gutter_trash
Banned
the Far-Left doesn't care about winning elections as long as they win arguments
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Hillary Clinton is ready to join the resistance
- Thread starter DOWN
- Start date
- Status
the Far-Left doesn't care about winning elections as long as they win arguments
Psychoward
Banned
lol
definitely, and I'm a hardcore bleeding heart lib
I mean, with the Republicans fucking shit up right now the last thing we need is a splinter party that takes more votes away from Dems. We can work out how to break up the two party system when we're in power, not before.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
No, I really want to now what serious issues these people are imaging other than their blind hatred for her. As of now it is purely a commitment to funding. The minute she oversteps then may be justified in dropping their pants and releasing their hate boners. Until then they're being absolutely foolish.
GoldenEye 007
Member
People have literally said in this thread it would be better for her support to come out after she's dead. People have been ignoring that this is largely grassroots stuff and behind the scenes.
Also one of the biggest to BernieSanders.com
Vicetrailia
Member
Go on HilLary and raise that money. I'm a part of two groups who are gaining influence locally and we'll need it (however we are doing okay right now). Ending the supermajority in NC by turning local districts still takes money.
Purity issues, not liking any one with connections to big industry, lack of charisma, etc.
The fact that her being associated with the movement might harm it in terms of image more than her skills helps it. I don't think that's correct, but I don't think its bullshit either. I've said this several times throughout the thread.
(There's also a more fundamental question about the disjointed aims of left-liberals, democratic-socialists, and socialists, but I'm not expecting you guys to agree with that one which is fine as this is neither the time nor the place for that discussion.)
See above.
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Member
ZSaberLink
Media Create Maven
This sounds good. Both she and Obama are helping the Dems fundraise and lay the groundwork for a proper grassroots campaign. Given that she's always been good at doing things behind the scenes and she doesn't plan on being a visible figure (which isn't her strength), this seems like a good thing.
Exactly, it takes big money to win on even a state level. Hop, purity and being liked don't matter if you can't afford to get your message out to energize voters.
excelsiorlef
Member
Okay and? I've acknowledged over and over again that people are probably unfairly discounting Hilary and this comes from some problematic sentiments. I don't think that detracts from my points.
Fast Forward
Member
Well put sir.
That being said, personally, I don't care if Hillary write books, or does speeches.
Just the idea of Hillary, of all people, fighting for the "resistance" makes me laugh, but whatever.
perfectchaos007
Member
the far left was the group who basically invented the modern definition of the word and used it unironically. Now the right uses it ironically to poke fun at the perceived "easily offended" far left
Winning an argument in your head and propping up your own ego, isn't winning an argument. It's narcissism.
EatinOlives
Member
Yeah, please redirect questions to me, clearly you're not interested in answering any.
Not endorsing her wouldn't have been an implicit endorsement of anyone. BLM had no problem protesting against people on the left who they felt were not backing them. That's what endorsements are. "I endorse this person for president because their policies are backing what I want out of a presidential candidate".
There's literally nothing to support the doubt that she's not going to "back" grassroots activists like BLM other than bog-standard pessimism. She's not running for any kind of office, meaning she has no reason to stay "controversy-free". If BLM had confidence in her in 2016 enough to endorse her, they wouldn't have a reason to go back on that confidence today.
Unknown Soldier
Member
I never hated Al Gore. I actually always liked him. Probably because Al Gore busted his ass the whole time. I felt sorry for him too.
Which is?
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
You only had one point to begin with and I'm not sure how we are supposed to even talk about it. Is her hypothetical engagement to raise money to fund progressive activism a net positive or negative? You yourself say you don't know, what is there to discuss?
We could have had it all with Al.
He kinda deserved a little scorn for Lieberman though.
I supported Bernie, does that warrant not one, but two labels on me?
NoblesseOblige
Banned
And what reasonable evidence do they have to believe her fundraising grassroots and other candidates to oppose Trump will do more harm than good? Other than, again, their blind rage for her.
The optics on her working on grassroots and behind the scenes to untangle this funding fiasco is interesting, and not for any reason stated in this thread by people who want her gone. But lets be honest, people aren't crying about optics. And while she's working, they damned sure won't be paying attention to either keep and eye on her, nor to learn anything about our system and fundraising. There is zero reason for anyone to cry about how it's going to look, she's that far removed from everything. Unless she turns around and starts flipping blood diamonds and sliding manila envelopes across tables, this is all nonsense.
Nobody has to like her. She just needs to do the thing so we can move it along.
Did you also support Bernie when he said to vote for Hillary?
Or is a better life and policies for America not progressive enough?
Your conduct in this thread certainly is that of a massive dickhead. Ultimately you brought those labels upon yourself, inaccurate as they may be.
TestOfTide
Banned
Quick question: Did you actually read the OP? Like did you read what Hillary plans to do?
I'll give you a hint, she isn't going to be out there rallying.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
It was past tense, Bernie became a neo-liberal shill when he started stanning for Hillary.
FreedomFighter
Member
I interpret this as an attempt to coopting the real grassroots movement and bring them back into the corporate Dem fold. This won't gain traction. She'll really only end up doing business as usual - which is par for the course for establishment Dems - and raise money from Big Pharma, 3rd party healthcare insurance companies, Wall Street, and whoever else Dems are ready to get on their knees, felate, and serve.
Yeah, ok. I'll believe this when I see it.
Yeah, ok. I'll believe this when I see it.
That wasn't my point? My point was that people need to be kinder and try to actually engage with people instead of just saying everyone that disagrees with me is stupid and the other more nuanced, and admittedly more common, versions of that sentiment.
I mean there isn't much discussion actually going on in this thread anyway. It's a lot of strawmen and painting everyone on the other side as the worst possible example.
Nah, I said progressives/socialists to start with. I was thinking a tent pole party between socialists and social democrats.
Although, yes, this would ideally be when the Republicans are eradicated and all their voters migrate ito the Dem party which splits in two. That's my fantasy anways.
2Smashed4U
Banned
Damn, is GAF really big enough that route that much traffic to both their sites?
minor effort
Banned
NoblesseOblige
Banned
You're asking for kindness and engagement towards people whose initial response to this information is literally "fuck off Hillary"?
SneakersSO
Member
I just want her out of politics. Just retire, please. I'm done with this. She's far too polarizing, and its not longer just a right v left issue - she starts fights among the left whenever she gets brought up. Her & her husband have already done so much for democratic politics. Just focus on the Clinton Foundation & let the new generation fix the mess. Please.
Really? SJWs are now far left.
That Overton window really is to the right in America, huh?
Name calling detractors worked so well for Hillary's cheer squad during the campaign, they just can't help themselves.
People in this thread have absolutely said that was an issue. Other people are just dismissing Hilary out of hand. The latter is bad, but it doesn't mean that the former is wrong in and of itself. Obviously there are people who aren't crying about optics, but that fact that there are some people being shitty doesn't mean we should paint everyone that disagrees with us as shitty.
This is more or less how I feel, but I also don't think that any other take is totally unreasonable.
Vicetrailia
Member
It doesn't harm the movement in circles of action.
M0nochromatic
Member
You engaged me because you misidentified me as an enemy. I understand that you want to defend Clinton, but you're jumping at shadows. And you realize that, that's why you won't elaborate on what it is that I have said that you take issue with.
It's just an internet forum, there's no reason to be needlessly aggresive.
Post Edit:
That's very cool. BLM does like Hillary, yes.
The topic we're discussing is about what she is going to do now. Which is raise funds, that's expected and a good thing. The way the it's spun as supporting the resistance is slightly humorous, at least in the tone it gives off, as I doubt she'll do anything drastic or outstanding regarding the more radical elements of resistance movements. Her actions in the future could be prove me to be off mark, but I doubt it.
In order to do that Democrats would have to be able to persuade Republicans to go over to their side and that requires a lot of time and money to get the message out. Winning a senate or house seat costs millions upon millions of dollars.
excelsiorlef
Member
He, out of a strong sense of personal conviction put donation restrictions on the DNC... Which is great in theory problem is in a post Citizens United world that gives the other side who have no desire to self-regulate an even greater advantage.
HarryDemeanor
Member
This is a perfect fit for her going forward. Democrats need all the help they can get regardless of your own feelings towards her. Anybody upset about this need to get their head out of their ass.
I'm asking for people to not do what you're doing here. Which is to say I'm asking that we respect the people that disagree with us enough to not try and portray everyone that disagrees as doing so without any sort of rational thought. More generally I'm asking that people understand that even if you disagree with them, people to your left aren't just idiots and regardless you're stuck working with them.
EatinOlives
Member
Again, there's no real reason to doubt that she's going to steer clear of "controversial" movements like BLM considering they had full complete confidence in her when the stakes were higher. Now she no longer has a need to come off as a mainstream, controversy-free politician.
I initially engaged because there's a lot of tut-tutting and finger wagging at someone who's just raising money with no desire to jump back into the spotlight, as if nothing she does is ever good enough.
As I've said over and over again in this thread, honestly at least 7 or 8 times now, I don't think it's a net negative. What I'm saying is that the position in and of itself is not necessarily completely stupid and irrational.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked