D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Of course. But I'm proposing we do all these other things (Planned Parenthood funding, reforming the police) AND the "economic" things. You are proposing doing just these first things.
-
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 |OT2| Well, maybe McMaster isn't a traitor.
- Thread starter ItWasMeantToBe19
- Start date
- Status
Of course. But I'm proposing we do all these other things (Planned Parenthood funding, reforming the police) AND the "economic" things. You are proposing doing just these first things.
Abinash117
Member
There needs to be boarder discussion one how social issues is tied to the to economy. It is probably something that Democrats needs to move forward really. Personally, it seems very, very naive to believe that increasing the wealth will solve a lot of racial issues or is the effective way of dealing with it. I don't think there's a lot of evidence to support that idea, while there's more evidence on the contrary. I really don't think some of Bernie's or people with similar ideas as him, idea of expanding the safety net is going to solve many racial or sexist issues.
Democrats routinely try to do both and have done so for awhile.
Democrats routinely try to do both and have done so for awhile.
BoogieWoogie
Banned
excelsiorlef
Member
Do you agree with Sanders that we might have to compromise on social issues in some areas of the US?
He is, hopefully within the next few weeks he'll make a decision. I'm with team Castro but I'll vote O'Rourke if it comes to it.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
A couple thoughts
1) I think the Ossoff comment wasn't that bad, unless he said something new that I missed.
2) It's pretty shitty that Bernie went to stump for Mello. Thompson just did extremely well as a pro choice candidate in Kansas and Quiet looks set to also do well. We should just run a bunch of mostly uncompromised candidates instead of losers like Mello.
1) I think the Ossoff comment wasn't that bad, unless he said something new that I missed.
2) It's pretty shitty that Bernie went to stump for Mello. Thompson just did extremely well as a pro choice candidate in Kansas and Quiet looks set to also do well. We should just run a bunch of mostly uncompromised candidates instead of losers like Mello.
No, they aren't. They're intertwined, but they are not one and the same. Financially secure black people aren't immune to being pulled over by police for driving while black. Wealthy women don't not want abortions just because they have money. A Hispanic man who is turned down for a job because he has a Hispanic last name doesn't find his job prospects improved because he's got a strong stock portfolio.
People who think that economic justice and social justice issues are one and the same are people who face no personal repercussions for a lack of social justice.
That's still a ways off. I think they'll wait a bit. The Montana special election is in 3 months, the DCCC is starting to pump money into that. I think you'll have to wait till next year until you see Dems start putting money into 2018, let the primaries decide the candidate before they make a push
I don't think anyone is proposing just doing the economic things. It's not even really worth bringing that stuff up because of course you're going to talk about economic issues on the campaign trail. It's absolutely impossible to run a campaign without addressing that. And despite what people said about Clinton's campaign, she did address economic issues quite a bit. You may not have agreed with her positions, but she did talk about it. So economic issues are going to be a part of any candidates campaign, everyone is just saying that they should make sure to not forget social issues.
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
They know.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Honestly its really only these two things in conjunction that seem to have people pissed. The Ossoff comment was annoying but then turning around and working with Mello just reinforces a lot of the negative stereotypes about Bernie's priorities
That's fair, I don't think he's gaining any additional supporters lately and I wouldn't want him being the sole face of the Democrats. But I also think the talk of him throwing parts of the base under the bus or actively harming the party is overblown nonsense that stems from bitter feelings in the primary.
He's not being actively hostile or opposing any relevant policies, afaik, we're all just complaining about optics and messaging (which is still important, to be fair, and I complained a lot about optics and messaging during the Clinton campaign). He's just not talking about some issues as much as I'd like, and I think he should have just not said anything about Ossof. But despite that, I don't see anything in his record indicating that he's against women or minority issues, and he still talks about those, just not as much as I'd like (there was a time in the primary where he showed signs of getting better at this, but didn't really keep the progress going and fell back into a comfort zone of the economic stump speech).
If anything, a much stronger case could be made that the moderates in the party are the ones actually throwing members of the base (the poor of any race) under the bus by actually voting against/opposing relevant policies to help the poor. Poor people make up a huge portion of the democratic base, yet the words "poor" and "poverty" almost never leave the mouths of anyone except Sanders. All the focus is on helping the "middle class." That's probably why I'm a little more forgiving of Sanders' comparative public silence on other priority issues, because at least he helps fill the gap on this one.
It's kinda funny that the right wingers tried the sponsor strategy first, had minor success at first but then when the sponsors found who they were, reversed course, and now centrist/lefties are using the same strat and it's actually working. lmao
Box of Kittens
Banned
Right. And this is why the notion of trying to remake our coalition by aggressively pursuing the white working class is so misguided. These issues are so inextricably linked that if you try and put social issues on the back burner to win people over with a pure economics message, you're still not going to lose votes because of racism. Why don't we have better social services? Because Republicans get white voters to oppose them by telling them it'll amount to black people taking their hard earned money. Why do American cities typically have horribly inadequate public transit? Because Republicans get white voters to oppose it by telling them it will allow black people into their neighborhoods. In the meantime ignoring social issues is a great way of getting what are currently a bunch of your most loyal voters to stay home or look elsewhere.
As usual, I want to make clear that I'm not saying white working class voters are inherently racist, just that not talking about social issues (or only doing so quietly while campaigning in certain communities) won't win over the ones who are racist. Nor am I saying that we shouldn't make sure we have an attractive economic message that resonates with the working class (one which would incorporate a number of things Sanders is talking about), just that specifically worrying about the white working class is the wrong way to think about crafting that message.
excelsiorlef
Member
Caitlin Jenner, pre-surgery, wouldn't have been any less denied access to use a woman's washroom in bathroom billed states despite being filthy rich....
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
When he ignored the post giving a source contradicting the pro choice endorsements, I found that interesting...
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Ultimately, We should allow compromises on any issue if that's what the voters in the area want. Once a primary is decided, in most every case support should be given. Sanders preferring a canidate in a primary is fine, but at least shut the fuck up in the GE.
Sanders: *says something stupid*
Sanders haters: *says stupid things*
Crab:
It's a beacon.
Anything dealing with shitty laws summons Metapod to defend, and anything dealing with Bernie summons Crab.
excelsiorlef
Member
Congratulations, you've managed to make Bernie's take look enlightened.
Someone is not a sexist/racist-lite candidate because theyre not on board the populist bullshit train. Its hard to change the goddamn system when youve only had 4 years in the past 30 years to do it!
Box of Kittens
Banned
I mean, if I were running for Congress, I would be pushing for a pretty left economic agenda. Of course, I also live in a D+20 district. That message isn't going to resonate in an R+8 district in suburban Atlanta (though, for a variety of reasons, something more like can work better in an R+11 district like, say, Montana at-large). Ossoff isn't as far left on these issues as I'd like but he's still solidly left-of-center. I totally get why Sanders isn't campaigning for him. He just needs to be better prepared to answer questions about it with something more diplomatic.
Economic and social issues are so closely intertwined that they're practically inseparable. It's literally impossible to find an issue that is purely one or the other, both factors play into everything (e.g. a wealthy black person can afford better lawyers to deal with police fuckery, and likely lives in a neighborhood not as aggressively policed in the first place).
However, I continue to be fucking baffled by responses in the vein of "well free health care won't stop everyone from being racist!" It's like, no shit? I agree? But at least everyone would have healthcare. And it's not like the government can pass legislation that magically gets rid of society's racism. It's a lot easier to legislate people's finances than it is their thoughts. Like, what are the anti-racism/anti-discrimination policies that people want that Sanders opposes? Are there any? Because there are certainly anti-poverty measures Sanders supports that other democrats oppose! And while fighting poverty doesn't end racism, it sure makes life easier for many of its victims, and it doesn't exclude other things like fighting for police/criminal justice reform, or immigration reform, or LGBT rights, or equal pay, or Native rights, etc. All things Sanders supports, even if he isn't as vocal about them as I'd like. But that's why I said I don't want him as the sole face of the party.
What could go wrong? Let's look at the history that the congressmen who voted on this clearly ignored!
That second paragraph:
Hiring a company that already has a bad track record for government contract work, woo!
What a joke.
Schumer should be embarrassed that he supports this shit. And why the hell was it included in a highway infrastructure bill?
BoogieWoogie
Banned
Longest Government shutdown in history was 21 days, I bet Trump and co can double that shit no problem.
Me too. Those 2006 incumbents fared really well with Obama's coattails.
BlastProcessing
Member
Aww, man, I'm so sad that I missed all of the Sanders talk!
Oh well...
@bradheath
Last summer, a shell company with a bogus address started buying Trump condos. U.S. gov't has been asking questions.
[url]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/04/20/trump-owns-250m-condos-and-you-could-buy-one/100566302/
[/URL]
I think it's shit like this that chased Chaffetz away. People focus on the Russia stuff but that's just the base of a mountain of fraud.
Oh and...
@IsaacDovere
NEWS: Obama will make 1st public appearance Monday, at the Univ of Chicago - "a conversation on community organizing and civic engagement"
Oh well...
@bradheath
Last summer, a shell company with a bogus address started buying Trump condos. U.S. gov't has been asking questions.
[url]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/04/20/trump-owns-250m-condos-and-you-could-buy-one/100566302/
[/URL]
I think it's shit like this that chased Chaffetz away. People focus on the Russia stuff but that's just the base of a mountain of fraud.
Oh and...
@IsaacDovere
NEWS: Obama will make 1st public appearance Monday, at the Univ of Chicago - "a conversation on community organizing and civic engagement"
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
If there is a shutdown it has to be the end of Ryan's speakership.
So, I agree with a lot of this, but I don't think it's just the white working class. Democrats have largely been abandoning the poor and working class in general in favor of the "middle class" and more affluent for a while now. Obviously the non-white working class won't be lured in by republican racism (nor is all of the WWC), but they can be discouraged from participating altogether. I don't think Sanders is the right messenger because I don't think he has as solid a grasp on the interconnectedness of race and class as I would like. But I think he's correct in pointing out that the Democratic party has a class problem that's been developing.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Hopefully he goes after CNN with maximum gusto.
I highly doubt this.
You'll get paid, just late and after extreme headache, hope you don't have any bills due or plan on grocery shopping! There's brinksmanship to be had in Washington, we are trying to screw poor people brown people and women, your missing paycheck is just a minor inconvinence, please understand.
"Literally impossible" seems like a hell of a stretch, particularly in your example: a wealthy black person can afford better lawyers to deal with police fuckery, but that's not much consolation if said black person is shot in his car and the officer gets off with a paid vacation. There are so many elements of criminal justice/police reform alone that have little if anything to do with the financial well-being of the system's largely minority victims.
You're probably baffled because you're imagining a post where I argued against free healthcare because it won't end racism at the same time. I didn't. And you're right, it won't. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that equating economic justice and social justice as one and the same (or so intertwined they may as well be one and the same) does a disservice to the kinds of solutions that many social justice issues actually call for.
You can't legislate people's thoughts, but you can legislate the framework in which those thoughts are executed on. That's the whole point of civil rights legislation: it doesn't stop people from thinking or acting like bigots, but it holds them accountable for their bigotry racism and empowers the victims of bigotry.
You must agree to some extent because you post here:
If the millionaires-and-billionaires stump speech doesn't implicitly cover all of these bases, then clearly that means these issues require separate attention and issues, no?
A rising tide may lift all boats, but if those boats were on uneven elevation in the first place, they'll still be uneven afterward. (I'm positive there's a better way to word this analogy...)
Sure, why not. I wouldn't put it past the Trump Administration to attack media outlets because they were mean to him.
As long as it gets rid of the Clinton News Network, right?
All parties involved are stupid and I'm tired of reading these stupid arguments over and over and over again.
The inherent problem with rising tide lifts all boats is that people don't actually care where the boats are, they care where their boat is in relation to other boats.
BlastProcessing
Member
Yates testifies to the House Intelligence Committee hearing on May 2. Clapper and Brennan as well. Open hearings after that.
Nunes' fuckery bought them a few weeks.
Nunes' fuckery bought them a few weeks.
Oh.. look it's victim blaming
Dude how did he manage to extend it so far? Glad it's finally happening, this is big news.
I know Nunes was given the boot, so who replaced him?
Nunes is getting ready to disappear into the night again.. this time for good
I just wanna see it in the news. One day there's just a mysterious bus that passed into Mexico and half of congress is gone along with Trump/co.
Conaway
Please explain how Dem policy positions have "abandoned" them.
And how it's not just "The GOP has dominated elections since LBJ."
Perhaps they should wear some sort of full body covering, let's call it a niqab, just to completely make up a word for this concept, so we riteous godly men don't lose control and become rapists at the sight of a woman's body.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked