Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #301  
Old 03-12-2018, 07:11 AM
SlackerInc SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,553
Okay, Whack-a-Mole: I’m wrong, the Federal Reserve is wrong, and the actual black voters who lived through the Clinton years as working adults are wrong. You and the Nation magazine, that well-known bastion of negritude, know better than any of us.

If only black folks had been smart enough to recognize their great white savior who had been hibernating in Vermont for fifty years between marching in the civil rights era and coming to save them in 2016.

The anger of white liberal Bernie followers toward black voters really comes across as “you ungrateful, stupid Negroes don’t even know what’s best for you and now you’ve fucked us all over”. Not a good look.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #302  
Old 03-12-2018, 10:39 AM
Do Not Taunt Do Not Taunt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...I have every problem with the part I quoted. The question wasn't just about how Trump communicated. It was also about the very real fear felt by muslim-Americans and other minorities. What appealed to some voters was Trump's "blunt and 'politically incorrect' manner of speaking". Bernie didn't denounce what Trump said. He did the opposite.
Well, just for context, here's the quote again:

Quote:
HAYES: You know, I was talking to some folks who we`re going to bring out
in a little bit, folks who live here who voted for Trump. And one of the
things they talked about was just how much they liked his – the way that
he communicated.

You know, obviously, he said things that created tremendous controversy,
offense, real – I think, in some cases, real genuine pain for some folks,
Muslim-Americans in this country particularly.

But there`s a sense that he was – he was violating some set of manners
that shouldn`t exist.

What do – what do you make of that?
So, in there, Hayes mentioned 'genuine pain for some folks' in the context of how Trump communicated. But the only actual, grammatical question in there is 'What do - what do you make of that?' What is 'that'? 'That', to me at least, is the way Trump communicated, which appealed to some people, some of whom are about to be on the show, even though it inflicted real, genuine pain on some other folks. Sanders focused his answer on why it might be appealing to some. I mean, fuck, that's a pretty interesting question to me still. Why the hell would anyone vote for this fucking clown?? So, yeah, the fact that that's the question that Sanders basically answered is not a problem to me in the slightest. Most other things about Sanders, yeah, those are problems.

Quote:
Democrats aren't going to appear "genuine" if they throw black and muslim-American voters under the bus.
Agree, and I agree with what I assume you are also saying, which is that the Sanders wing is throwing black and muslim-American voters under the bus in pursuit of their 'socialist' agenda. And women, too. I just don't think the material you quoted demonstrates it.
  #303  
Old 03-12-2018, 01:53 PM
SteveG1 SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Van Nuys CA
Posts: 13,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
Democrats aren't going to nominate a socialist, so, I guess you will not be supporting the democratic party.

Thank you for letting us know that we do not have any reason to pay any attention whatsoever to your opinions on the direction of the party, any more than we would listen to the opinions of republicans on where the party should go.

I'd like someone further to the left of Clinton too, but I'm not willing to destroy the country to get it, politics is supposed to be a game for adults. I'll send some nice chocolate cake with *two scoops* of icecream over to you at the children's table.
This. We have a choice. We can by our votes or lack of votes support the party of the fascist dominionist racist oligarchy,

the party of Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, Roy Moore, Jeff Sessions, Steve Bannon, Sebastian Gorka, ex-Sheriff Arpaio, Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, Darth Cheney, Chris Cantwell, etc, or "ANYONE BUT THEM".

I will continue to choose "ANYONE BUT THEM".
  #304  
Old 03-12-2018, 07:46 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 7,472
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveG1 View Post
This. We have a choice. We can by our votes or lack of votes support the party of the fascist dominionist racist oligarchy,

the party of Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, Roy Moore, Jeff Sessions, Steve Bannon, Sebastian Gorka, ex-Sheriff Arpaio, Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, Darth Cheney, Chris Cantwell, etc, or "ANYONE BUT THEM".

I will continue to choose "ANYONE BUT THEM".
Basically, this.

I personally dislike the politics of purity and I tend to believe that what has been needed all along isn't an ideology that's pure but simply an intelligent form of incrementalism. However, that assumes that both parties are acting in good faith, and it's been clear over the past 30 years that Republicans have been acting in good faith less and less, and simply replacing good faith with blind faith in whatever great white hope manages to raise enough money and enough of a profile to compete in an election. At this point, I would accept a Bernie Sanders, flaws, warts, and all, if it meant keeping Republicans out of office. The concern is what damage a Bernie Sanders type candidate would do to the progressive brand in terms of giving voters confidence that progressives can actually tie their own shoelaces and run a lemonade stand.
  #305  
Old 03-13-2018, 02:52 AM
SlackerInc SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,553
Ha! Well put.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #306  
Old 03-13-2018, 01:22 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoggyDunnit View Post
Thanks in advance for the treats; I'm happy to be seated at the bastion of sense and humanity that you think constitutes "the children's table".
Do you really think that stamping your feet and demanding that you get or your way or you will hold your breath until everyone around you capitulates is adult behavior? If so, shut up and eat your ice cream.

Quote:
If the Dems fuck up again, I'll be happy to remind you of what's behind Trump's re-election in a couple years and change.
What's that, you voting for him?

Tell you what, you show up in the 2018 midterms, and you support the party, and we'll consider taking you seriously. Show up in 2019 and vote in your local and state elections to support democrats at the ground level, and we may even listen to your opinion.

Stand there and whine that the party isn't exactly what you want it to be, and you refuse to support it until it is, and you will be ignored.
  #307  
Old 03-13-2018, 02:07 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole Whack-a-Mole is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 20,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Okay, Whack-a-Mole: I’m wrong, the Federal Reserve is wrong, and the actual black voters who lived through the Clinton years as working adults are wrong. You and the Nation magazine, that well-known bastion of negritude, know better than any of us.
You have not addressed what was claimed in the article.

What is wrong with the stats in the article I posted?
  #308  
Old 03-13-2018, 02:12 PM
Airbeck Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,303
Still on the "I know better than black people who they should have voted for" thing?

Maybe if you actually listened to some black people you'd know more about why they did not vote for Bernie. Or you can just continue to insist that you know better than actual black people who black people should vote for. Whatever floats your boat.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #309  
Old 03-13-2018, 02:20 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole Whack-a-Mole is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 20,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
Still on the "I know better than black people who they should have voted for" thing?

Maybe if you actually listened to some black people you'd know more about why they did not vote for Bernie. Or you can just continue to insist that you know better than actual black people who black people should vote for. Whatever floats your boat.
And still the points I cited are avoided.

I looked. I still do not know why they liked Clinton more than Sanders. Presumably you have those answers so please share.
  #310  
Old 03-13-2018, 02:24 PM
Airbeck Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,303
Why don't you ask some black people why they voted how they did. I don't feel comfortable speaking for them.
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #311  
Old 03-13-2018, 02:43 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole Whack-a-Mole is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 20,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
Why don't you ask some black people why they voted how they did. I don't feel comfortable speaking for them.
So you have got nothing except trying to get me to call black people stupid.

Pretty much what I thought you were after.

Last edited by Whack-a-Mole; 03-13-2018 at 02:45 PM.
  #312  
Old 03-13-2018, 02:51 PM
Airbeck Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
So you have got nothing except trying to get me to call black people stupid.

Pretty much what I thought you were after.
No, you *have* essentially been calling them stupid because they didn't vote the way you insist would have been better for them. I'm pointing out that this is not a good look, and you might want to think about why you are so insistent that you know better who they should have voted for. If this is representative of the typical Bernie supporters' mindset, it might actually explain it for you. You don't reach out to them, you don't talk to them or listen to them, you just insist that they should vote the way you say they should because you know better. It's highly insulting and condescending. Look at how you feel when people say that Bernie or Busters should have voted for Hillary against Trump. Nobody wants to be told how to vote from a place of "I know better than you, so vote how I say". Is any of this getting through?

And no, what I'm after is getting you to have a little self awareness of how bad this is coming across for you. I mean how many black people have you gotten to change to your way of thinking on this? Have you even talked to a single one? So how are you so certain what is best for them, and that you know better than they do?
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes
  #313  
Old 03-13-2018, 03:07 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole Whack-a-Mole is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 20,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
No, you *have* essentially been calling them stupid because they didn't vote the way you insist would have been better for them.
I have provided citations on why the Clintons were not good for minorities.

Feel free to point out why that is wrong and they were actually great for them.

So far you and the other Clintonistas can't answer that.

I'll be over here holding my breath hoping you will have the answers no one else does.

Last edited by Whack-a-Mole; 03-13-2018 at 03:09 PM.
  #314  
Old 03-13-2018, 03:22 PM
Airbeck Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
I have provided citations on why the Clintons were not good for minorities.

Feel free to point out why that is wrong and they were actually great for them.

So far you and the other Clintonistas can't answer that.

I'll be over here holding my breath hoping you will have the answers no one else does.
No, you have cited ways that *you feel* Sanders was a better choice for them. They felt differently. I don't need to answer anything, the actual results of the election tell me that maybe you don't have your finger on the pulse of black America like you think you do.

And they had all the same information that you did, and yet voted the other way. We all saw the same anti Hillary memes Bernie supporters were sharing like there was no tomorrow during primary season. Black people use social media too. You don't have secret knowledge on the subject. They just made a different calculation, as is their right as voters.

I've already suggested the best way to find your answers. Talk to them. Ask them. Why do you refuse to do the obvious thing to answer this question for you?

Also I am not a Clintonista, just a rational voter that wanted what was best for the country, I've said that I would have gladly voted for Bernie had he won the nomination, but he didn't. What is irrational about that?
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes

Last edited by Airbeck; 03-13-2018 at 03:24 PM.
  #315  
Old 03-13-2018, 03:33 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole Whack-a-Mole is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 20,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbeck View Post
No, you have cited ways that *you feel* Sanders was a better choice for them.
I provided citations.

You and others have provided nothing and have resorted to attacking me.

Typical of someone with no argument. I have pointed this out and still you have nothing.

I'm still waiting for how the Clintons were great for black people. Surely it is not a secret if all the black people knew why Clinton was better than Sanders as you say.
  #316  
Old 03-13-2018, 03:40 PM
Airbeck Airbeck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Chicago - South Side
Posts: 2,303
You posted citations that convince *you* that Bernie was a better choice for black people than *the actual choice they made". I get how you feel, but you seem to have no interest in finding out why they didn't vote the way that you insist they should have.

I'm not attacking you, but you are doing a good job of making yourself look pretty bad, with all of the condescension and refusal to even discuss the idea of actually just asking them why they voted the way they did. If you are really curious to understand, there's nothing stopping you, just ask them. How do you expect people to be politically aligned with you if you refuse to talk to any of them?
__________________
"Sometimes I think that the surest sign of intelligent life in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." - Calvin and Hobbes

Last edited by Airbeck; 03-13-2018 at 03:41 PM.
  #317  
Old 03-13-2018, 05:04 PM
SlackerInc SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,553
All true. Additionally, when I posted an article from the Fed outlining how the black-white wage gap declined during the Clinton years for the first time in decades, this was dismissed with no counter-evidence. But every article I’ve read talking about African Americans’ fondness for Clinton cites their feeling that the ‘90s were good times for them, times they made progress after years of stagnation.

Also ignored: that the overwhelming majority of the Congressional Black Caucus voted for that infamous crime bill, as did Bernie himself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #318  
Old 03-13-2018, 05:24 PM
SteveG1 SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Van Nuys CA
Posts: 13,841
This is pretty fucking pathetic. We have Deplorables arguing about the evils of Racist Clinton (or something),
while we've had an administration infested by and supported by

Jefferson Beauregard "KKK" Sessions, Sebastian "Nazi" Gorka, Donald "Very Fine People"Trump, backer Robert "never met a fascist I didn't like" Mercer, Mike "dominionism" Pence, Steve "Nazi" Bannon, Joe "kill the Mexicans" Arpaio, Roy "Little Girls Are Fun" Moore, Sean Donahue, Paul "Nazi" Gosar etc etc etc, Etc.



and we have


banning people over their religion, deporting and scapegoating immigrants because of their race, coddling violent and murdering racists, repeating/retweeting sick violent memes by White-Supremacists, ignoring Right-Wing mass murder and rampant gun crimes while hyping bigoted foreign terrorism fears, Ignoring Climate Change which increases the threat of more intense hurricanes, storms, draughts, floods and fires. ignoring 1000 hurricane deaths in Puerto Rico, stealing funding from public schools to give tax payer money to private religious school mills that cherry pick the easier students but don't get better educational results, threatening the Press with retaliation for not co-towing to his endless ego, selling off pieces of the internet to the highest bidder, blocking access to legal abortion to underage undocumented rape victims, knee-capping the agencies that protects consumers from rampant investment and banking fraud, threatening Black Football players with being fired for seeking legal non-violent redress of their grievances against the government, selling out the middle-class to corporate greed, disrespecting the families of our Fallen Vets, fucking up peoples health care, destroying our national parks, gutting safety and health regulations which put the environmental, consumer product standards and worker safety in dire peril, and systematically destroying our democratic institution

Last edited by SteveG1; 03-13-2018 at 05:24 PM.
  #319  
Old 03-13-2018, 05:49 PM
DoggyDunnit DoggyDunnit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Fort Worth, Tex-ass
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
Do you really think that stamping your feet and demanding that you get or your way or you will hold your breath until everyone around you capitulates is adult behavior? If so, shut up and eat your ice cream.
Refusing to support a party until they start caring about me and people like me is sure as hell adult behavior.

Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
What's that, you voting for him?

Tell you what, you show up in the 2018 midterms, and you support the party, and we'll consider taking you seriously. Show up in 2019 and vote in your local and state elections to support democrats at the ground level, and we may even listen to your opinion.

Stand there and whine that the party isn't exactly what you want it to be, and you refuse to support it until it is, and you will be ignored.
Me and everyone else given lip service but ignored in practice.

After I complete my move up North this spring, I will get to work for quality organizations and candidates for the midterms. Actual progressives; no corporate crooks/crypto-fascists. I will be happy to vote for quality candidates - this includes Berniecrat Democrats; any races that are between a Republican and "Republican lite" (i.e., typical Democrats) get left blank or, where applicable, get a write in or a vote for a Green, other progressive party, or independent. I research and find out about every candidate and prop on my ballot beforehand.

What ain't gonna happen is unconditional/total support, not until the "mainstream" of the party drops its crypto-fascism. The Democrats must earn the votes of the underclasses; they are not entitled to them simply because they are a "lesser evil".

Last edited by DoggyDunnit; 03-13-2018 at 05:50 PM.
  #320  
Old 03-13-2018, 07:13 PM
Do Not Taunt Do Not Taunt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,169
Out of curiosity, DoggyDunnit, do you believe that Clinton would have been no better than Trump, or do you believe that by withholding your vote from Clinton (and similar candidates), you'll force the Democrats to nominate candidates more to your liking next time? Or is there a third option I'm missing?
  #321  
Old 03-13-2018, 07:58 PM
Stonebow Stonebow is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Lower 48
Posts: 1,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoggyDunnit View Post
What ain't gonna happen is unconditional/total support, not until the "mainstream" of the party drops its crypto-fascism. The Democrats must earn the votes of the underclasses; they are not entitled to them simply because they are a "lesser evil".
You....do understand how American voting works, right? As on. at the end, you have exactly 2 viable choices?

Do I assume you're one for whom voting is purely an academic exercise and you don't see much change in your daily life from one party's control over another? Must be nice, is all I can say about that.
  #322  
Old 03-13-2018, 08:10 PM
SlackerInc SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonebow View Post
You....do understand how American voting works, right? As on. at the end, you have exactly 2 viable choices?



Do I assume you're one for whom voting is purely an academic exercise and you don't see much change in your daily life from one party's control over another? Must be nice, is all I can say about that.

We fully agree here. DoggyDunnit has explicitly admitted that what is most important to them is to feel their pweshus “hands are clean”, which for them means voting for some theoretically ideal candidate who has no chance of winning—not only so as not to compromise their values, but so as not to actually have to take any responsibility for the things the candidate does once they get into office.

Of course, their hands are not truly clean atl all, because failing to act to prevent evil is semi-evil itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #323  
Old 03-13-2018, 08:14 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole Whack-a-Mole is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 20,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
All true. Additionally, when I posted an article from the Fed outlining how the black-white wage gap declined during the Clinton years for the first time in decades, this was dismissed with no counter-evidence.
This is what you are hanging your hat on?

The counter evidence is in the article I cited. The gap narrowed because they started throwing so many black men into jail they were no longer included in the stats.

Quote:
But every article I’ve read talking about African Americans’ fondness for Clinton cites their feeling that the ‘90s were good times for them, times they made progress after years of stagnation.
I am sure you can cite these articles for us then.'

So far you have one thing to support your assertions and that has been done away with.
  #324  
Old 03-13-2018, 11:55 PM
DoggyDunnit DoggyDunnit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Fort Worth, Tex-ass
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Do Not Taunt View Post
Out of curiosity, DoggyDunnit, do you believe that Clinton would have been no better than Trump, or do you believe that by withholding your vote from Clinton (and similar candidates), you'll force the Democrats to nominate candidates more to your liking next time? Or is there a third option I'm missing?
Both, sort of. Hillary would have been more of the shitty-ass status quo, which for me and many others like me - those of us in the real struggle at the bottom of society who neither party cares about, was simply not an option.

Secondly, it's about "my people" giving the Democrats some schooling. Put forth quality candidates, win elections. Put forth mediocre crypto-fascists, and lose because we're tired of CFs who talk all this game but don't actually do much of anything for us. Shut up about the fucking "middle class" for 2.5 picoseconds and earn our votes by showing you care about those of us on street level.

And, thirdly, Trump, to me personally (and to many others), represented (and represents) a chance of seeing the whole motherfucker come down, which presents an opportunity to stand up and find better lives amongst the chaos.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonebow View Post
You....do understand how American voting works, right? As on. at the end, you have exactly 2 viable choices?

Do I assume you're one for whom voting is purely an academic exercise and you don't see much change in your daily life from one party's control over another? Must be nice, is all I can say about that.
Yup, I do. I watched CGP Grey's Animal Kingdom series. First past the post, etc. Having two viable choices is fine, so long as one option is actually substantively different from the other. Think "a burger or a burger with a couple pickles on it" versus "a burger or a chicken sandwich". We gotta have real choices.

And yes. Yes! You're soooo close to getting it! Warm as hell! Whether typical Republicans are in control, or typical Democrats are in control, my life is the same "streets struggle". Fighting to survive, fighting for life, fighting for the necessities that the bourgeois and petit bourgeois are determined as hell to hoard and keep away from me. Ain't even just pure economics, either - I continue to struggle to have much in the way of simple human bonds. Ostracism stacked on ostracism.

In short - and really chew on this for a while - when one is dumpster diving no matter D or R, one tends to stop seeing a difference.

The only ones who have much to lose under Republicans versus under Democrats are the petit bourgeois. And since y'all (your statement implying you have something to lose depending on what party's in power basically gives me the impression you're PB) have shown no concern or care for me, I get to show no concern or care for y'all.

I ain't got shit to lose, myself, so whatever. Hell, the more of y'all who are hosed down enough to end up on street level with me, the better - it's hard in today's culture of sociopathy for someone to wake up unless they know what it's like to be at the rock bottom of society.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
We fully agree here. DoggyDunnit has explicitly admitted that what is most important to them is to feel their pweshus “hands are clean”, which for them means voting for some theoretically ideal candidate who has no chance of winning—not only so as not to compromise their values, but so as not to actually have to take any responsibility for the things the candidate does once they get into office.

Of course, their hands are not truly clean atl all, because failing to act to prevent evil is semi-evil itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Responsibility? Y'all're a hoot! Why is it my "responsibility" to care about the petit bourgeois and what happens to them but ain't no courtesy shown towards people like me?

Is my heart supposed to bleed because some "middle class family" (fuck that cliché, by the way) has their taxes jacked up or whatever making them not be able to afford that new SUV or kitchen remodel? The poor dears! How’s about feeling good there’s actual fucking food in that kitchen in the first place?

I AM acting to "prevent evil" - by being a mature progressive who only lends my support to people, parties, and organizations who are about everyone, including people like me. "lesser evil" is still fucking evil - how hard is that to understand?
  #325  
Old 03-14-2018, 03:52 AM
SlackerInc SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,553
I didn’t say anything about “middle class families” or taxes. And FTR, my family was on food stamps from 2008 to 2010, on WIC from 2008 to 2017, and my four kids got their health care from Medicaid from 2000 to 2017. We would not have had those crucial benefits without the center-left Democrats you disdain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #326  
Old 03-14-2018, 07:48 AM
DoggyDunnit DoggyDunnit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Fort Worth, Tex-ass
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I didn’t say anything about “middle class families” or taxes. And FTR, my family was on food stamps from 2008 to 2010, on WIC from 2008 to 2017, and my four kids got their health care from Medicaid from 2000 to 2017. We would not have had those crucial benefits without the center-left Democrats you disdain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Never said you did. Just was using an example of rhetoric that's often sent my way regarding my stance on Democrats.
  #327  
Old 03-14-2018, 10:04 AM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 30,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonebow View Post
Do I assume you're one for whom voting is purely an academic exercise and you don't see much change in your daily life from one party's control over another? Must be nice, is all I can say about that.
As far as daily life goes...no, there's not much change.

As far as the lives of some others go (human and non-human), yeah, there's a difference.
  #328  
Old 03-14-2018, 10:48 AM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoggyDunnit View Post
Never said you did. Just was using an example of rhetoric that's often sent my way regarding my stance on Democrats.
Can you explain exactly what a "crypto-fascist" is?

You keep calling the democratic party a party of them, and I assume it is an insult, but it really sounds like just a snarl word you throw at people you don't like.

If it is those who work with the people in financial and manufacturing sectors to keep our economy running smoothly, as opposed to socialism ideals that, instead of working with the private sector, seek to eliminate it, then you are just going to need to form your own party.

Democrats aren't going to nominate a socialist. Just because the democrats are closer to that then the republicans doesn't mean that that is the direction we are going, or even that we desire to go. I wouldn't mind moving a bit further left, but you just want to go straight to nationalizing everything that doesn't give you the results that you think it should. That's not just non-viable politically, it's also a terrible idea.

Go join Bernie in his socialist party, and tell the socialists how to be socialist.
  #329  
Old 03-14-2018, 10:54 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 7,472
A lesser evil gives the rest of us a chance to see things we care about voted into effect; purity gives us no place at the table to talk. Conor Lamb would never have come this close to victory in PA if he had run a Bernie Sanders race. But I guess Bernie Sanders' supporters just want to pretend that eventually people in rural Pennsylvania - or Kansas or wherever - will become more enlightened and vote just the way rural white folk in Vermont do. It's a kind of condescension that's not likely to persuade anyone at all; it will simply succeed in polarizing people more and dividing up progressives into factions with coarser attitudes toward each other. That's why Bernie's Bros are essentially a left wing version of the Tea Party. And while the Republicans did get some mileage out of that movement, it would appear to be an increasingly toxic brand with limited shelf life.
  #330  
Old 03-14-2018, 11:10 AM
Ambrosio Spinola Ambrosio Spinola is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoggyDunnit View Post
And, thirdly, Trump, to me personally (and to many others), represented (and represents) a chance of seeing the whole motherfucker come down, which presents an opportunity to stand up and find better lives amongst the chaos.
The "whole motherfucker" includes things like rule of law and political accountability, though. I mean, it seems like the worst thing about the Trump administration generally is the brazen conflicts of interest and corruption getting normalized or shrugged off. You think that a period of chaos is going to be helpful for the powerless? I think it would be much more likely to end up with the US being like Putin's Russia or Duterte's Philippines, where the rich/powerful/connected can do exactly as they like and if you don't keep your mouth shut you just get killed out on the street and no one will do a thing about it.
  #331  
Old 03-14-2018, 05:47 PM
SlackerInc SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,553
Posts 328-330 are all really good and deserve to be recognized as such. No insult to 328 or 329 to say that 330 is the most insightful of all. Kudos!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #332  
Old 03-15-2018, 02:33 PM
Stonebow Stonebow is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Lower 48
Posts: 1,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoggyDunnit View Post
In short - and really chew on this for a while - when one is dumpster diving no matter D or R, one tends to stop seeing a difference.
I can appreciate that as a personal perspective based only on personal experience, however, there are real differences in the social safety net, common good services, educational opportunities, worker protection, and civil rights of marginalized populations when Dems are in charge. To suggest otherwise is incorrect at best, malicious at worst.

I am often amused at Americans who think they are living 'at the bottom.' Go tell that to someone from Rwanda or Ecuador, and then be sure to duck. Even while dumpster diving and living the struggle 'in the streets,' you still managed to either own or find a public means of engaging this online community. What a country, eh? And the suggestion that somehow you'll bring us all down to your level and that will improve your lot? Laughable. Not in its naivete (I tend toward optimism, myself), but because we have actually seen how that plays out over and over again in history.
  #333  
Old 03-16-2018, 06:24 PM
SteveG1 SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Van Nuys CA
Posts: 13,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
A lesser evil gives the rest of us a chance to see things we care about voted into effect; purity gives us no place at the table to talk. Conor Lamb would never have come this close to victory in PA if he had run a Bernie Sanders race. But I guess Bernie Sanders' supporters just want to pretend that eventually people in rural Pennsylvania - or Kansas or wherever - will become more enlightened and vote just the way rural white folk in Vermont do. It's a kind of condescension that's not likely to persuade anyone at all; it will simply succeed in polarizing people more and dividing up progressives into factions with coarser attitudes toward each other. That's why Bernie's Bros are essentially a left wing version of the Tea Party. And while the Republicans did get some mileage out of that movement, it would appear to be an increasingly toxic brand with limited shelf life.
This, in its entirety.

The kind of Bernie Bro "purity" you are saying NO to, is exactly what we need to avoid.

The Dems need to push the things people are directly affected by, and care about. Safety. Health care. Accountability. Pro union. Supporting allies around the world. Ethical government. A "pro second amendment" view that is coupled with sensible gun laws, such as universal background checks. Be against tax giveaways for the rich. Be pro education. Be pro-choice. Favor religious freedom for ALL, not just for a few racist prosperity bible thumping heretics.

Conor lamb did it right. So did Doug Jones. They have given the blueprint for all to follow.

And encourage Trump to ummm hee hee ha ha "help" Repub candidates right down the toilet as he did in Alabama and Pennsylvania. The more his toxicity rubs off on them, the better for us. Weaponize that orange asshole against them.

But demanding a "purity test", and fighting against anyone for not being "Bernie - ish" enough is stupid.

Besides, what is this crap about crypto-fascists, when we are now dealing with REAL fascists?
  #334  
Old 03-16-2018, 06:50 PM
SlackerInc SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,553
I agree with almost all of that, but I’m not so sure Trump’s visits hurt in AL and PA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #335  
Old 03-17-2018, 05:26 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 7,472
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveG1 View Post
This, in its entirety.

The kind of Bernie Bro "purity" you are saying NO to, is exactly what we need to avoid.

The Dems need to push the things people are directly affected by, and care about. Safety. Health care. Accountability. Pro union. Supporting allies around the world. Ethical government. A "pro second amendment" view that is coupled with sensible gun laws, such as universal background checks. Be against tax giveaways for the rich. Be pro education. Be pro-choice. Favor religious freedom for ALL, not just for a few racist prosperity bible thumping heretics.

Conor lamb did it right. So did Doug Jones. They have given the blueprint for all to follow.
I can't remember if I said it here or elsewhere (my apologies if I already mentioned it) but the Democrats need to understand something going forward: there are the local races and then there's the big one, the presidential race. In local races, the blueprint is to support the candidate that can win as a Democrat, provided they're willing to support at least some of the core Democratic principles. Taking Conor Lamb as an example, he probably wouldn't support severe firearms control restrictions but he probably would support stronger background checks. He probably wouldn't support Medicare for All, but he probably would support strengthening Medicare and expanding Medicaid, especially since a lot of Republicans seemed okay with Medicaid expansion. Conor Lamb was able to win in a Republican stronghold because he wasn't a Republican. That's good enough for me, and it ought to be good enough for everyone else in the party.

The bigger challenge will be the presidential elections, which is when you have to bring the different factions together and have them enthusiastically support the winner. Chances are, the winner is not going to be Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, and if it were, I wouldn't give them much of a chance to win the general election.
  #336  
Old 03-18-2018, 10:39 AM
SteveG1 SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Van Nuys CA
Posts: 13,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
...

The bigger challenge will be the presidential elections, which is when you have to bring the different factions together and have them enthusiastically support the winner. Chances are, the winner is not going to be Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, and if it were, I wouldn't give them much of a chance to win the general election.
I liked Bernie and would have voted for him if he had won the Primary. He didn't, so I voted Clinton (and feel good about that).

I like Warren, and she is a fighter, but she can't win. She would be a lightning rod for banks, Wall Street, corporate heads etc. They would spend stupid amounts of money and spread all sorts of lies to make SURE she got polarized. And, the holy rollin' bible thumpers of the "religious right" would be on her for being "an uppity female".
  #337  
Old 03-19-2018, 12:43 AM
SlackerInc SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,553
It’s important to note, too, that Warren lagged significantly behind Obama in Massachusetts in 2012. A large number of that state’s voters split tickets, voting for Scott Brown and Barack Obama, despite the fact that Obama’s opponent Mitt Romney had recently been a popular governor of the state.

She did win, obviously—but only because there are so many Democrats in Massachusetts. She would not have the same luxury in a national race.

And her false claims of being a racial minority are really pretty deadly politically speaking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #338  
Old 03-19-2018, 01:47 AM
elucidator elucidator is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,288
Many Americans have delved into their heritage as descendents of America's First Victims. I have affirmed such connections myself, my tribal name is Dances With Vulvas.

But semi-seriously....in Texas, white families with a mixed American Indian heritage is as common as dirt, even more so in Oklahoma. Ms Warren's Cherokee heritage is neither unusual or remarkable.

Last edited by elucidator; 03-19-2018 at 01:47 AM. Reason: D'oh! A dear, a female dear....
  #339  
Old 03-19-2018, 01:54 AM
EddyTeddyFreddy's Avatar
EddyTeddyFreddy EddyTeddyFreddy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Exurbia, No'thuh Bawst'n
Posts: 13,079
Warren's my senator, and I'm happy to have her in that office.

If she ran for President she'd be lose decisively. Besides what SteveG1 and SlackerInc pointed out, she often projects a scolding schoolmarm vibe when she gets impassioned.

Unfair? Ayup. A practical problem nonetheless? Ayup.
__________________
Dude, your statistical average, which was already in the toilet, just took a plunge into the Earth's mantle. ~ iampunha
Well, maybe you shouldn't use the political equivalent of the Weekly World News as a factual source. Just sayin'. ~ RTFirefly
Brought to you as a public service by EddyTeddyFreddy Industries, Inc., purveyors of wit, wisdom, badinage, and run-on sentences since 1949.
  #340  
Old 03-19-2018, 02:24 AM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 12,854
I was appreciating Bernie's contributions to politics years before these kids were born. I remember when he was elected mayor of Burlington in what, 1981? and got a Doonesbury strip about him. Over 35 years his record built up plenty of respect and goodwill on my part. When he announced, although I never supported him over Hillary, I remember being well disposed toward him anyway. Then suddenly all these hotheads rose up who had only just heard of him, lacking any historical perspective.

It took only half a year for the Bernie freaks to completely demolish the respect and goodwill of decades I had felt for him. The crazier and more toxic they got, the more I cursed the day I ever heard of Bernie Sanders in the first place.
  #341  
Old 03-19-2018, 09:15 AM
Stonebow Stonebow is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Lower 48
Posts: 1,864
I have wondered how much of the "Bernie bro' phenomenon is attributable to the candidate himself and how much of it was going to happen no matter what when we had a female candidate.
I tend to think that Bernie needing to maintain street cred and his personal brand kept him from pulling some percentage of his followers into the fold to confront Trump, but I couldn't say how much that would amount to.
  #342  
Old 03-19-2018, 10:33 AM
Eonwe's Avatar
Eonwe Eonwe is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Burlington VT
Posts: 8,456
And how much of it is amplified by people who, despite supposedly being "sick" of Bernie, find the need to bring him up over and over again, while the rest of us are content to move on.
  #343  
Old 03-19-2018, 10:46 AM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 48,020
The OP is a response to a Bernie Bro who still can't find a way to admit voting for Clinton would have been the responsible thing for him to do.
  #344  
Old 03-19-2018, 11:31 AM
Eonwe's Avatar
Eonwe Eonwe is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Burlington VT
Posts: 8,456
Wrong. Read the OP. The OP is a response/support to an outrage editorial about a local interview Sanders gave in the state in which he is still a representative. Not a "Bernie bro" in sight.

The three most recent and active threads on the SDMB about Bernie were started by people who want him to "go away".

If you want Bernie to go away, stop talking about him; very few other people are.

You will forever find somebody to passionately argue whatever stupid position you hate. Someone will always step in to be your "Bernie bro" if you open the door and put up a welcome mat. And it seems to me that there's a sub-set of people who enjoy instigating hyperbolic and vitriolic conversation about Sanders, and then when a few people take the bait, it becomes "proof" that these Sanders people just won't let it go.

Whatever floats your boat, but it's pretty disingenuous.
  #345  
Old 03-19-2018, 11:40 AM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 48,020
Whack-A-Mole isn't a Bro? Okay, whatever.
  #346  
Old 03-19-2018, 11:43 AM
Eonwe's Avatar
Eonwe Eonwe is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Burlington VT
Posts: 8,456
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Whack-A-Mole isn't a Bro? Okay, whatever.
The OP has nothing to do with Whack-A-Mole.
  #347  
Old 03-19-2018, 11:44 AM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 48,020
That's literally the second word in the OP.
  #348  
Old 03-19-2018, 11:45 AM
SlackerInc SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
But semi-seriously....in Texas, white families with a mixed American Indian heritage is as common as dirt, even more so in Oklahoma. Ms Warren's Cherokee heritage is neither unusual or remarkable.

It’s not really her heritage, is the point.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-native-ameri/

Be sure to read the last section, “Recipe for Embarrassment”. That’s really the most cringeworthy part of the whole thing.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #349  
Old 03-19-2018, 11:50 AM
Eonwe's Avatar
Eonwe Eonwe is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Burlington VT
Posts: 8,456
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
That's literally the second word in the OP.
Here's the OP. Are you looking at something else?

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...69&postcount=1
  #350  
Old 03-19-2018, 02:05 PM
SteveG1 SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Van Nuys CA
Posts: 13,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddyTeddyFreddy View Post
Warren's my senator, and I'm happy to have her in that office.

If she ran for President she'd be lose decisively. Besides what SteveG1 and SlackerInc pointed out, she often projects a scolding schoolmarm vibe when she gets impassioned.

Unfair? Ayup. A practical problem nonetheless? Ayup.
I like her a LOT. But that does not change the fact, that she would not win.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017