslim from getting control of the DNC. we only racially pathologize anyone to the left of our desired policy goals because we care! now sit down shut up and apologize to Mr. Saban, Ms. Omar, you are to speak when spoken to.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2019 15:15
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:I don’t support Biden and I’m not going to vote for him in the primary (I support Warren). But if he’s the nominee you’d have to be pretty stupid not to vote for him. When you’re going to get one of two choices, and one choice is clearly much better than the other, whining about how you really want a third, impossible choice isn’t very smart. Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:remember. vote for Democrats, to preserve abortion rights. so insolent, these upstarts, eh, ogmius. can't they understand that their rights are the sacrifice we must pay, for you to feel good about the president again.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2019 19:02
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Elizabeth Warren is like Bernie, but smarter. the people who find "but what if we made the extermination of Palestinians carbon-neutral" a sign of intelligence are a never-ending source of wonder
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Yeah I’m all about promoting the Boy Scouts. That was the point of that post. Totally. in fairness to that huge reach, your previous greatest hits in this thread have included "Hyde Amendment? more like Who Cares Amendment"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2019 15:38
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:wait when the gently caress did they do the third one? I thought the whole government shutdown was over them not giving trump the funding ~guess what their last act before the 4th of july recess was~
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2019 01:10
|
|
|
the political compass site is by libertarians with the express purpose of saying You The Reader are actually a libertarian if you are my particular flavor of datamongering weirdo it's fun to take the test and try to get an authoritarian left result- the test is designed to slot pretty much anyone who thinks government should be able to exert regulatory authority into authoritarian right and anyone who wants to smoke weed into libertarian left.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2019 22:35
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:Isn't just so weird how none of the cowards who demanded that "vote blue no matter who" never be discussed in USPOL so t come into the specially made thread and defend their views? hey, Ogmius stopped in for a while. then he established you should vote Democrat to preserve abortion rights and also Democratic politicians shouldn't have to defend abortion rights, and found somewhere else to be for some reason.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2019 22:36
|
|
|
twice burned ice posted:So Republicans do not also 'wreck the loving poo poo' out of the same populations? man, that goal of avoiding the slaughter sure pissed off in a hurry, huh
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2020 17:05
|
|
|
twice burned ice posted:Bad phrasing, edited out much like all those mexican kids under Obama, wakka wakka!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2020 17:06
|
|
|
How are u posted:How about you let us know what you would have done instead. if i was asked to destroy a country on the grounds it would make the french happy, i would simply tell them "nah"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
How are u posted:Yeah I was following the news minute by minute as it was happening. I am quite aware. Feel free to explain how you would have handled the incredible volatility of the Arab Spring and the Libyan revolution in the Correct manner as compared to that poo poo-lib lanyard Obama. when the French come begging me "hey our attempt to exert control over our old colonial stomping ground has failed embarrassingly, could you do a regime change for us" i tell them "wow, that sucks bro" as opposed to "of course, dear friend, this will be my chance to demonstrate how you do regime change the SMART way!" its not super hard, tbh
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2020 23:09
|
|
|
How are u posted:Feel free to just make up things and pretend that I'm saying them, I guess. we gotta vote for the corrupt, warmongering, social-security cutting, concentration-camp enthusiast rapist who thinks climate change is an anti-business conspiracy, to get rid of the corrupt, warmongering, social-security cutting, concentration camp enthusiast rapist who thinks climate change is an anti-business conspiracy hell yeah
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2020 23:13
|
|
|
How are u posted:This is so loving wrong I can't even imagine how poisoned your mind must be in echo chambers to get there. But, you've got your conclusion and by god you're gonna hold onto it. pretend for a moment Joe Biden, the rapist, for whom you are presently advocating voting, wins the election. what comes next.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2020 23:20
|
|
|
How are u posted:It's not just "the establishment", Joe is winning the votes and winning the primary elections. Scream about the media and "low info Black voters" all you want I guess but if Bernie can't overcome that then he can't win. odd, it seems like you forgot to answer the question. as a refresher: What if the entire democratic establishment lines up behind Pete Buttigiege, the same way the lined up behind Joe Biden? What if they weight the entire primary against anyone to the left of Reagan, the same way they did it this year? Will you change your voting pattern then? Or just pray that the same action causes a different reaction? do you have an answer, or is it just sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming "VOTE FOR THE RAPIST OR YOU'RE A BAD PERSON"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2020 23:23
|
|
|
How are u posted:Biden pushed Obama into supporting gay marriage. Biden is not Donald loving Trump on this poo poo. Vote for whoever you want or don't at all, but this false equivalence is straight up incredible. you see, when a democrat grabs you by the pussy, it's different. for reasons
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2020 23:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 14:18 |
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Biden is awful but pretending he is somehow worse then Trump is straight up insane unless you are just really right wingers trying to discourage D voters in general, which would explain the constant repeated Right Wing propaganda from those types. remember to vote for your local rapist, friend. to own the conservatives.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2020 23:47
|
|