-
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 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
- Thread starter aspiegamer
- Start date
- Status
As much as I hate to side with Glenn Greenwald on anything, particularly when he's such a fucking petulant childish troll towards her...
but...
He's right about her. She's a party cheerleader, with a pretty loose grasp of facts or reality.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Another worthless non-answer from a tool who knows nothing.
"Things will be fine", "This will be handled", "We'll sit down and make a good deal", "We'll have a great plan", "We'll figure out what's going on", "We'll make many new jobs".
All non-specific vague answers that just provide empty pleasantries to cover the fact that he has zero ideas, zero plans, zero knowledge and zero capacity to learn. The worst part is these empty pleasantries somehow work on many idiots.
"Things will be fine", "This will be handled", "We'll sit down and make a good deal", "We'll have a great plan", "We'll figure out what's going on", "We'll make many new jobs".
All non-specific vague answers that just provide empty pleasantries to cover the fact that he has zero ideas, zero plans, zero knowledge and zero capacity to learn. The worst part is these empty pleasantries somehow work on many idiots.
Well, he's not a hard-core Democrat given his Blue Lives Matter bullshit.
BlastProcessing
Member
I've never been particularly impressed with her. The only MSNBC personalities I can really stand are Maddow and Hayes.
Alternately, elections are mostly about national tenor and the economy, so let's actually run leftist candidates for everything and when we win eventually just because America works that way we can actually pass shit.
whyamihere
Banned
boop. this.
There are definitely more examples in the Senate of individual candidates overcoming national tenor, but the House? Yeah, no.
Aaron Strife
Banned
That's because very few people have any grasp on policy to begin with.
I fee like Trump might be the first modern president whose ineffectualness is a product of pure stupidity. Even Carter's problems were borne more out of a cold relationship with Congress (which Trump also has) than any intellectual incompetence.
The issue is going hard on pro-choice is like going hard on gun control. It energizes your base, but it energizes your opposition even more.
Abortion access is already basically toast in a lot of red states because they'll fight a lot harder against it than we will for it.
It's a cause where the procedure needs to be de-stigmatized like hell. "I had an abortion and that's okay!"
Abortion access is already basically toast in a lot of red states because they'll fight a lot harder against it than we will for it.
It's a cause where the procedure needs to be de-stigmatized like hell. "I had an abortion and that's okay!"
JBE is no more relevant to Dem's house candidates than Charlie Baker is to the GOP's. The reason why he can run as a pro-life Dem is because of the fact that LA's not sending him to Washington.
Landrieu is a much more compelling example. She had a staunch pro-choice record, iirc, no? And if her brother runs, which way would he go?
Landrieu is a much more compelling example. She had a staunch pro-choice record, iirc, no? And if her brother runs, which way would he go?
GoldenEye 007
Member
Well he's a conservative, so those views aren't shocking. The tough question is do you want a conservative Democrat or a Republican in office? Because those are the choices in a lot of areas unfortunately.
I don't have a lot of faith in pro-life Democrats in LA, KS, and the like to not be conservative on other issues that will come to vote.
Mello, for what it's worth, actually was pretty progressive when it came to other matters.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Maybe, but Manchin out of WV has been whipped relatively well as an example. And ultimately is it better to have him mostly in the D column or a GOP member that will vote with Dems almost never? Without someone like him, we're talking about how even more fucked healthcare is right now after the successful vote last week.
RumbleHumble
Banned
Hey gang, any talk on how the Pentagon plans on arming the Ukraine without having informed Trump yet, because, according to the Wall Street Journal, that's a thing.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/pentagon-offers-plan-to-arm-ukraine-1501520728
https://www.wsj.com/articles/pentagon-offers-plan-to-arm-ukraine-1501520728
It's going to be a disaster.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Edwards got Medicaid expansion and protections for LGBT people like within days of being governor. I guess it's up to you whether that's worth signing that shitty blue lives matter law and things like that. It just makes me wonder if we really could do better in a state like Louisiana. Landrieu was staunchly pro-choice like said earlier but got her ass handed to her in 2014. (I fully acknowledge this had more to do with national mood than anything and I would be very down for her or Mitch to give it another go in 2020)
LePage is taking a strong stance against Collins running for governor, which is interesting as she hasn't even declared. Opening up her Senate seat for 2020 would be huge. https://amp.bangordailynews.com/201...rallies-his-supporters-against-susan-collins/
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
Kansas dems that actually get elected are actually pretty good on abortion rights. Boyda and Moore, our two most recent representatives from there, both had perfect pro-choice voting records and Sebelius was also super pro-life as governor.
I generally agree with your point though.
I mean, that's not a tough question!
The idea that you should be supporting the vast majority of candidates nominated by local electorates is not a complicated one! The reason there's not a hard litmus test here is simple: the majority of the party is going to allow it to happen. There is virtually zero chance of the Dem party being overrun with hardcore pro-lifers trying to cut off women's access to birth control because the party electorate as a whole won't stand for it!
I briefly wonder if that was the second thing from Friday. I doubt it. I feel like it's definitely another personnel thing. But if it is McMaster related then maybe?
They don't want Trump to have a say on whether Ukraine hurts any of Big Sweet Daddy Putin's men.
Where do you draw that line?
Btw this is what sexism looks like, thinking this issue is negotiable.
I agree with your concern here, but the party responds to the electorate, not the other way around. The party doesn't need to draw a line - voters will. (and if they don't, then it doesn't matter what the party does)
The reason why there are no pro-life Democrats is because there are no pro-life Democrats!
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Its dumb to blame "the left" anytime the Democrats do something bad but in this particular case like...the Democratic establishment has been very staunchly on the side of abortion rights for a long time, and it feels like the noise for "downplay identity politics to better appeal to the working class voter" has been coming from one direction
I'll cut 'the left' some slack here. This is straight out of the Rahm 06 playbook. If anything, it's the outdated, DLC/New Dem reflexes kicking in.
In truth, nobody really had any idea just how bad things were going to get for the GOP that cycle until around September - the Dems way overcompensated in their pivot towards the center that year.
I had to compromise and negotiate for years based on being gay, gtfo with this BS.
The Dem electorate will draw the line for us. I trust our voters to police this for us, because the people for whom this is their 100% obsessive issue are highly unlikely to be joining up with the Dems at all.
lol okay.
Veritigo_X
Member
We should've been doing this years ago.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
BoogieWoogie
Banned
@TrumpRegrets continues to be hilarious
BlastProcessing
Member
VendettaRed07
Member
I'd prefer rebranding the party as a stronger pro-labor party that can create a better contrast that paints the GOP as the clear elites pro corporate and Special interest party instead of just doing the same crap they are doing, taking a bunch of money that doesn't really help, and selling off minority and women's rights while expecting them to turn out in incredibly high numbers just because they aren't as bad overall as the opposition
But what do I know
But what do I know
GoldenEye 007
Member
Depends on the electorate in the given area. Would you rather a Dem in there that will vote with Dems 70% of the time while also in a reality where something like an abortion bill would never make it to the floor for a vote?
Or a GOP member who votes against Dems 99% of the time and will just fuck everything up as fast as possible?
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I mean what do you think "the message needs to prioritize economic progressivism to win back the voters the Dems have lost over the last several decades" means? What concessions do you think those people are going to ask for anyway?
EDIT: This is literally a thing I have had people argue with me about, the historical patterns behind the change in who does and doesn't vote blue
smokeymicpot
Beat EviLore at pool.
http://www.azfamily.com/story/35890...er-sheriff-joe-arpaios-criminal-contempt-case
PHOENIX (3TV/CBS 5) -
U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton on Monday found former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio guilty of criminal contempt of court, the culmination of a federal trial that was years in the making.
The six-term sheriff, who was voted out of office in November 2016, is known for, among other things, cracking down on illegal immigration and using controversial crime suppression sweeps" to round up those suspected of being in the U.S. illegally. Those operations, which went on for years, are what landed him in court.
PHOENIX (3TV/CBS 5) -
U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton on Monday found former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio guilty of criminal contempt of court, the culmination of a federal trial that was years in the making.
The six-term sheriff, who was voted out of office in November 2016, is known for, among other things, cracking down on illegal immigration and using controversial crime suppression sweeps" to round up those suspected of being in the U.S. illegally. Those operations, which went on for years, are what landed him in court.
Aaron Strife
Banned
TIL the Maine governor's mansion has a name
If Collins runs for governor next year, would she need to resign her Senate seat first? Does Le Page appoint someone to fill her seat until a special election?
@jbouie's article about Trump's lack of record and 2016 is one of the keys to understanding. it. He lied his ass off and took the populist economic mantle (alongside all that racism) but he's governed as a standard issue Republican on economics. This is a problem, because it's not what his coalition voted for. As a frend of mine put it - Rorshach test Candidates (Obama, Trump, Macron) who run with light records are extraordinarily powerful. The GOP can't run that play in 2020, no matter who it is.
The issue with minority/women's rights isn't "selling them off", it's de-emphasizing them in campaign messaging because Hillary Clinton could give 9 speeches on economic issues, but make one Deplorables speech or have 1 talking heads segment on Colin Kaepernick and their brains immediately obsess on that issue.
Aaron Strife
Banned
She wouldn't have to, no. She could wait until she was sworn in as governor before resigning, allowing her to appoint her successor.
I would be just fine with Collins as governor as long as she had a D legislature. She'd probably govern like any other moderate Democrat in that instance.
Conversely, what about having an exciting, concise, novel economic plan and not jettisoning your other issues?
smokeymicpot
Beat EviLore at pool.
Mooch out as comms director per sources
https://twitter.com/GlennThrush/status/892091243219570688
That was fast.
https://twitter.com/GlennThrush/status/892091243219570688
That was fast.
BoogieWoogie
Banned
GoldenEye 007
Member
HAHAHA christ
I don't even think the bottom has fallen out in WV and AK. I think we have as good a chance as any to put D senators in those states in a 2020 wave. Both Cassidy and Capito betrayed their constituents, and we have the votes to prove it.
They're not being jettisoned.
Immediately following the election, BLM changed gears entirely to focus primarily on local organization and behind the scenes advocacy instead of using protest as a primary strategy. Trying to figure out a way to continue advocacy and progress without accidentally energizing a hornet's nest of white nationalists that make up the modern GOP base is the needle everyone on the left is having to thread right now. The Dems as a party are changing messaging, not their core values.
The issue is with populist swing voters (there are a lot more of them then there are libertarians) and their problematic behavior and views that we have to tiptoe around.
- Status