I wonder if the willingness to "evolve" on the issue is mainly due to it mostly effecting women?
What do you actually think is the net result of opposing what Bernie is saying? Play out for me what having the opposite viewpoint of Bernie is and how that works in the elections he is referring to? Who do you think would be the mayor of Omaha if we followed your idea of how to handle that race? What is your strategy for getting more Democrats in power in Republican strongholds? Do you have any ideas about that at all?
Read things. It's good for you.
Democrats and gaffers only give a shit about women and feminism as political capital.
You know how it is with "allies". They'll throw your ass under the bus when it comes time to test your mettle. They never fail to acquiesce to the right when things start getting rough.
To be fair, I believe he said "I don't know."
Eleventh Commandment, people. Bernie, it ain't that hard. It'll save you the pain in the long run.
Sanders also has a super high rating from women's rights organizations. 100 percent in many cases. But hate away lol.
If Sanders suddenly didn't support less pro choice candidates like Biden then the same people would pile on him too. Guess Bernie shouldn't have supporter Hillary in the general. Given she supports some restrictions on abortions while he does not.
http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/hillary-clinton-late-term-abortions
The hypocrisy by some on this forum is outstanding.
Don't care about an issue? PURITY TESTS!
Care about an issue enough to be ok with the issues of your candidate of choice when the alternative is better on the issue (but campaigns with candidates who are less good on the issue). No problems here!
I really really don't understand some people...
Honestly, if "compromising" on women's rights becomes a larger trend in the Democratic party, I might as well start voting Republican and save money on my taxes. I think compromise from Democrats is really the death knell for access to abortion and birth control. It won't be immediate, but it means the fight is ending and women have lost.
To add onto this, it's worth noting that describing the groups as just white and nonwhite is a bit obfuscating. Bernie did the worst with black voters, especially in the south, and he barely could win young black voters, but he did much better with Hispanics where he could about tie in some states (Illinois, Nevada) or at least do better on the margins (Arizona) and he absolutely killed Hillary in the Native American vote (see Alaska). It's hard to find good numbers on the Asian vote but at the very least he dominated Hawaii.No, age is not the "real split" in the Democratic Party. It's both race and age, by about 20 points each way.
Ex: Young PoC voted for Bernie by 20pts more than older PoC, young whites voted for Bernie by 20pts more than young PoC, young whites voted for Bernie by about 20pts more than older whites, older whites voted for Bernie by about 20pts more than older PoC
Tim Kaine is anti-labor and supports right-to-work, legislation that almost fucked my dad over and would have left us in poverty. Would it be reasonable for me to oppose supporting Hillary because she picked him as her running mate?
To add onto this, it's worth noting that describing the groups as just white and nonwhite is a bit obfuscating. Bernie did the worst with black voters, especially in the south, and he barely could win young black voters, but he did much better with Hispanics where he could about tie in some states (Illinois, Nevada) or at least do better on the margins (Arizona) and he absolutely killed Hillary in the Native American vote (see Alaska). It's hard to find good numbers on the Asian vote but at the very least he dominated Hawaii.
Which isn't to say he isn't often tone deaf or terrible at talking about intersectional issues, which he often is. It is good to see that the party has the sort of power to scare someone like Mello into falling more in line with party orthodoxy but Bernie should be more willing to call that shit out.
Thanks for the link, I guess, but that doesn't answer any of my questions. You don't seem to have put much thought into this discussion other than deciding on the label of "progressive" and wanting to "call out" things. Again, it would be interesting to hear an actual electoral strategy from someone who disagrees with this approach. All your post says is, "well yeah, Bernie's approach makes sense but (complaints about the use of the term progressive)."My take on 50 state strategy: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=234622657&postcount=485
the DNC emails? that's the best you got?
Tim Kaine is anti-labor and supports right-to-work, legislation that almost fucked my dad over and would have left us in poverty. Would it be reasonable for me to oppose supporting Hillary because she picked him as her running mate?
Thanks for the link, I guess, but that doesn't answer any of my questions. You don't seem to have put much thought into this discussion other than deciding on the label of "progressive" and wanting to "call out" things. Again, it would be interesting to hear an actual electoral strategy from someone who disagrees with this approach. All your post says is, "well yeah, Bernie's approach makes sense but (complaints about the use of the term progressive)."
As for the DNC emails, what else do you want as evidence of a smear campaign? The DNC chair had to resign.
I just don't think you're adding much to the discussion. Sorry.
So you think that compromising on women's rights is worse than the party that is outwardly racist, xenophobic, misogynistic and focuses on economic policies that straight up do not work and benefit only their lobbyists?
No matter how much compromise, the dems will still be better than republicans. The more powerful republicans are, the more they will get to pull the country to the right. The dems must come closer to wrest control away from them, and then they can start pulling it back left when they're in control. You can't move to the left without winning, and voting for the hard right because the other option isn't as left as you want is just insane.
cool thx. i love pandering, that totally sums up all the complexities of this situation.Despite what you may believe, it's actually really easy to pander to racists. It's easy to pander to misogynists. Congrats on your winning electoral strategy.
Just want to say that, even as I defend "50 state" strategy and get what Sanders is doing here, that this is a 100% great post. The Democrats will have to be running the calculus to decide where compromise can occur, and if there are people for whom their chosen issue is a dealbreaker, I hope they send a message to look elsewhere.If Democrats abandon women's rights, then I'll vote based on other interests, because that is all that will be left for me to do. I'm not surprised, by the expectation that women should be willing to sacrifice their rights, for the greater good, but I won't do it. It just makes it easier for the party to abandon women. I hope that Democrats know that compromising on women's rights will cost them.
The fact that they were hacked, redacted, and disseminated by the Russians, for starters.As for the DNC emails, what else do you want as evidence of a smear campaign? The DNC chair had to resign.
The fact that they were hacked, redacted, and disseminated by the Russians, for starters.
cool thx. i love pandering, that totally sums up all the complexities of this situation.
If Democrats abandon women's rights, then I'll vote based on other interests, because that is all that will be left for me to do. I'm not surprised, by the expectation that women should be willing to sacrifice their rights, for the greater good, but I won't do it. It just makes it easier for the party to abandon women. I hope that Democrats know that compromising on women's rights will cost them.
Yeah, but what other interests? Republican policy is horrendous and inhumane in so many levels that it's just not justifiable.
Civil rights? Nope
Economy? Nope
Foreign policy? Nope
Racial issues? Nope
Healthcare? Nope
Climate? Nope
Immigration? Nope
Science spending? Nope
Education? Nope
Corporate overreach? Nope
Are you basically saying that if not for women's rights you'd vote republican? Because they're trash on basically every issue.
Guys, I'm firmly Pro-Choice but this purity test mentality has got to stop. Every Democrat can't agree on 100% of social issues, even ones that we feel strongly about. And it doesn't make them a bad person either.
Guys, I'm firmly Pro-Choice but this purity test mentality has got to stop. Every Democrat can't agree on 100% of social issues, even ones that we feel strongly about. And it doesn't make them a bad person either.
Guys, I'm firmly Pro-Choice but this purity test mentality has got to stop. Every Democrat can't agree on 100% of social issues, even ones that we feel strongly about. And it doesn't make them a bad person either.
How many of those issues are directly impacted by reproductive rights? Certainly economics and civil rights. So it can't just be siloed off as a "social issue."
the personal is the political, and all that.
Reproductive rights are an economic issue. and a civil rights issue. And women and POC are the base of the Democratic party.
So I hardly think it's unjustified to, like, not throw women under the bus.
Yeah, but what other interests? Republican policy is horrendous and inhumane in so many levels that it's just not justifiable.
Civil rights? Nope
Economy? Nope
Foreign policy? Nope
Racial issues? Nope
Healthcare? Nope
Climate? Nope
Immigration? Nope
Science spending? Nope
Education? Nope
Corporate overreach? Nope
Are you basically saying that if not for women's rights you'd vote republican? Because they're trash on basically every issue.
What about economic issues?
By voting Republican, I can save money on my taxes and donate more to social interest groups or causes that I'm concerned about. I mean, is it really so crazy, if I choose to stop supporting a political group that abandons protecting my fundamental rights? (In the hypothetical scenario where Democrats abandon women's rights). Is there any other demographic, that we expect to happily accept the loss of rights and to continue acting, solely for the benefit of others? I mean, your posts make me feel like it's more important than ever, that women make these kinds of statements. I think it's important for Democrats to know that they can't and shouldn't take women for granted. If the Democratic party ever choses to abandon women's rights, then I would feel fine about abandoning them.
I feel like a broken record now but since when has Bernie not compromised on economic issues? If endorsing this guy for mayor = compromising on abortion, then surely endorsing Obama, Hillary et al amounts to compromising on economic issues?
By voting Republican, I can save money on my taxes and donate more to social interest groups or causes that I'm concerned about. I mean, is it really so crazy, if I choose to stop supporting a political group that abandons protecting my fundamental rights? (In the hypothetical scenario where Democrats abandon women's rights). Is there any other demographic, that we expect to happily accept the loss of rights and to continue acting, solely for the benefit of others? I mean, your posts make me feel like it's more important than ever, that women make these kinds of statements. I think it's important for Democrats to know that they can't and shouldn't take women for granted. If the Democratic party ever choses to abandon women's rights, then I would feel fine about abandoning them.
By voting Republican, I can save money on my taxes and donate more to social interest groups or causes that I'm concerned about. I mean, is it really so crazy, if I choose to stop supporting a political group that abandons protecting my fundamental rights? (In the hypothetical scenario where Democrats abandon women's rights). Is there any other demographic, that we expect to happily accept the loss of rights and to continue acting, solely for the benefit of others? I mean, your posts make me feel like it's more important than ever, that women make these kinds of statements. I think it's important for Democrats to know that they can't and shouldn't take women for granted. If the Democratic party ever choses to abandon women's rights, then I would feel fine about abandoning them.
By voting Republican, I can save money on my taxes and donate more to social interest groups or causes that I'm concerned about. I mean, is it really so crazy, if I choose to stop supporting a political group that abandons protecting my fundamental rights? (In the hypothetical scenario where Democrats abandon women's rights). Is there any other demographic, that we expect to happily accept the loss of rights and to continue acting, solely for the benefit of others? I mean, your posts make me feel like it's more important than ever, that women make these kinds of statements. I think it's important for Democrats to know that they can't and shouldn't take women for granted. If the Democratic party ever choses to abandon women's rights, then I would feel fine about abandoning them.
I guess if you're ok with explicitly supporting homophobia, racism, income inequality, anti-science and all that other stuff then I don't really have anything to say to you. Enjoy being a republican.
Great, but we shouldn't be calling anti-choice candidates like Mello progressive while simultaneously calling candidates like Ossoff not progressive. That is the problem.
Not sure why this has to be repeated!
What about economic issues?
Seriously, there is no other demographic, except women, that we hold to such standards. Ladies, how dare you think of your own rights and vote for your own interests. Obviously, as a woman, I should inform the Democratic party that I will accept all actions they take against my interests, because (like a good woman), I'm perfectly willing to sacrifice myself for others.
Seriously, there is no other demographic, except women, that we hold to such standards. Ladies, how dare you think of your own rights and vote for your own interests.
If the Republicans weren't currently some kind of tax-cut death cult. But they have become such a terrible party, as a whole, that we need a broad-based coalition just to keep them out of power.
If the Republicans were just "kind of shitty" instead of treasonous racist, thieves, I would be more comfortable having a hard line on any single issue. Basically as long as you believe in a fair society, in general, and aren't a white nationalist or a Russian stooge, then I think there's room in the Democratic Party even if you are not 100% on economic issues, and certain social issues, or gun control.
I'm not sure exactly where to draw the line, but it's hard when you know the alternative is "at least as bad as your conservadem + also evil"
no other demographic? where the hell were you when the talk was about leaving behind identity politics and focusing on white working class?Seriously, there is no other demographic, except women, that we hold to such standards. Ladies, how dare you think of your own rights and vote for your own interests. Obviously, as a woman, I should inform the Democratic party that I will accept all actions they take against my interests, because (like a good woman), I'm perfectly willing to sacrifice myself for others.
Seriously, there is no other demographic, except women, that we hold to such standards. Ladies, how dare you think of your own rights and vote for your own interests. Obviously, as a woman, I should inform the Democratic party that I will accept all actions they take against my interests, because (like a good woman), I'm perfectly willing to sacrifice myself for others.
Thats not what I'm saying though. And just out of curiosity, what do you consider progressive? And, more importantly, if hypothetically a person has all of the standards of what you deem a professional should have except one (and Pro-Choice is a big one, I understand), does that mean they aren't progressive?
The way I see it is we have to drag the country towards being more progressive both socially and economically. In some states, that's not an issue at all. In some states, it's incredibly hard. You can't really make a state more progressive without having representatives on all levels being elected and introducing more progress legislation. Like, Alabama isn't going to become moderate, let alone progressive, unless moderate Democrats can win elections through the state and start implementing some of these important ideas.
And if we draw a hard line on many issues and decry a Democrat who might disagree with one or two of them, it makes it that much harder to turn purple and light red states blue and basically impossible to start making deep red states more progressive.
It's not the endorsement that people are mad about. It's the fact that he called Heath Mello a "true progressive," while calling Ossoff "not a progressive." The message that sends is that we can compromise on issues like women's reproductive rights and still be "progressive" (like Mello), but we absolutely cannot compromise on economic issues (like Ossoff's center-left positions).
How many of those issues are directly impacted by reproductive rights? Certainly economics and civil rights. So it can't just be siloed off as a "social issue."
the personal is the political, and all that.
Reproductive rights are an economic issue. and a civil rights issue. And women and POC are the base of the Democratic party.
So I hardly think it's unjustified to, like, not throw women under the bus.
Literally every demographic is subjected to this. No dem candidate has perfectly represented the interests of minorities or LGBT or immigrants or the lower class, but they represent all of those together better than the republicans, and since we only have two realistic options, we must vote for the one that is better than the one that is explicitly racist, misogynistic, homophobic and more. Not doing so is, in my opinion, just morally wrong and explicitly or implicitly supporting republicans.
That's fine and all, but democrats already do win elections in Omaha. I don't particularity convinced a Mello is needed there, but that's who they're stuck with.
W/ Kaine's labor record- VA is a RTW state (and the chances of that changing are like 0), so it's effectively a pre-requisite to running here. Was there something he was actively pushing for that you had an issue w/?Keri's position here is actually why I brought up Tim Kaine's labor record. While I wouldn't suggest voting against the Clinton/Kaine ticket last year because I care about the other issues at stake, it's important that when you build a coalition that the coalition has mutual respect for each other's desires. I'm not a woman and will never need to worry about whether or not I can get an abortion, but it's important for me to understand the importance of fighting for the fellow members of my coalition because it's the right thing to do. Similarly, I hope someone who wouldn't be affected by right-to-work (or possibly even benefit from it) would still oppose it because they value my rights or my father's rights as a worker.
It's why it's important to oppose losers like Mello who will give up on abortion rights, or at the very least pressure them into better action.