legacyzero
Banned
Not what I said at all. I said that it can't be the ONLY platform, nor can we demand that it be the only focus of ANY campaign. We abandoned the working class and we paid for it. Like it or not.
-
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.
NYT: Shattered Charts Hillary Clintons Course Into the Iceberg
- Thread starter nynt9
- Start date
- Status
Father_Brain
Banned
This is laughably disingenuous, and one can easily come up with this sort of quasi-predictive rationale to dismiss literally any poll that doesn't fit your preferred narrative. In fact, exactly the opposite was frequently said by Clinton partisans to dismiss her underwater favorables - "her approval ratings will soar once voters see the real her!" - and a similar narrative was spouted even more often by establishment Republicans to dismiss Trump's consistently high polling in 2015.
Yeah, I don't see any reporting or evidence here, just your assumptions about what their rationale was, assumptions that are shared by hardly anyone else connected to politics from what I've seen.
Her core messaging was "Trump is a monster and I'm not," not any progressive policy agenda.
michaelius
Banned
If she had message it was impossible to notice it in Europe where all we got was "I'm not trump" style news
LegendofJoe
Member
I don't see much of that with Hillary but I do with the Democratic party. The people pretending that the party didn't line up behind her before the primary began are lying to themselves.
Prominent people in the party like Biden, Booker, and Cuomo would have absolutely ran for the nomination if they weren't going up against the Clinton machine. With the exception of Biden you better believe both of them and a several others are going to run in 2020. And whoever wins will be a lot stronger than Hillary was post nomination. The lack of competition for the 2016 nomination was a fatal mistake.
Dude Abides
Banned
Big labor unions didn't support Trump. What is this nonsense?
It'll be fun to watch the Berniecrats try to out-Trump Trump over the next few years.
It didn't happen under Obama because Republicans blocked. Obama initiated the proposal several times throughout the latter half of his presidency. The GOP blocked it every time;
His most recent proposal (which Clinton promised to retry when she entered office);
http://www.nationalskillscoalition....-prioritizes-workforce-education-and-training
The blockage by the GOP:
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-acti...this-week-congress-ignores-obamas-last-budget
Gee I wonder which party the majority of rural America supported...
Again, you can't restore power to workers in dying industries, or in positions that are unskilled or easily replaceable. Take fast food workers for example, many are pushing for higher wages, and many companies are now looking to outright replace them with machines. The best bet for those workers is to offer an opportunity to be retrained so that they can prosper in the new economy. Them throwing their lot in with the Republicans actually made their situation worse because they don't understand the nature of the global economy, and the party itself is even more in the pocket of big corporations than the democrats.
Again, your jobs aren't coming back. THAT is the reality. Clinton (and Obama) said that the government was going to offer free college and various grants to get you retrained and thus you getting a better job down the road. Unfortunately those people didn't want to hear the reality and instead voted in the party that lied to their faces and is in the pockets of global corporations as well. However, unlike Obama and Clinton, they don't give a shit about the working class, so you're not going to get any government assistance while your job is still being sent overseas.
union voters went for trump i believe, obviously the unions didn't endorse him
Dr. Feel Good
Banned
This logic I don't understand. The Trump message is built on smoke and mirrors. You can't bring back jobs to America which are inevitably going to disappear. Middle class workers need to Stop looking in the short term and focus long term. If Trump can bring your job today but it's gone again in five, did anything get accomplished? If anything you're in a worse position being older. Here's a thought, if your job is on the chopping block start learning skills or get education that can expand your attractability within the marketplace to navigate to a safer occupation or industry. You're jobs are fucked either way and if you don't do something about it now you're just going to be more pissed off blaming the lofty elites again. You want change in your life? Fucking make it happen don't idolize clueless politicians.
Yeah that's what I meant. In Ohio for example, Trump won the union vote by 9 points. Obama won the union vote in Ohio by 23 points in 2012.
The Greek Freak
Member
People don't even remember how Obama beat Clinton in these "racist hotbeds" by killing her on stuff like NAFTA. Sadly the economic bounceback never reached these areas so voting for 4 or 8 more years of the same but probably worse wasn't an option no matter how much Trump sucks.
Dude Abides
Banned
Uh, Clinton beat Obama in Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania in 2008.
Common sense is common sense. A lot of us already saw the results in real time. A book about it is just putting salt in the wound.
Hillary doesn't have to own up to being representative of the Democratic parties institutional failures, she was just representative of it during the election. She and Bill can pretend everything is great and extol how everyone else was to blame on the sidelines.
