TheOfficeMut
Unconfirmed Member
Sounds like masturbation, where men get themselves to the point where they almost orgasm and then stop.
Hell yea, top of the page.
PPP: Democrats Have Big Enthusiasm Edge for 2018
- Thread starter Autoignition
- Start date
- Status
Sounds like masturbation, where men get themselves to the point where they almost orgasm and then stop.
Hell yea, top of the page.
Randolph Freelander
Member
Sure, now Democrats care.
ElectricBlanketFire
Member
thatsthejoke.jpg
RPGCrazied
Member
Trump's 100 days ends next week. What has he done? Nothing legislatively. No wall, no repeal of Obamacare, no tax reform. Nothing. He sure is playing the hell out of some golf, eating cake, disgracing world leaders, looking like a man child on twitter.
old manatee
Banned
Haha a joke. That's like a thing that someone says to cause amusement or laughter, especially a story with a funny punchline.
its funny because this literally describes what a joke is and also serves as a joke at the same time
now everyone can stop being meta and go back to your regularly scheduled posting
I hope the party starts adopting a self-narrative, because that's how the precariat class of America jumped on board towards Trump.
Laugh as we might, but being given a story of a world -- and your life -- restored to what it was 20 years ago is a far easier story to tell then to elaborate on why in inequality and precariousness has risen. Worse still, the Dems still lack major, comprehensive policies to handle this issue, so I do worry they're on the ropes until they do.
For example, Barack Obama himself has warned the party to "smarten up" on what is killing middle class: automation. What Dems have the balls to actually state this? This is something not even Bernie will admit...and until the party does, they are poised to be whipped up by literal charlatans on the Republican end.
Laugh as we might, but being given a story of a world -- and your life -- restored to what it was 20 years ago is a far easier story to tell then to elaborate on why in inequality and precariousness has risen. Worse still, the Dems still lack major, comprehensive policies to handle this issue, so I do worry they're on the ropes until they do.
For example, Barack Obama himself has warned the party to "smarten up" on what is killing middle class: automation. What Dems have the balls to actually state this? This is something not even Bernie will admit...and until the party does, they are poised to be whipped up by literal charlatans on the Republican end.
I agree, but it shouldn't come as a surprise. There are a lot of people out there, and a lot of them are very different from the groups you might be used to interacting with.
LegendofJoe
Member
Let me illustrate how important 2018 is if the Democratic party wants to do something about gerrymandering. There are thirty-six (36) gubernatorial elections next year. Republicans will be defending twenty-seven (27) of those seats. The Democratic party could conceivably pick up Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Vermont, Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Wisconsin, Georgia, Maine, New Hampshire, and Alaska.
Is everyone suitably enthusiastic yet?
Is everyone suitably enthusiastic yet?
AstroNut325
Member
Don't worry. They'll lose their enthusiasm once they see the candidates failing their fantasy purity tests.
TangoAlphaLima
Member
Dems could also easily pick up Kansas too. Kansas goes hard red for federal, but they've alternated red and blue for governor for many decades. Plus, Brownback has been an utter disaster. The odds are probably in the Dems' favor to take it.
ElectricBlanketFire
Member
My enthusiasm... :/
Obama did have what Trump has now, and it led to the largest social entitlement program in 60 years.
Yup. It puts party support​ over candidate nitpicking. It leads to wave elections.
Mushroomer25
Member
As somebody from a state that has some of the best representatives in the nation (Oregon), I look forward to feeling absolutely helpless as the rest of the country manages to somehow fuck this up.
LegendofJoe
Member
If a good candidate is run I could see it happening. An enthusiasm edge alongside a good candidate is a winning formula.
boiled goose
good with gravy
Watch Democrats run horrible candidates and bungle it again.
Obama wasn't perfect (not by a long shot) but at least he helped improve things to some degree instead of this garbage fire of an administration.
the party is still utterly divided on naming an enemy. this is the perfect illustration of the issue: https://twitter.com/TimeForAllofUs/status/854699349636526080
Autoignition
Member
Trump never actually stopped campaigning.
Agreed and so far I don't see them doing that before 2018 or 2020.
Hickbilly Deluxe
Banned
Yah, the purity arm will flop their way into history by helping the Democrats blow two easy election runs in a row.
boiled goose
good with gravy
Because the same ruling class that donates to the gop, donates to Democrats. As long as big money fuels, Democrats will continue to take the L.
Let's assume it's a fact that progressives get more enthusiastic when a candidate actually represents the people and not corporate interests. This enthusiasm translates into votes.
Why not run appealing candidates if you actually want to win?
If progressive candidates become less appealing to other people, then do those people become the "purity wing"? If progressive candidates wowould still get centrist votes because unlike progressives they are not the purity arm, then why not run winning candidates?
So basically, your accusation is either hypocritical or you want to lose for no reason other than to blame progressives? I don't get it.
That's a perfect clip, really.
In a sense, you can actually somewhat empathize with Perez: don't demonize a group of people, as the issue is more of trends and the neoliberal system itself. Unfortunately, his aversion to "name the beast" is precisely why we don't deal with systemic issues, and allows a narrative that Bernie is "picking on the winners" to miss the nuance of systemic inequality that can be traced back to the 1970s. This is what the Dems hit Bernie for, right? Keeps picking on the elite. He's pointing to a deeper issue when he does so, and it's one that the party, in 2017, is still trying to avoid admitting exists. It's a bit hilarious, really.
If the party thinks like Perez, they're done. They're not even on life support as Mark Blyth would argue. End of discussion. Their refusal to name problems in depth will allow literal neonationalists to bullshit people en masse and get away with it. Nancy Pelosi fell into this trap at a CNN townhall when a Millennial asked her to respond to a poll that showed many of that generation rejected Capitalism: she didn't blame systemic trends, but "shareholder Capitalism." These childish pivots also fail to create a self-narrative, which makes it even more likely for Republicans to come in and propagandize the uneducated.
The party needs an actual identity linked to reality, because the alternative is the identity bathed in mysticism and lies that the GOP is currently getting away with. Being an opposition block, which is what the party presently is, doesn't get us out of this. You need ideas, a vision, and dose of "telling it like it is" that the party is deeply missing. This should frighten people, because we're living in a climate where the failure of those things has manifested itself.
People will jump to fear if your hope is empty, and I would hope Perez finds that out one day. And hope is empty for a large portion of the precariat.
If nothing else the GA-06 vote proved the GOP are in a bad spot if a dem won a plurality in what is normally a safe R district. Trump is basically proving that he can't save anyone's political career. With reports of guys like Chaffetz bailing out while Paul Ryan begs him not to, the prospects for more R's retiring their seats looks good.
It's gonna be an interesting 2018 and lead up to 2020 at this rate.
It's gonna be an interesting 2018 and lead up to 2020 at this rate.
If Sanders was a candidate that motivated those who are typically "disenfranchised" (poor word choice, but just quoting the original poster) because there is no leftist candidate, why was the 2016 primary have lower turnout than the 2008 one, or the 2016 Republican one? I mean, if there's this large untapped group voters that have, up until Sanders, been ignored, you'd expect larger numbers in the primary right?
If there are all these leftist voters waiting for a true leftist candidate, why didn't they show up in the primary?
Its like straight edge but not full of a bunch of losers trying too hard.
It's really a shit show with multiple factions having different purity tests for completely different reasons. The special elections have been encouraging though.
there are possible explanations but it's hard to know how true they are. sanders was relatively unknown before early 2016, the party was mostly working against him, registered democrats who are likely to vote in primaries would lean more towards establishment candidates than the general electorate, etc. but really who knows?
what i would emphasize are two main points: the party has dramatically declined in power across the country despite its supposed demographic advantage and incredible fundraising, and sanders is currently the most popular politician in the country by a long shot. we need to try something different, and his way looks like the best bet.
LegendofJoe
Member
The Sanders message will be especially potent against the Trump administration. A group of literal billionaires running the country. They've painted a bright red target on their backs, a smart candidate would light them the hell up.
The Greek Freak
Member
Booker at a progressive conference is hilarious.
but then you have the wing of the party currently in control. they want to target affluent white suburban republicans: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/4/19/15351888/panera-bread-ossoff
this is exactly the strategy clinton employed in 2016 trying to win states like arizona.
boiled goose
good with gravy
Yup.
I would add in a few other factors.
Incumbent party after 8 years generally less excited.
Overall distrust and disinterested in politics from the left. (See decreased registration with Democrat as party affiliation)
Also media coverage. Sanders excited young people who consume news online, if you just consume tv news, you get a very different flavor of the Sanders message.
ThatStupidLion
Member
I don't trust polls anymore. they mean nothing. NOTHING!
We definitely need a change up in strategy, or at the very least a greater emphasis on the tried and true 50 state strategy. The issue with Bernie though is that while he's very popular, his surrogates have a tough time actually winning. That's due to a number of factors including the party at large actively pushing other candidates but it still can't be ignored. Basically, we can't throw the baby out with the bathwater but something definitely needs to change regardless.
What's really dumb about this strategy is applying it to the nation as a whole. It's more viable in certain districts, completely unrealistic in others.
what's even dumber is that it's entirely predicated on the existence of trump in the race. if you plan your entire win around the fact that the opponent is uniquely monstrous and crude you will lose big as soon as the other party runs someone else.
it is literally a strategy just for 2018 and 2020 with no long-term electoral planning, which is exactly what we should expect from centrist democrats.
About 35% of the population thinks Anerica is automatically great if a black man is not in the white house. He didn't and doesn't have to do anything.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Why? They have been generally accurate thus far.
Autoignition
Member
Please stop this stupid narrative.
soul creator
Member
Agreed. I think a good politician should then craft a straightforward message to appeal directly to people's self-interest and personal lives, rather than the generic "everything's already great, look at this list of stats! We just need to tweak things a bit and we'll be ok!" approach. I dunno, maybe it'll lead to high favorables for that person, and get younger people more active, and be a good longer term strategy to build on. Just a thought.
lol
shiftplusone
Member
the combined age of that ticket will be 265 years old in 2020.
Mass Effect
Member
Don't worry, I'm sure they'll find some way to fuck up by then.
balladofwindfishes
Member
How would they? They don't hold any power to do anything at all.
Voters (especially midterm voters who aren't even that liberal) don't really care about inane in-fighting on whether or not a candidate said the magic word of "capitalism is evil" or whatever.
As evident by the last few weeks, the Democrats are doing pretty good running candidates in regions that hold beliefs pertinent to their region.
The answer is that Sander didn't tap into a bunch of previously ignored voters. He tapped the youth vote, as did Obama in 2008. Unlike Obama, Sanders was incapable of gaining significant support beyond the young. The roadblocks you describe in your post existed in 2008, and there were millions of more voters in 2008, signaling that Sanders didn't bring a bunch of voters out who had ignored the process before hand. Quite the opposite.
Voter turnout was down in the primary because of Dem complacency after 8 years in the White House, and general lack of excitement over either candidates outside of their most fervent supporters.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
Yeah, that enthusiasm will wane once hardcore liberals start demanding that highly electable and/or incumbent moderates capitulate to unreasonable demands ("support universal healthcare or else," etc.).
SaviourMK2
Member
Being excited and showing up are two different things.
Soulscribe
Member
The fact that only 63% consider themselves at all energized is just.... ugh. It's really too bad that the Democrats are the ones with the better ideas because they can't fucking be bothered to fight for them. If almost 40% of them are still sitting around being ambivalent with Donald fucking Trump as our president... it's just really really really hard to not be cynical right now. lol
- Status