Support NeoGAF

[whyamihere]

The Election Data Services updated their projections for 2020 reapportionment in December but I didn't see it poster here:

https://www.electiondataservices.co...016/12/20161220-NR_Appor-16wTablesAndMaps.pdf

Using the new sets of projected 2020 data, the apportionment calculations show that 15 or 16 states could gain or lose districts by the time the Census is taken in 2020 in four years.

The gainers and losers are:

Arizona +1 (from 9 to 10)
Colorado +1 (from 7 to 8)
Florida +2 (from 27 to 29)
Montana even or +1 (from At-large to 2)
North Carolina +1 (from 13 to 14)
Oregon +1 (from 5 to 6) Ohio -1 (from 16 to 15)
Texas +3 or +4 (from 36 to 39 or 40)

Pennsylvania -1 (from 18 to 17)
New York -1 (from 27 to 26)
Minnesota -1 (from 8 to 7)
Michigan -1 (from 14 to 13)
Illinois -1 or -2 (from 18 to 17 or 16)
Alabama -1 (from 7 to 6)
Rhode Island -1 (from 2 to 1)
West Virginia -1 (from 3 to 2)

Earlier in the decade’s estimates indicated that both California and Virginia could have enough population to gain another seat in 2020, but both last year’s study and this report based on the new Census Bureau data for 2016 and projected to 2020 shows those states just missing the cut. The short-term projection method showed that California, in fact captured the last available seat (#435) just missing an actual loss in the delegation. There are just 435 congressional districts allocated to the states under a 1941 law capping the number of seats. Virginia’s additional seat came in at seat number 439 (slipping two positions), missing the cut off by 107,282 people (nearly
double the margin reported last year).

The projections also demonstrate how close states are to the magic 435 cut off. Using the longterm projection model, Texas’s fourth additional seat occupies the magic 435 position, gaining that seat by just 41,029 people. Pennsylvania has the potential of losing two seats, having captured position 434 or 433 (depending on the projection methodology) by less than 90,000 people.

The new 2016 estimates also point to how close a number of states stand to gain or lose a district.

Most notable are the states of:

Rhode Island – While keeping their two congressional districts with the 2016 numbers, the new data shows the state is now only 5,569 people away from dropping to a single district state. This has steadily decreased over the decade so far. Last year the state was 16,130 people away from losing its’ second seat, and the year before the margin was 21,389 in population The 2010 Census gave Rhode Island their second seat but only 52,481 people to spare. At this rate, they will be down to just one district in the next several years, the first time this has occurred to Rhode Island since 1789 when the nation was formed. This is confirmed in the 2020 study data They would join seven other states that also just have a single representative in the US House (Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming). Note that one projection method shows Montana gaining a second seat.

Wisconsin – The long-term trend methodology shows Wisconsin keeping it’s 8th congressional district, but with only 72,639 people to spare. It captured seat #433, just two
away from the 435 cut-off point.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Most undocumented immigrants are Chinese? Visa overstays are not considered undocumented are they?

Visa overstays are considered undocumented and that makes up the vast majority of "illegal immigration" of recent history.

China doesn't accept back the people the U.S. wants to deport so we are going to get some fucking huge detention centers moving forward.

 

[Nelo Ice]

More town hall fun from Arkansas and saying exactly what we've all been screaming. "Country over party".
https://twitter.com/julieyoujest/status/834077881974284292

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Kenneth Arrow died D:

The GOAT

 

[gutter_trash]

Maxine Waters is on fire now on MSNBC

 

[shinra-bansho]

What does Kander even do now?
Is he just unemployed?

 

[leroidys]

WA governor is being floated as 2020 candidate.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...d-with-states-legal-victories-on-immigration/

BUT

Inslee insisted on the local politics podcast this week that he's not running. For whatever that's worth.

Honestly I don't think he would be a great candidate and I don't understand where this is coming from.

 

[Grexeno]

National politicians don't come out of Washington or Oregon.

 

[Oblivion]

What does Kander even do now?
Is he just unemployed?

He was on Real Time the other day, so...yes.

 

[mo60]

Man, this NYPost article is silly.

http://nypost.com/2017/02/12/trumps-white-house-eyes-potential-foes-in-2020-election/



A lot of this reads like what Democrats said about Republicans this year. I mean, how much of this stuff hurt Trump? All it takes is the right candidate.

It kinda reminds me of what conservatives said about Justin trudeau in 2015. The provincial conservatives were I live in Alberta also kinda did not treat the Alberta NDP as a threat until the last minute when they were literally crushing the two conservative parties by like double digit margins in the polls in the last week or two of the 2015 provincial election.The two provincial conservative parties were I live are also kinda falling the same trap again with some united conservative plan where they think if they unite into one party they would be able to obliterate the Alberta NDP in the next election.

 

[TiredofWinning]

When the fuck is Obama getting back from Richard Branson's private island?

 

[Poodlestrike]

What does Kander even do now?
Is he just unemployed?

He's got an voting access advocacy group called Let America Vote, but I don't know how much of his time that actually takes up.

 

[Aaron Strife]

The Election Data Services updated their projections for 2020 reapportionment in December but I didn't see it poster here:

https://www.electiondataservices.co...016/12/20161220-NR_Appor-16wTablesAndMaps.pdf

Most of those gains probably help us, if anything. Even Montana would probably elect a Democratic representative if you drew a Western MT district:

MN going down to 7 districts should be interesting. The GOP has dreamed for years of combining the 4th and 5th into a single district, but I doubt they'd get away with it. More likely that the other five districts divvy up the remaining space if anything. Democrats could probably draw a safe 4-3 or maybe 5-2 map if they control redistricting next round. The current MN-7 is gone forever once Peterson leaves, but Nolan and Walz should be able to hold down their districts, and MN-2, MN-3 and MN-6 can probably be split into one Democratic and one Republican district.

 

[Lmo911]

When the fuck is Obama getting back from Richard Branson's private island?

Never. He's tasted the sweet freedom of wind surfing. Would you come back to Trump's America or wind surf forever?

 

[RustyNails]

So it's going to be Gillibrand then.

Depends. Will she release her Wall Street speech transcripts??

 

[Aaron Strife]

Depends. Will she release her Wall Street speech transcripts??

Every Dem nominee going forward will need to release transcripts of everything they've ever done or said in public or to an audience going back to the third grade.

Preschool, if necessary.

 

[rec0ded1]

When the fuck is Obama getting back from Richard Branson's private island?

Shit, I'd be worried about getting arrested and executed by trump to make his supporters cheer about taking out the Kenyan Antichrist. If I were him I'd wait it out until someone else is running the country.

 

[leroidys]

National politicians don't come out of Washington or Oregon.

That's not true really true, especially recently. A few off the top of my head, skewed towards recent national policy and politics (and WA only)-

First to legalize marijuana
First to legalize gay marriage by referendum
Prosecuted Travel ban TRO and won
Patty Murray - currently 9th ranking US senator and 3rd ranking democrat
Tom Foley - Senate majority leader
Gen. Mattis
Scoop Jackson

 

[soul creator]

Guess who's bizzack

Lincoln Chafee defends Trump, criticizes Raimondo and does not rule out return to politics

Asked if he wants "to get back in," he said: "There's a presidential run in 2020. You know I've done crazy things before." Then he laughed.

More seriously, he said: "I'm in between right now. I had a good career and I don't know what's next."

In a subsequent interview with The Providence Journal, Chafee said: "I'll be 64 in March, and that's too early in my view to be completely retired."

38 Studios update also

Chafee also took aim at Raimondo's tax-incentive-driven economic development strategy, calling it a "candy store."

"I have traditionally been opposed to — I call it the candy store. I'd rather treat all the companies equally in Rhode Island, rather than pick favorites and shovel the candy at them, as I call it, taxpayer dollars."

He also drew attention to the final settlement in the lawsuit he launched to recover as much as possible of the state's doomed $75-million loan deal with Curt Schilling's 38 Studios.

By his own calculation, "we were just successful at getting $61 million back from the 38 Studios settlements, and it's painful to see it fly out the window to very, very wealthy companies. You don't get any more wealthy than General Electric and Johnson & Johnson. ... [while] Rhode Island companies loyally pay their property tax and all their fees. They're not getting the candy."

 

[Plinko]

That's not true really true, especially recently. A few off the top of my head, skewed towards recent national policy and politics (and WA only)-

First to legalize marijuana
First to legalize gay marriage by referendum
Prosecuted Travel ban TRO and won
Patty Murray - currently 9th ranking US senator and 3rd ranking democrat
Tom Foley - Senate majority leader
Gen. Mattis
Scoop Jackson

I mentioned Murray a few days ago when asked what female candidate I think would be a good one for the national stage. I'd love to see her considered for a VP slot. Very relatable to women, lower/middle-class, etc.

 

[GutsOfThor]

I have no idea if he has any plans of running for president but what do you all think of Martin Heinrich from New Mexico?

 

[whyamihere]

Murray is a good Senator and an excellent negotiator but she sort of lacks the X factor needed to drive someone to the national stage.

Like if Chris Murphy were president, since we're taking about that NYPost article, I believe he'd be the first president from Connecticut since the country's founding. Which would be crazy. Some states just don't seem to produce national winners.

I have no idea if he has any plans of running for president but what do you all think of Martin Heinrich from New Mexico?

Dad.

 

[TiredofWinning]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDHjk6NJ0wM

Ellison released a video endorsement from John Lewis. Pretty good stuff.

DNC is going to be fucked from the backlash if he doesn't win.

 

[B-Dubs]

Murray is a good Senator and an excellent negotiator but she sort of lacks the X factor needed to drive someone to the national stage.

Like if Chris Murphy were president, since we're taking about that NYPost article, I believe he'd be the first president from Connecticut since the country's founding. Which would be crazy. Some states just don't seem to produce national winners.

I think that's mostly due to the Electoral College and the need to appeals to specific demographics in order to win.

 

[benicillin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDHjk6NJ0wM

Ellison released a video endorsement from John Lewis. Pretty good stuff.

DNC is going to be fucked from the backlash if he doesn't win.

I still haven't seen a good reason to not have Ellison as DNC chair apart from picking someone else to not just rehash the primary. So naturally the DNC will probably pick Perez.

 

[kirblar]

I still haven't seen a good reason to not have Ellison as DNC chair apart from picking someone else to not just rehash the primary. So naturally the DNC will probably pick Perez.

He and Perez are basically on the same page- but we can run Perez in MD, so it's just the better utilitarian option.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

Guess who's bizzack





38 Studios update also

Chafee is possibly the weirdest fossil still around in American politics, he's like the last of the Rockfeller Republicans.

Murray is a good Senator and an excellent negotiator but she sort of lacks the X factor needed to drive someone to the national stage.

Like if Chris Murphy were president, since we're taking about that NYPost article, I believe he'd be the first president from Connecticut since the country's founding. Which would be crazy. Some states just don't seem to produce national winners.



Dad.

Spoiler

yeah I realize his only elected position was from Texas but he's basically a CT politician

 

[RastaMentality]

The sole good thing about Booker running (if he does) is that we'll likely get a really great pastor-esque inspirational speech after he wins the SC primary.

 

[GutsOfThor]

Dad.

I understood that reference! lol

 

[JP_]

Last time he said "I TOLD YOU SO" after an attack it tanked his polls for a month. One of his lowest points of last year in polling was right after Orlando.

Chance it could play different coming from a president where "I TOLD YOU SO" will be accompanied by actions that americans will think are making them safer.

 

[Aaron Strife]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDHjk6NJ0wM

Ellison released a video endorsement from John Lewis. Pretty good stuff.

DNC is going to be fucked from the backlash if he doesn't win.

"Bu-but he endorsed Hillary, how can he then endorse Keith?" (Alt left heads explode)

Honestly, Perez would be fine but I agree with your sentiment as Keith would probably be just as fine anyway. Perez also has a fair shot at Maryland governor if he went for it, whereas Keith doesn't really have anywhere else to go. I'm not faithful enough that Minnesota, a state possibly trending Republican (I'm not yet convinced that Trump's close loss here is proof of any long-term trends as that discounts the 8% third party vote, but I understand there are other factors moving us to the right), even with its progressive history would elect a big city liberal Muslim as a senator or governor.

 

[royalan]

Honestly, none of the DNC Chair candidates stand out to me (except Mayor Pete). They're all promising the same thing for what is really a boring ass job that requires you to be competent and not much else. None of them stand out as a potentially BAD pick.

I don't like how Ellison is threatening a potential backlash. Nobody's stupid, we know he has the support of the Bernie wing, and everyone who followed the primaries knows what that means. We know what the implication is whenever he references that. Pick me...or else.

Then again, it might be good for the DNC to have someone this cutthroat serving as chair. It's about time Democrats shed their manners.

EDIT: This just needs to hurry up and be done with so the party can get to work.

 

[whyamihere]

Chafee is possibly the weirdest fossil still around in American politics, he's like the last of the Rockfeller Republicans.

Spoiler

yeah I realize his only elected position was from Texas but he's basically a CT politician

He's from Texas.

 

[B-Dubs]

Honestly, none of the DNC Chair candidates stand out to me (except Mayor Pete). They're all promising the same thing for what is really a boring ass job that requires you to be competent and not much else. None of them stand out as a potentially BAD pick.

I don't like how Ellison is threatening a potential backlash. Nobody's stupid, we know he has the support of the Bernie wing, and everyone who followed the primaries knows what that means. We know what the implication is whenever he references that. Pick me...or else.

Then again, it might be good for the DNC to have someone this cutthroat serving as chair. It's about time Democrats shed their manners.

EDIT: This just needs to hurry up and be done with so the party can get to work.

Yea, this should have been done by the end of January. Plus it never should have been this public.

 

[Nelo Ice]

So many coastal elites.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58ac7f3ce4b0c4d5105717e0

SOUTH CAROLINA
Greenville is “the reddest part of a very red state,” according to Kate Howard Franch, the chair of the local Democratic Party. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), who led the Benghazi committee, is their congressman, if that gives any indication of the area’s leanings.

Franch usually gets about 20 people at her monthly meetings ― 40 on a good day. But at the end of January, she had 120.

Franch said that in her nine years there, she’s never seen this sort of engagement. They had a gathering at Furman University after the Women’s March to build upon the momentum and figure out next steps. Even though the meeting took place on Super Bowl Sunday, there were about 1,000 people in the audience.

 

[Wilsongt]

So many coastal elites.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58ac7f3ce4b0c4d5105717e0

We'll never have any Democrats in SC elected to congress except for Clyburn, but it's nice to see people motivated. Hopefully it lasts until 2018.

 

[Aaron Strife]

So many coastal elites.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58ac7f3ce4b0c4d5105717e0

Not that I'm delusional enough to think this would flip a place like South Carolina on its own, but how many more elections would we win if left-leaning voters in red states/districts didn't sit them out because they think it's hopeless? So long as 60% turnout (at best) is the norm, it's a fool's errand to try and gauge the partisan lean of various parts of the country.

Like I said, I don't even think it would change that much, but our current president was elected by what, 20% of the country? Less? It's pathetic.

 

[Teggy]

Welp

Bob Hardt‏ @bobhardt

Gillibrand pledges a full 6-year term if she's re-elected in 2018, adding Gov. Cuomo would "be a great candidate" for president. @ny1 7&10pm
6:04 PM · Feb 21, 2017

 

[excelsiorlef]

Welp

I wouldn't announce I'm considering running for President now if I were anyone so doesn’t mean much.

 

[metalslimer]

I might be misremembering but didn't Hillary promise the same thing in 06? It really doesn't matter anyway as she will easily win reelection.

 

[Randolph Freelander]

Just a regular night in North Carolina

NC conservative activists accused of threatening Muslims

The nation’s largest Muslim civil rights group is calling for the FBI to look into death threats made against the Muslim community at a meeting of conservative activists in Kernersville on Thursday.

“My only recommendation is to start killing the hell out of them,” one participant said, according to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, based in Washington, D.C. “I’m ready to start taking people out.”

The meeting at a restaurant included a presentation on “a supposed Muslim plot to conquer the United States,” the council said, citing local media reports of the meeting.

“Shed some blood, too,” the same participant said in response to the presenter’s call to “shed some light” on the issue, according to the council.

The meeting included Tea Party members, patriot groups and other conservative activists, the Triad City Beat alternative newspaper reported.

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/po...-politics/article133917359.html#storylink=cpy

 

[jack_package_200]

Just a regular night in North Carolina

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/po...-politics/article133917359.html#storylink=cpy

Look at all that economic anxiety

 

[Head of Vengarl]

Alright PoliGAF, I feel like I need some clarification on the issue of identity politics.

In the latest Milo Yiannopoulous thread, I caught some serious heat for this post (replying to someone who said "fuck Sam Harris"):

Fuck Sam Harris? He's been a vehement critic of Trump and his supporters. He argues using nuance and reason. He's exactly the kind of level-headed person the left needs to listen to right now, even if you find that some of his arguments make you uncomfortable. I'm guessing your main issue with him is his strident criticism of religion, and particularly Islam, which somehow got him labeled a racist (thanks Ben Affleck). Or maybe it's because he has been increasingly critical of the left for going overboard with identity politics and outrage culture? Left-GAF has been freaking me out ever since Trump won. I'm becoming increasingly aware that many of you support the use of violence against speech, as was the case with the Berkeley incident. Absolutely nothing good will come of that. We (the left) need to pull our shit together before we lose the 2018 and 2020 elections. That starts with taking a hard look at ourselves.

Also, Sam's latest podcast episode was great:

Waking Up with Sam Harris #65 — We're All Cucks Now (with David Frum)

Here are the responses:

Really? You try to defend the man by associating him with the identity politics and outrage culture boogeyman fight?

Not the best line if argumentation given the context of this thread

Let me first stop it right here and add that my view on "outrage culture" was best described by Bill Maher in this video:

New Rule: Stop Apologizing | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO)

I just wanted to get that out of the way, because after that first reply by excelsiorlef, nobody even mentioned outrage culture. Back to the responses:

Honestly, "identity politics" is a bullshit phrase that anyone who associates themselves with being left or progressive should be embarrassed of saying.

Being against "Identity politics" is a way for white guys to disregard women, gay, and minority rights

The thing that cracks me up is when dudes are like "identity politics are holding the left back. Now let's focus on getting the white working man on our side"

My reply:

I had a feeling people were going to latch on to that term. Calling people out for saying or doing bigoted things is good, but making it the center of left-wing discourse has proven to be a political dead end, as far as I can see. As I said, I'm worried about future elections for Democrats.

I would personally be more concerned with popular self-proclaimed liberal icons like Bill Maher self-righteously embracing bigotry against the trans community in front of millions on TV than anything Left GAF has done.

I won't defend that. I've already criticized Maher for that weak ass episode.

The responses:

Without mincing words -- I find it disgusting that you think attempting to do the bare minimum to help minorities is putting it at the "center".

And even more disgusting to call it a dead end. You would trample over our bodies to win elections.

The white working class chose Donald Trump. They're going to have 'their way' for four years. I can't stand people who argue that the solution to that, is to do more to appeal to white people.

'Hey, they elected a white supremacist, so we've got to cater to them now.'

Like... what the hell?

How is it the center of "left-wing" discourse and how is it a dead end?
Sounds like you think there should be no focus on minority issues.

My reply:

How is it the center of "left-wing" discourse and how is it a dead end?
Sounds like you think there should be no focus on minority issues.

Proven *how*?

Because a huge number of people, and not just ultra right-wingers, don't seem to give too much of a shit about minority issues? Call me cynical but we need to think about winning elections first and foremost right now.

Without mincing words -- I find it disgusting that you think attempting to do the bare minimum to help minorities is putting it at the "center".

And even more disgusting to call it a dead end. You would trample over our bodies to win elections.

There's a difference between not mincing words and losing yourself in hyperbole. That last sentence of yours is ridiculous.

I'm absolutely willing to compromise with the center and moderate republicans in order to win elections for the left. Anything is better than our current nightmare situation.

The responses:

Ignore the minority issues and you run the risk of losing the minority vote (the only reason you even come close to winning elections) like the Republicans when they heel-turned during the civil rights movement.

Nice to know how little the left values the civil rights of the electorate they feel are held hostage to only vote for their candidates.

This strategy people are now rushing to adopt hinges on the minority vote being a given because the alternative is reliably worse. No accountability for the nearly half the populace that doesn't vote or attempts to get them involved.

It's almost like people not caring about minorities in America is an acceptable, forgone conclusion...

And it's not like the issues affecting whites don't also affect minorities; they're even often exacerbated by being a minority.

Can't let laziness set in. The enemy certainly doesn't

Yeah, the entire premise is dismissive and racist af.

My reply:

Ignore the minority issues and you run the risk of losing the minority vote (the only reason you even come close to winning elections) like the Republicans when they heel-turned during the civil rights movement.

Nice to know how little the left values the civil rights of the electorate they feel are held hostage to only vote for their candidates.

This strategy people are now rushing to adopt hinges on the minority vote being a given because the alternative is reliably worse. No accountability for the nearly half the populace that doesn't vote or attempts to get them involved.

It's almost like people not caring about minorities in America is an acceptable, forgone conclusion...

And it's not like the issues affecting whites don't also affect minorities; they're even often exacerbated by being a minority.

Can't let laziness set in. The enemy certainly doesn't

So how do we win in 2018 and 2020? If it isn't obvious, I'm desperately searching for a path to victory for us.

The responses:

If you don't even know, why the FUCK is your first go-to throwing us under the bus?

Do you not realize how this looks?

2018: Focus on tying Trump to the Republicans like an albatross.
2020: Don't take any voter demographic for granted like Clinton did in Wisconsin and Michigan.
Both: Campaign like a motherfucker.

If the Democratic Party tries to throw minorities under the bus to win, then fuck the Democratic Party. They will lose and they will deserve it.

Get the people who did not vote to show up. Throwing us under the bus to appeal to bigots is not an option and it's quite disturbing that you think it is.

Gotta get people voting and thinking long term. You can't outwit crazy or blind, you just have to outnumber it and drag them along. No sniping at each other over dumb shit. No "Bernie or Bust" shit. People have to accept that there will never be a perfect candidate when representing a diverse group of voters and make reasonable choices.

If you stop caring about people because you want to win then you might as well just go republican because that's what they're all about.

At this point I was pretty rattled over the numerous accusations of racism/throwing minorities under the bus, which I didn't really understand. And then I read this post:

Yep.

Don't throw your vote away on a protest vote or not show up because you think it was a sure thing. Looking at the news and the numbers showing up in protest, it seems like a large part of the formerly dormant electorate got that message.

When the primaries are done and your select candidate was not chosen, don't hide your tail between your legs and instead find common ground.

Take nothing for granted and get people out there to vote.

When a candidate is selected and if you are able: volunteer and canvass.

This last part isn't directed specifically toward Luap (❤️ you) as a lot of this talk was floating around shortly after the vote and it was all insulting:

Just don't act like a turncoat "ally" and think that you can ignore the "identity politics" (read: civil rights) of the ethnic, religious, language, sexuality, and gender minorities that you would have no chance of winning if you ignore. Don't let inherent privilege rob you of the empathy you should be feeling for your fellow voter. Otherwise, as Massive Duck said, you're really no different than republicans.

The bolded part made me realize that I was not on the same page as these people. Going into that conversation, my idea of identity politics was not the same as civil rights. This response to a Quora thread asking In the U.S., what is the distinction between "civil rights" and "identity politics"? was close to what I viewed it as:

Civil rights is a legal concept. It is based on outlawing discrimination based on race, sex, etc.

Identity politics is a marketing concept for politicians. It has to do with appealing to people based on race, sex, etc and making promises to those groups.

and also this video:

Is Identity Politics a Way to Lose Elections?

and the first half of this video:

Sam Harris ”Waking Up": identity politics at dead end; how to build global civilization?

are good summaries of my idea of the topic.

But if we are to view identity politics and civil rights as the exact same thing, then the accusations of racism make more sense.

Continuing with my reply:

If you don't even know, why the FUCK is your first go-to throwing us under the bus?

Do you not realize how this looks?

How does it look? I'm basically just thinking out loud in here. I'm open to changing my stance, or at least admitting I'll need to learn more before continuing, in the face of good arguments.

Gotta get people voting and thinking long term. You can't outwit crazy or blind, you just have to outnumber it and drag them along. No sniping at each other over dumb shit. No "Bernie or Bust" shit. People have to accept that there will never be a perfect candidate when representing a diverse group of voters and make reasonable choices.

If you stop caring about people because you want to win then you might as well just go republican because that's what they're all about.

Get the people who did not vote to show up. Throwing us under the bus to appeal to bigots is not an option and it's quite disturbing that you think it is.

2018: Focus on tying Trump to the Republicans like an albatross.
2020: Don't take any voter demographic for granted.
Both: Campaign like a motherfucker.

If the Democratic Party tries to throw minorities under the bus to win, then fuck the Democratic Party. They will lose and they will deserve it.

So you guys really think we can win with the same platform we've been running, just with a more vigorous campaign? I hope you're right, but this election shattered my faith in this country. That's why I've opened up to a more cynical approach, if it's necessary.

Tell you one thing talking about winning in 2018 sure as shit isn't relevant to talking about how Milo is a bigoted POS.

True. Though TBH there isn't really much more to talk about on that point. I find the current conversation much more interesting, but I'll stop if a mod thinks I'm unnecessarily derailing the thread.

The responses:

It looks like you don't give a shit about any of your principles and only care about winning.
As such you cannot be trusted in ever doing what you would promise since in effect you only care about winning not what happens afterward.

love how not throwing minorities under the bus isn't a good enough argument

Not dropping minority issues doesn't mean having the same platform; there are other parts that can be added or dropped. It also doesn't mean campaigning the same way in different states; when in Wisconsin, tailor your message to the issues that concern people in Wisconsin. Same with communicating with any other state. But don't fucking drop minorities under the bus in the rest of the country just to appeal to Iowa or Wisconsin.

It looks like your first instinct was to disregard minorities for the sake of winning an election, despite no real strategy around how doing so would actually produce a win. I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume that wasn't your intention. Honestly, there were a lot of PoliGAF people the night of, and the morning after, the election who were saying things like "We have to totally abandon guns and religion", "We have to put up a Southern white guy," "We need Tom Hanks and Mark Cuban", and all sorts of ridiculous knee-jerk reaction shit.

So you guys really think we can win with the same platform we've been running, just with a more vigorous campaign? I hope you're right, but this election shattered my faith in this country. That's why I've opened up to a more cynical approach, if it's necessary.

Let's not overlearn lessons from the election. We won the popular vote by a massive amount and lost the EC vote by an extremely slim margin in three states. That's a narrow loss that with smarter campaigning and a more charismatic messenger can be flipped back into a win.

I'd like to just point out that in a thread about a known bigot, who has assaulted just about every minority community out there, getting some level of comeuppance you are basically responding with meh I'm much more interested in talking about how minority issues are detrimental to the Democrats election success...

Please consider that

My final reply:

I'd like to just point out that in a thread about a known bigot, who has assaulted just about every minority community out there, getting some level of comeuppance you are basically responding with meh I'm much more interested in talking about how minority issues are detrimental to the Democrats election success...

Please consider that

Point taken. I'll take my discussion to PoliGAF.

So that's what led me here. It was an eye-opening discussion for several reasons, but the main takeaway is that I really need to get some clarification on the distinction between identity politics and civil rights, or if there indeed is no difference. The other question is, if there is a difference, is it still wrong to advocate against identity politics, as far as winning future elections for Democrats goes?

 

[whyamihere]

lol Gillibrand. Sure, girl.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

"You speak Spanish and you're brown, you must be a Mexican!" turned into policy.

 

[shinra-bansho]

The white working class is also an identity under the pejorative version of the term identity politics. And pandering to them at the expense of minority voters is just trading one identity politics for another.

Under a more narrow view that it refers to politics aimed at minority and/or marginalised groups that suffer institutional inequalities, then the idea of abandoning "identity politics" does essentially amount to throwing minorities under the bus.

 

[B-Dubs]

lol Gillibrand. Sure, girl.

I'd be shocked if she weren't at least thinking about it.

 

[royalan]

Alright PoliGAF, I feel like I need some clarification on the issue of identity politics.

In the latest Milo Yiannopoulous thread, I caught some serious heat for this post (replying to someone who said "fuck Sam Harris"):



Here are the responses:



Let me first stop it right here and add that my view on "outrage culture" was best described by Bill Maher in this video:

New Rule: Stop Apologizing | Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO)

I just wanted to get that out of the way, because after that first reply by excelsiorlef, nobody even mentioned outrage culture. Back to the responses:





My reply:



The responses:





My reply:



The responses:






My reply:



The responses:






At this point I was pretty rattled over the numerous accusations of racism/throwing minorities under the bus, which I didn't really understand. And then I read this post:



The bolded part made me realize that I was not on the same page as these people. Going into that conversation, my idea of identity politics was not the same as civil rights. This response to a Quora thread asking In the U.S., what is the distinction between "civil rights" and "identity politics"? was close to what I viewed it as:



and also this video:

Is Identity Politics a Way to Lose Elections?

and the first half of this video:

Sam Harris ”Waking Up": identity politics at dead end; how to build global civilization?

are good summaries of my idea of the topic.

But if we are to view identity politics and civil rights as the exact same thing, then the accusations of racism make more sense.

Continuing with my reply:



The responses:








My final reply:



So that's what led me here. It was an eye-opening discussion for several reasons, but the main takeaway is that I really need to get some clarification on the distinction between identity politics and civil rights, or if there indeed is no difference. The other question is, if there is a difference, is it still wrong to advocate against identity politics, as far as winning future elections for Democrats goes?

I'm confused about your confusion over the term "identity politics" and why it's problematic to minorities.

I am black gay man. As a long-standing member of the Democratic party, I will not stand for issues that pertain to me as black and gay to be shelved in the name of perceived political expediency.

That's the problem with "identity politics." It's a dogwhistle. A trivialiation of minority issues. Of civil rights issues.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

I picked a random simpsons episode to watch and out of all the episodes of 28 seasons... I picked an episode where Springfield bans immigrants.

So to Trump's immigrant ban I say... Simpsons already did it.

 

[TiredofWinning]

Joe Scarborough singing on Colbert