shinra-bansho
Member
Also when did the "Democratic base" become solely "crybaby weirdos that care way too much about an organisational role and will throw the toys out of the cot if they don't get their way."
-
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.
PoliGAF 2017 |OT1| From Russia with Love
- Thread starter ItWasMeantToBe19
- Start date
- Status
Rasta, I found all of your snarky Clinton supporters.
Like always, everyone will swear they won't vote for Clinton/Bernie if their person doesn't win, but as always, everyone actually votes.
Based on how much stock some of the folks in previous posts put into random tweets from the internet, you all must be big fans of the Tyler model.
As shinra points out - this is sub 1% of Bernie primary voters in all actuality, they just like to scream on the internet and people like to search them out to validate their own confirmation bias.
Like always, everyone will swear they won't vote for Clinton/Bernie if their person doesn't win, but as always, everyone actually votes.
Based on how much stock some of the folks in previous posts put into random tweets from the internet, you all must be big fans of the Tyler model.
As shinra points out - this is sub 1% of Bernie primary voters in all actuality, they just like to scream on the internet and people like to search them out to validate their own confirmation bias.
In space!
Box of Kittens
Banned
Rasta, I found all of your snarky Clinton supporters.
Like always, everyone will swear they won't vote for Clinton/Bernie if their person doesn't win, but as always, everyone actually votes.
Based on how much stock some of the folks above put into random tweets from the internet, you all must be big fans of the Tyler model.
I mean, we're all huge fans of the Tyler model. By the time he's done adding variables his model will have R^2=1.
It is the BEST MODEL.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
What happen to the Clinton wing's pragmatism?
Fact of the matter is, after you lose elections, you can't go on only rewarding the voters that voted for you. You need to find a group you can convince otherwise. And I personally think millennials, poor people, and minorities that voted for Obama but not Clinton are the easiest block to convert.
Where else is there to go? Nominate Kasich or McMullin?
Obviously you're always going to see people hate on democrats for anything, but you can at least try to stop the bleeding on things that's relatively painless. I'm not asking to give all the way in and go full Bernie, just a simple gesture that the party acknowledges them as a part of the party.
What should the typical response be to the people that think the party doesn't give a crap about the bernie wing of the party? Ellison wins, you can always at least say that Bernie's endorsement is in charge of the DNC, proving there's change in the party after the election.
Or we can just continue down the road of "but Trump", which is enough of an argument for most of us, but doesn't do anything to get people to get out to vote.
I know, but we need idiots to win elections.
shinra-bansho
Member
Then they should grow up and get the fuck over themselves.
Or consign themselves to eternal Trumps.
Making decisions to ensure the feelings of a tiny bunch of malcontents that were not pivotal to the election is as idiotic as they are.
Or consign themselves to eternal Trumps.
Making decisions to ensure the feelings of a tiny bunch of malcontents that were not pivotal to the election is as idiotic as they are.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
"Grow up and get the fuck over yourselves" makes a great campaign slogan.
I'm pretty convinced that's what our pool of swing voters is mostly made up of at this point.
shinra-bansho
Member
I think so too.
You Know Nothing
Member
Surprised something like this hasn't been a Eurovision entry yet.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
This is a stupid attitude.
A lot of this is just anger and resentment on both sides
Ellison is the better pick: doesn't split the party, has the same ideas as Perez, perez and pete can run in their states.
Perez literally just seems to be a way to lock out the Bernie wing and the bernie people aren't stupid about this, they can whine and moan a lot but they have eyes and ears. I literally can't think of a reason why he needed to run besides not being brave enough to run in MD because he wrongly things Hogan is unbeatable.
Intheflorsh
Banned
You might as well root for someone you dislike taking the DNC chair since there's virtually no chance the Democrats are winning the Senate in 2018 regardless of who wins. Just think of all the future scapegoating opportunities.
No, but they can get the house, and that's enough to prime for a 2020 D/D/D setup. Cohn on that from today- all the best possible pickups are in metropolitan districts: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/...-house-control-is-following-the-sun.html?_r=0
shinra-bansho
Member
I quite literally give zero fucks who ends up being DNC chair.
If it's Ellison, good for him. If it's Perez also good for him.
I'm not running for DNC chair though so I can call the people investing so much into this pointless contest that it will impact their voting down the line the idiots they are.
LostMyNarbles
Member
A lot of Sanders supporters pretty much gave up after the primaries and refused to support Clinton while Bernie himself campaigned for her and showed support. Why would you try to cater to people who instantly duck out once they don't get their way? Where does the buck stop if you elect Ellison and then this same group of supporters get rabid every time a Sanders candidate doesn't get the attention they deserve? What happens if Tulsi Gabbard runs in 2020 and people get pissed off if she doesn't get nominated?
I want Ellison to win because he's qualified for the job (He is) and appears passionate about change (He does), but I don't think he should be the no-contest winner just because Sanders supporters say so.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
*squints* Falgsclth
metalslimer
Member
Oh god just give it to mayor Pete to ignore both sides of this shit
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Look I like Ellison and think he'd be fine in the job and if this is what an olive branch to those people looks like I'm more than willing to offer it. That doesn't mean every concession going forward but this one is easy and the DNC should realize how easy it is
nature boy
Member
Abinash117
Member
It was suppose come out last week too.
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
All the terrorists are filling out their one week Visas and are pouring in
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
If you're not going to give them something no one cares about, then what are you going to give them?
And this thing is going to come back everytime there's a primary for anything. Perez tipping the scales so that the undeserved bank lover wins is a story you will see a lot more of than if Ellison won.
You can ignore them if you want, but I'd to hear how else the democratic party changes if not to compromise with the sanders wing every once in awhile.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
Steven Miller busy finishing Facism for Dummies.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
1500 Arkansas libs are in line to yell at Tom Cotton at this town hall.
I would also like to yell at Tom Cotton if he represented me.
I would also like to yell at Tom Cotton if he represented me.
We already tried saying this before the election. Which is why I'm hesitant to go back to that again. :\
Yes, sadly.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I think democrats have to make an effort to include these people, though. They have no choice.
nature boy
Member
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
How white is the crowd?
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Then why are you spending time lambasting those that do care?
If it doesn't matter to you then why stonewall them?
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Nice.
I highly recomend anyone here go to one of these town hall protests near them if you're frustraited by all the bad Trump news. It's really quite cathartic.
Does anybody here buy this argument?
I'd expect a full on civil war before this particular scenario.
shinra-bansho
Member
It's not something to "give" though, as noted above by someone else.
It's something where a collection of individuals decide who they for whatever reason think is best for the role.
The "Sanders wing" (my god, why is this a thing) already had significant compromises made. There is no once in a while. And there is no compromise with certain people. There is my way always no matter what. And the amount of attention going into this is a symptom of that.
If someone is going to kick down the sand castle because they don't get the bloody DNC Chair they preferred (for no real reason other than he endorsed Saint Bernard) then they are a fickle and wholly unreliable constituency anyway, that will need to be appeased at every turn.
If Ellison wins, because he'll do well in the job, which he probably will, then more power to him. I mean it's fortunate that he at least seems about as good as any other candidate. But it's not candy to give.
Just as everything else for the next four, or really two, years is not candy to give.
I don't see how I'm particularly spending excessive time lambasting dumb people nor stonewalling them from being dumb by doing so, by posting a few posts about how dumb they are.
Big Baybee
Member
Because it's frustrating that people will basically screw themselves and others if the guy they back fairly loses.
I really don't understand why the DNC Chair position has to be the thing to appease the Bernie wing. As Cybit said, most of Bernie's supporters aren't paying attention to this thing. It's just that the ones that are are the loudest of the fucking loud.
How the fuck did this get so public? What makes Ellison the "progressive" choice other than Bernie's endorsement?
Ugh, this whole thing is such a waste of publicity.
EDIT: Also, it's wrong to label Perez's base as "Clinton-ites." The segment of Perez's support that WOULD be upset if he were to lose, from what I see, are just people who respect the party and its processes, and balk at the idea of giving someone the position just because they were anointed by Bernie after he spent last year shitting on those processes. That isn't just Clinton supporters; Bernie eroded some of his own support last year with his fucking tantrums.
Ellison's movements lately feel like a threat. Some like that. Some don't.
How the fuck did this get so public? What makes Ellison the "progressive" choice other than Bernie's endorsement?
Ugh, this whole thing is such a waste of publicity.
EDIT: Also, it's wrong to label Perez's base as "Clinton-ites." The segment of Perez's support that WOULD be upset if he were to lose, from what I see, are just people who respect the party and its processes, and balk at the idea of giving someone the position just because they were anointed by Bernie after he spent last year shitting on those processes. That isn't just Clinton supporters; Bernie eroded some of his own support last year with his fucking tantrums.
Ellison's movements lately feel like a threat. Some like that. Some don't.
Because it irks people that the reason it matters to some isn't "Ellison is way more qualified for the job" or even "Perez and Butteig should run for higher office and this is the best spot for Ellison" but rather "because Bernie picked him". Like maybe its not a hill worth dying on but I think its still obvious why that annoys people?
Aaron Strife
Banned
We don't want the party elite to anoint leaders, except when it's the party elite that i like!
Yeah, it makes no sense. I thought he was going in a completely different direction until he pulled that out.
LostMyNarbles
Member
Then the party can do that by universally adopting a more progressive platform. I think Bernie Sanders had a lot of good ideas and the Democratic party needs to adapt to them. What we don't need to be doing is specifically appointing people who have been christened by Sanders just to show people the party is listening. Because if you start doing that then they will throw a fit any time they don't get their way and require the party to constantly baby them.
The Democratic Party crafted its most progressive platform ever last year, thanks in part to Bernie.
And the Bernie wing gave not a fuck about that, because at the end of the day they gave not a single shit about progressive policies. They wanted Bernie. That's it.
The 2016 platform was super-mega-hyper-ultra-progressive.
They didn't care. Because what they say they care about isn't what they actually care about.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
That high level of response can probably be ascribed to partisan response bias more than anything else. They're answering that way not because they believe it but because they know that's the "GOP/conservative answer".
Cesare Borgia
Banned
The thing that bothers me (perhaps the most) is how much anger and focus there is over something most people don't even understand. I've listened to Bernie supporters talk about it and it's like they think the DNC chair is the face of the party, in charge of everything, etc etc. Hence the obsession over purity on legislation or economic views.
The end result, much like the primaries, is that if Bernie doesn't get his way: everything is rigged, everything is corrupt, take your ball and go home. These people are fucking idiots. I can't think of a civil way to put it.
Perez is probably going to win. Do I think he made a big mistake by announcing the level of support he has? Yes. But ultimately it is what it is. And furthermore...what has Ellison DONE to warrant absolute praise or even qualify for the job in people's minds? I have no problem with him, he'd be a good DNC chair, but it's not like he has some noteworthy level of organizing experience. He's being heralded because...he supported Bernie, and Bernie supported him.
Nor do I think this has much to do with Clinton. The Clintons are finished, thank god. This is not some proxy war with promises on the line, 2020 in discussion, etc. That ship has sailed. Perez is not a Clinton lackey.
The Senate is not the end-all, be-all. Winning back the House, while a tall task, is not impossible. And perhaps more important -- and definitely more winnable -- are a ton of governorships and other state legislature seats around the country, all of which will be crucial in determining the next round of redistricting in 2021.
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
I think the underlying issue was an expectation that Clinton was paying lip service to the issues and would abandon them once in office. The party adopted the platform but a lot of voters were so sold on Hillary being the corporate shill liar butcher of Benghazi etc etc that they didn't think she would follow through afterward. I think they're mistaken because Hillary seems to basically go where the wind blows, but nonetheless voters didn't buy it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked