ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
The 110 million is something that Spicer mention and has be disproven.
-
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
When you have multiple failed repeal efforts, you get multiple times to remind everyone why erasing Obama's legacy isn't that easy!
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
How likely is it that Kushner is the source of a bunch of leaks? They are rarely about him, and it could be a way for him to make himself look better in the eyes of Trump, to get more responsibilities.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
no hold on i definitely want to read another couple pages of y'all arguing about where Trump got 110M because that's incredibly useful, please do keep going
Thaedolus
Member
Ted Lieu was musing about this on Twitter today, Kush throwing daddy under the bus
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1413816
That thread is so nauseating. Edwards is most certainly a Republican in sheeps clothing /s.
http://www.nola.com/health/index.ssf/2017/01/gov_edwards_marks_louisianas_m.html
http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_ro...cle_168c6d6e-5089-11e7-a0d6-7f67135f59a4.html
http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/article_316e284a-0334-11e7-9147-2b197739a8d4.html
You blue state Democrats don't know how it feels to live in a red state. The most conservative Democrat in this region is going to be 10x better than the Republican alternative.
That thread is so nauseating. Edwards is most certainly a Republican in sheeps clothing /s.
http://www.nola.com/health/index.ssf/2017/01/gov_edwards_marks_louisianas_m.html
http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_ro...cle_168c6d6e-5089-11e7-a0d6-7f67135f59a4.html
http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/article_316e284a-0334-11e7-9147-2b197739a8d4.html
You blue state Democrats don't know how it feels to live in a red state. The most conservative Democrat in this region is going to be 10x better than the Republican alternative.
He was almost certainly behind a lot of the anti-Bannon leaks, when the two of them were butting heads weeks ago or months ago or whenever that happened.
Mary Landrieu
You can't explain that
Anyways, that thread is a clusterfuck because apparently most people on this forum think that the definition of pro-life is something that 90% of elected Democrats would already self-identify as
If abortion is your only voting issue, no voter is stupid enough to fall for 'personally against abortion, but going to uphold Roe, fund Planned Parenthood, etc.'
I find this non-negotiable, sorry. Not going to throw women under the bus for some nebulous benefit in the center.
I sympathize with you. JBE is a good governor and I like him, and there are other good pro-life Democrats too (but not Lipinski).
How is this position not fundamentally sexist? This is an abdication of women's rights, its not a negotiable position.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Fenderputty
Banned
I've noticed a lot of the leaks do so from a perspective that Trump is acting inappropriately, but that it's because he personally knows he's not guilty. It's part of the reason I've always felt "useful idiot" is a legit possibility.
I reject that binary.
balladofwindfishes
Member
It isn't. You can run pro-choice candidates. You're acting as if women's rights are some sort of negotiable bargaining chip.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
Chait has been problematic a number of times but that column is fair, just, and fine. Also he's right?
balladofwindfishes
Member
How many of those can be won be a Democrat?
benicillin
Banned
Regardless of whether or not you have a problem with Democrats being fine with candidates who are anti-abortion (which is a stupid way to phrase it in the first place) they have got to be better about messaging this shit in a way that doesn't make them seem like craven opportunists scrambling for the center over minority and women's issues.
EDIT: If someone is actually anti-choice they shouldn't be in the Democratic Party to begin with though.
EDIT: If someone is actually anti-choice they shouldn't be in the Democratic Party to begin with though.
This is disgusting to me, frankly.
No issue with the former. We're discussing the latter.
THIS. How are you even going to turn out your base when you're willing to so quickly throw women, minorities, and marginalized groups under the bus to appeal to the votes of sexists.
balladofwindfishes
Member
So what exactly do you think is going to happen when 1% of Democrats in congress are pro-life? That there will be fundamental changes to the party's platform?
This is what you sign up for when you want a 50 state strategy.
How much are women's rights going to advance without a senate or house majority?
Honestly the messaging wasn't bad at all. The real quote was something akin to "We won't have litmus tests for our candidates" referring to rural districts. But someone wrote an article immediately jumping to the DNC funding pro-life candidates and people lost their shit.
No.
But 1% is too much.
This craven, gross "pragmatism" is why people hate the Democrats.
balladofwindfishes
Member
So even if they have no practical effect at all other than +1 towards Democrat votes for 99% of legislation, and +1 towards a majority, you don't want that and think the opposite is better overall for women's rights
I'm really sorry this issue is more complicated than you want it to be. But it is.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
I think you might be surprised how rarely young Democrats are actually challenged on any of the views they pick up, which is part of why I think purity testing has become such drag on electoral efforts.
benicillin
Banned
Which is something Democrats should know and be aware of in 2017 when their constituents rights are actually under attack.
Basic human rights aren't complicated. Either you think it matters or you don't.
This is bullshit.
Aaron Strife
Banned
balladofwindfishes
Member
benicillin
Banned
A couple thousand people across a handful of states is what put Trump in the White House, actually. Hillary voters showed up, just in the wrong places.
Should the party be getting behind, and funding pro-life candidates though? This is the question.
Again, I fundamentally reject this binary. You saying "this is how reality is" doesn't make it so.
Why do people consider this position 'pro-life'?
Would a pro-life voter consider that a pro-life position? Of course not. So therefore it's very clearly not a pro-life position. Democrats have to stop trying to reclaim terms and words that have been tainted by the GOP.
If the Kaine/Biden position was 'pro-life,' the Democrats would clearly be a pro-life party and abortion would never be a political issue every again. That's clearly not the case.
Democrats are not pro-life and THAT IS OKAY.
/rant
Fair point
whyamihere
Banned
Fenderputty
Banned
Thaedolus
Member
Honestly it was a number of things but most assuredly what I am saying was a factor. See also: Trump cheating
balladofwindfishes
Member
16 million people would have lost their healthcare yesterday if Manchin wasn't in the senate because you couldn't bring yourself to vote for him if you were in his district.
Think about that.
The country is still divided on abortion. It's pretty much the #1 issue for single issue voters (like yourself). If we realize we have an annoying amount of single issue voters to work around, we work around them as we move towards progress.
Cesare Borgia
Banned
Your guy is doing good, keep it up.
As I said in the thread, we're never going to reach a point where there are a whole lot of pro-life democrats in DC. This is a non issue that is being propagated by lazy media types ("democrats are too liberal"). That being said, if you want a big tent you have to be prepared for a few pro-lifers to walk in. Nothing wrong with that.
benicillin
Banned
Purity test as a phrase is overused and meaningless at this point.
whyamihere
Banned
I'm sympathetic to the fact that we shouldn't actively recruit pro-life candidates, but also, we have pro-life Dems who aren't Dan Lipinski in office. What do you do with them?
Kushner and Ivanka, or their close aides, are certainly behind the constant leaks saying they opposed some dumb policy move or hiring/firing decision made by the administration.
Box of Kittens
Banned
Lipinski is so infuriating. We could do so much better in a D+6 district. Unfortunately that name is very powerful in that district.
I'm not defending the position. But I am saying that the difference between a pro-life Republican governor and a pro-life Democratic governor, especially in a red state, is that one will actively restrict and punish women and cut funding for their health care, and the other will not.
I'm fine massaging the messaging on abortion to expand the map.
I'm very skeptical that voters will pull the lever on a pro-life Democrat simply because they are pro-life (or lie about it). I genuinely don't believe its a particularly effective strategy because voters aren't stupid. They generally know what they want, and then they get what they want.
Midterms are as much about turning out the base as it is expanding the coalition. Persuadable swing voters, as they are in every election, are rare commodities. One way to depress turnout is to throw your base under the bus!
I'm very skeptical that voters will pull the lever on a pro-life Democrat simply because they are pro-life (or lie about it). I genuinely don't believe its a particularly effective strategy because voters aren't stupid. They generally know what they want, and then they get what they want.
Midterms are as much about turning out the base as it is expanding the coalition. Persuadable swing voters, as they are in every election, are rare commodities. One way to depress turnout is to throw your base under the bus!
benicillin
Banned
Pretend they don't exist and hope no one writes a Medium article about them.
- Status