What we need to focus on now is actually reforming the party so the elites of the party and the Clinton esque senators fighting against actual progressive change are either cowed into supporting the people or voted out.
People are waking up now. You can't push a Chris Cuomo who pretends to support free tuition and public schools yet packs his bill with so many loopholes and giveaways and doesn't actually fix the core problem, or a Diane Feinstein who actively fights against medicare for all with the rightwing attitude that "government should not control your healthcare" or a Cory booker who takes the most money from WallSt out of anybody.
These politicians who try to pretend they are for people with sound bits and rhetoric but don't actually stand for anything but their own jobs are not what America needs to become great.
Join Justice Democrats and support the movement against phony politics.
Its more important more than ever, because if these elites keep going on like this expecting to win any midterms in 2018 just by saying "we're not Republicans!" they've got another thing coming.
Social issues and identity politics alone don't win elections. You can't expect people to fall in line with you just because you don't wan't to actively destroy their lives and silence their views because they are female or minorities(black, asian, latino, muslim, what have you), that's just common basic sense shit you should be doing by default. Your not going to get any round of applauses for that.
You need to OFFER SOMETHING SUBSTANTIVE to the citizens, that isn't just a halfway gift to your big donors without attempting to fix core issues.
Hillary doesn't have to own up to being representative of the Democratic parties institutional failures, she was just representative of it during the election. She and Bill can pretend everything is great and extol how everyone else was to blame on the sidelines.
What we need to focus on now is actually reforming the party so the elites of the party and the Clinton esque senators fighting against actual progressive change are either cowed into supporting the people or voted out.
People are waking up now. You can't push a Chris Cuomo who pretends to support free tuition and public schools yet packs his bill with so many loopholes and giveaways and doesn't actually fix the core problem, or a Diane Feinstein who actively fights against medicare for all with the rightwing attitude that "government should not control your healthcare" or a Cory booker who takes the most money from WallSt out of anybody.
These politicians who try to pretend they are for people with sound bits and rhetoric but don't actually stand for anything but their own jobs are not what America needs to become great.
Join Justice Democrats and support the movement against phony politics.
Its more important more than ever, because if these elites keep going on like this expecting to win any midterms in 2018 just by saying "we're not Republicans!" they've got another thing coming.
Social issues and identity politics alone don't win elections. You can't expect people to fall in line with you just because you don't wan't to actively destroy their lives and silence their views because they are female or minorities(black, asian, latino, muslim, what have you), that's just common basic sense shit you should be doing by default. Your not going to get any round of applauses for that.
You need to OFFER SOMETHING SUBSTANTIVE to the citizens, that isn't just a halfway gift to your big donors without attempting to fix core issues.
I may be in the minority here but I don't think he copped to sexual assault. It was just assumed on and run with by the media.
I'm not defending his words or actions and I do not like Trump at all but his "You just grab them by the pussy" comment seems to me more a crude turn of phrase than saying he literally walked up and grabbed a girl there. Like the phrase grab life by the horns or by the balls or whatever. He seemed to be speaking in a metaphor with how his Hollywood star power let him approach girls he otherwise couldn't have.
That was my take on his statement anyways.
People have shockingly poor knowledge of primaries, not just historic ones, but even what actually happened in 2016.
Hillary and Obama was a hard-fought primary, which makes it hard to assign a simple narrative. They roughly split the "battlegrounds", but Obama clawed out an advantage little-by-little and the campaign ended with a clear lead.
2016, by comparison, was a lop-sided win, with Hillary curb-stomping Sanders in most of the battleground states, and finished up ahead by double-digits in dele. And despite it being nowhere near as close as the immediately preceding primary, Sanders supporters treated it like it was some kind of nailbiter, and that the elected officials of the Democratic party were in a position to justifiably throw out the primaries and anoint the less popular candidate.
Say what? Anyway what's so hard to comprehend about the earlier post, she was a combination of lazy and stupid that was unprecedented like this topic and book is about:
Flew home every night like a Trump
Let Trump outwork her on the trail and all forms of media
Didn't even visit Mexico's president
Had half the battleground state offices that '12 Obama had
Ignored Bill, Obama, Bernie, MI primary, Brexit, etc
Skipped WI
Threw away traditional ads for the web
And before all of that indefensible shit, she had the worst ratings we've ever seen from a frontrunnner and a FBI investigation. You had to swallow a pretty big pill to risk the country on that candidate even from the start, can't keep being blind to optics or how terrible Hillary and her camp proved to be.
El_Tiguere
Member
Too little too late then... Obama oversaw one of the greatest transfers of wealth to the top 1% under the Fed's QE, and he oversaw the further demise of the middle class. If the election is about optics, this retraining push was nowhere in sight for a huge portion of this country. A lack of progress in the "recovery" was front and center for most.
They went for the party that didn't botch a 7-year economic recovery, hoping that things would change.
I'm talking about restoring power of workers in all aspects of legislation, and away from powerful corporate lobbies that stand in the way of increased negotiating power for workers, higher wages, basic stuff like maternity/paternity leave, health care coverage for all, free public education... these are all pro-worker things that Bernie shouted for, and these were all pro-worker things that the Corporate Democrats shied away from in order to not upset their corporate donors. The rise in populism doesn't come from coal workers having no more coal jobs... the rise in populism comes from corporate Democrats and corporate Republicans ignoring the needs of the lower classes for too long, and towards our current historically extreme level of economic inequality.
They understand the nature of corporations being able to play by their own set of rules, and they are correct in thinking that both Clinton and Obama have helped these corporation write those rules. They are complicit. They were blamed by these workers in 2016 for not doing enough for them, while they bailed out corporations by the TRILLIONS. No amount of preaching about the global economy would undo that perception.
LegendofJoe
Member
Yeah, I'm hoping someone new other than the Cuomos or Bookers of the party runs and takes the nomination. Someone like Eric Garcetti taking Feinstein's Senate seat next year and then running for President in 2020. Seriously, the guy is a Jewish Latino-American Rhodes scholar who served in the military. His resume practically screams future President of the United States. He would be the most educated President we've had since Woodrow Wilson.
Hell, Bill Clinton even said he might be president one day. Hopefully, that won't be held against him.
Hell, Bill Clinton even said he might be president one day. Hopefully, that won't be held against him.
jack_package_200
Banned
Bernie is gonna totally win California you guys!!! He's gonna turn it around.
Retroactive Momentum!!!!
Kamala Harris
shoplifter
Member
What about the other accusations? We're supposed to listen and believe, aren't we?
LegendofJoe
Member
She doesn't have children, which I think unfortunately is an automatic disqualifier.
legacyzero
Banned
Yeah, Booker will face hell with his Pharmecutical ties. Dude has taken over 300,000 from big pharma, and then had the nerve to vote against Bernie legislation making drug prices cheaper "because of the FDA", as if Canada has a problem with people dying on medications.
Cuomo earned credits with the new free public college bill and #FightFor15, so he may have some traction, or he's certainly trying to position himself for it IMO.
Edit: Dose loopholes doe lol
And yeah, Feinstein needs to go. Her recent word-salad fuckery at her town hall regarding Single Payer was an absolute joke.
EatinOlives
Member
Hence my first post. I believe the accusations against the man who literally ADMITTED to regularly committing sexual assault.
El_Tiguere
Member
He would have if the DNC didn't systematically block independents from registering (who were always 60-40 pro Bernie). He also would have done better if the media hadn't been so utterly desperate to placate his nomination (on behalf of Queen Hillary) by announcing the results of that Tuesday primary ON MONDAY NIGHT.
Looking back, all primaries were ripe with party/Clinton shenanigans, but leave it to Clinton supporters to be forever shortsighted with blind loyalty.
jack_package_200
Banned
Booker wouldn't survive any media scrutiny + he isn't all that well liked from his home state.
Warren is too old and would face a lot of the same shit Hillary had to deal with
Gabbard is an islamophobe who tried to trick Sanders supporters into supporting her (with mixed results)
They should follow the Obama route and find someone young, sexy, and charismatic.
Warren is too old and would face a lot of the same shit Hillary had to deal with
Gabbard is an islamophobe who tried to trick Sanders supporters into supporting her (with mixed results)
They should follow the Obama route and find someone young, sexy, and charismatic.
Father_Brain
Banned
The DNC clearly had their thumb on the scale for Clinton in the primary, but she would've won anyway.
LegendofJoe
Member
Cuomo is 100% positioning himself for 2020. I'm not a huge fan, but he definitely has the experience for the job.
Garcetti though, he's a future star. If Feinstein decides against retiring he needs to run against her in the primary and force her out. The party leadership needs to be smart, new exciting people like him need to get to DC as soon as possible. It's time for the old guard to step aside.
Edit: He was also one of the first guys on the ground in Iowa working for Obama. Don't be shocked if Garcetti is his guy going into 2020.
Bruce Springsteen
Member
IT ALWAYS DOES. Name an election where a party hasn't had a preference in a candidate before the primary? And honestly why is this an issue? The entire purpose of the primary election is for the party to choose a candidate that gives them the best shot at winning the entire thing. While voting picks the candidate at the end of the day, it seems impossible to not have a race horse going in. The democrats used the "I'll go with the idiot that I know rather than the genius that I don't" mentality with wanting Hillary. And honestly who can blame them at the time? Hindsight is 20/20.
legacyzero
Banned
Warren has BITE that Hillary lacks. I'm still sore that she sat on the sidelines in the Primary.
And how is Gabbard an Islamophobe? Because she spoke out on the atrocities happening in those countries? Namely Saudi Arabia? Is that really worthy of the tag? Can you not criticize Islam without being a phobic? I criticize Christianity daily for the shit that happens here in the USA. Does that make me phobic?
As far as the Obama swagger, I agree. Love Obama. I just wish he were a bit harder. Especially when he had a majority.
Which was idiotic in the first place.
LegendofJoe
Member
And guess who was invited to attend the who's who of potential 2020 nominees?
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/democratic-party-realignment-cpac-235806
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/democratic-party-realignment-cpac-235806
jack_package_200
Banned
Lol
1. If you want to participate in the process of choosing a party's presidential primary, it is not unreasonable to expect you to be part of that particular party.
2. Besides Hillary won most of the open primaries anyway
He never had a chance. Like Hillary completely failing to appeal to swing voters during the general, Sanders didn't even try to appeal to one of if not the most reliable voting bloc in the democratic party: minorities.
tearsintherain
Member
One of the most fascinating things of the 2016 election (beyond the obvious Trump stuff) was how loud and strong the message was going in that corporate money / superPACs are ruining democracy and we NEED to get citizens united overturned and return power to the people.
Enter 2017, and nobody talks about that anymore. Nobody. Clinton outspent Trump in absolutely vast amounts, especially when SuperPACs are factored in and in the end its unclear how much of it was just wasted money. We saw a hint of that in the previous cycle when the Vegas billionaire Sheldon Adelson spent a fortune on candidates who all lost.
It'll be interesting to see the effects of corporate money and rich billionaires in 2018 and 2020.
Enter 2017, and nobody talks about that anymore. Nobody. Clinton outspent Trump in absolutely vast amounts, especially when SuperPACs are factored in and in the end its unclear how much of it was just wasted money. We saw a hint of that in the previous cycle when the Vegas billionaire Sheldon Adelson spent a fortune on candidates who all lost.
It'll be interesting to see the effects of corporate money and rich billionaires in 2018 and 2020.
legacyzero
Banned
Why even have a fucking vote? If you're going to not let the people have complete control over the process, don't have a process.
It's really easy. Don't allow Superdelegates to weigh in unless it's needed at the Convention. Or just get rid of them entirely.
I'll even defend the Republicans on this one for. It having SDs. It didn't work for them very well, but the PEOPLE decided. And I'm for that.
Dude Abides
Banned
Progressive Icon Tulsi Gabbard licks Assad's taint because Assad bombs Sunnis and Gabbard's a Hindu nationalist who hates Sunnis. Not hard to figure out.
It's interesting indeed that all that money didn't help Hillary on a national level.
I do wonder, though, if Republicans outspent Democrats on downticket races. If super Pacs are still helping the GOP pack the house, there's still a real issue that needs to recapture our attention.
So empty rhetoric is better for those rust belt Americans than an actual economic plan? Interesting....
Yeah, because he was blocked by the opposition party. A party whose main goal was to obstruct Obama and make conditions worse for the average American. Those average Americans awarded that obstruction by putting that party back into power after they caused one of the greatest economic debacles in American history. When Obama asked them to expand the wealth back down to poorer Americans, Republicans said no and demanded MORE tax cuts to the top 1%.
Seriously, your criticisms of Obama corporate ties ring hollow when the people you champion are dumb enough to vote for Republicans.
Yet they don't seem to realize that that very same party purposely sabotaged that 7-year economic recovery. Looks like Fox News did its job.
Getting money out of politics, raising taxes on the wealthy, expanding the social safety net, universal health care, free college, etc. I have no problem with any of that. However, the issue here is the belief from mostly white working class people in the rust belt that Mexicans and the Chinese were taking their jobs, Blacks were getting free iPhones and murdering them in the cities, and gays were raping their kids in public restrooms. Thus, they voted for a lying cheeto and a political party who is even more entangled in corporate interests than Clinton was, and is actively attempting to make their economic situation worse. I simply can't get behind that level of ignorance.
And again it's an uneducated and short-sighted perception that doesn't absolve them of voting AGAINST their own long-term self interests.
shoplifter
Member
I'm fine with this concept as long as state taxpayers aren't footing the bill for the primary election. If the taxpayers are on the hook, the primary should be open to all registered voters.
The people decided for the democrats to but your upset because it wasn't for your candidate.
Probably not?
He lost the primaries, by a lot. It was never in much doubt once states started voting and it became clear.
He especially lost in battleground states, suffering several 30+% curb stomps in states that are vital during the general election.
He lost, despite having almost no resources on either side spent to attacking him.
He lost, under rules that were basically a copy-paste of the 2008 rules, but with less BS. If Michigan or Florida 2008 happened, Sanders supporters probably would have murdered somebody.
Before voting started, Hillary was routinely beating him in head-to-heads with Trump, and Sanders only gained after he essentially lost the primary, because he managed to fleece $100 Million more dollars from his supporters that was used to inflate himself and make his supporters loathe Hillary and the Democrats, while closing the actual primary gap by, like, 1-fucking-percent.
The only circumstance where I'd say "Sanders would have won!" is if sexism was a gargantuan part of Hillary's loss, rather than just a big part of her loss, and that there's a bunch of reasons why sexism matters way more in a general election rather than during a primary.
Other than that, he got completely fucking stomped during the primaries, for a bunch of obvious, logical, demonstrable reasons.
legacyzero
Banned
So much wrong with this.
1: not only does closed Primaries work for Hillary, they can work against her too. Especially for Indepents who went overwhelmingly for Bernie. It's like you don't want her working for votes? Spoiler alert. She didn't work for votes in the GE. She lost.
As for Minorities.. really? Bernie didn't work for them? Or he didn't APPEAL to them? What more did he need to do, exactly? Which of the two treated BLM protests with condescension again? Especially when marking them answer for their past? (I.E. Mass incarceration and "bring them to heel")
While Bernie was actually FIGHTING in the civil rights movement, Hillary Goldwater-girl Clinton was not.
You depiction of Bernie was almost as if he was unconcerned about Minorities and it's an utter lie.
Thumb. Scale.
That's the conversation here. The goalpost isn't yours to move.
Neither is yours and you seem convinced that Bernie would have won. I don't think there's any proof of that. There's a reason he lost the primary and it has nothing to do with Super Delegates.
Dude Abides
Banned
Demon witch Clinton fails to appeal to certain voters - her fault.
Saint Bernard fails to appeal to certain voters - definitely not his fault.
Copy. Paste. 2008 Rules.
The rules don't change much from cycle to cycle, and the way things are different are often times out of the hands of the DNC, anyway. The DNC doesn't actually run the elections themselves-- they are still run by the state-based election commissions, or in the case of caucuses, by local shitshow branches of the parties, not the national committee.
They are following the example of Saint Bernard. Whenever he losses, it is because the other side is corrupt.
legacyzero
Banned
Is this anecdotal? Or actually proven. I'm actually legit curious because I don't want to support ACTUAL islamophobia.
From where I'm sitting, Tulsi dared to be diplomatic and come to reason, and dared to question Trump's strike in a post-true Trump presidency?
*Looks at polls pre and post election
/sip
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph...itician-in-america-might-just-be-a-socialist/
LegendofJoe
Member
They're both at fault for that, I don't know how many more times we're going to keep spinning around on this merry-go-round, but the sooner we stop the better.
I'm optimistic and excited about the elections being held this year, next year, and in 2020. Look to the past to learn from your mistakes and then move on.
http://www.alternet.org/civil-liber...bic-politics-dem-congressmember-tulsi-gabbard
honestly gabbard is shit and progressives need to get over her fast. just because she was an early sanders supporter doesn't mean she deserves any support.
legacyzero
Banned
Dayum.
I'm not sure about that source, but if true, that's rough. And if she tries to run in 2020, she's gonna get grilled
zaid jilani is a leftist himself, he wouldn't be making up shit to smear someone like gabbard
she's also homophobic btw
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked