2017 Democratic Thread

[bigruss]

Reddy it's similar to your conversation with the feminist board you mentioned awhile back. You were already invalidated because of who you are, even if you wanted to be an ally, or had a helpful suggestion, it didn't matter because you are a white straight male.

 

You just did that to this board. Where does that get us? I get your point, it's valid to question why white males are "deciding" what's best for women, but that doesn't mean they can't help and they shouldn't be allies.

 

That's my problem with SJW out there, they are so damn focused on certain issues or so pissed at white establishment that they throw out any potential contribution from whites. And then people are confused why white suburbia (just a general expression for this) doesn't understand social justice issues. We aren't going to them as allies, and maybe some don't deserve even that much, but it's off-putting to one's you could win over.

 

The above is why I think BLM is struggling with so many people compared to the LGBTQ movement. BLM is "f*** the establishment" and LGBTQ is more "influence and change the establishment." Those are general, extremely simple views of them though.

[southsider2k5]

Reddy it's similar to your conversation with the feminist board you mentioned awhile back. You were already invalidated because of who you are, even if you wanted to be an ally, or had a helpful suggestion, it didn't matter because you are a white straight male.

 

You just did that to this board. Where does that get us? I get your point, it's valid to question why white males are "deciding" what's best for women, but that doesn't mean they can't help and they shouldn't be allies.

 

That's my problem with SJW out there, they are so damn focused on certain issues or so pissed at white establishment that they throw out any potential contribution from whites. And then people are confused why white suburbia (just a general expression for this) doesn't understand social justice issues. We aren't going to them as allies, and maybe some don't deserve even that much, but it's off-putting to one's you could win over.

 

The above is why I think BLM is struggling with so many people compared to the LGBTQ movement. BLM is "f*** the establishment" and LGBTQ is more "influence and change the establishment." Those are general, extremely simple views of them though.

 

I think this last paragraph is on the right track. When you humanize an issue and you make it real for people, that is when the breakthrough happens. Barack Obama got this when he tried to humanize the Trayvon Martin shooting by saying "this could be my son". I think the gay rights issues have gotten much further as people have experienced this in their own homes with having gay children or friends, than they ever could have with an agenda that consisted of only gays could understand gay issues, etc. BLM doesn't humanize civil rights nearly to the extent that the Rodney King video did.

 

Write people off at your own risk, and don't be surprised when the emerge for whatever pied piper appeals directly to them, instead of against them.

[Reddy]

Reddy it's similar to your conversation with the feminist board you mentioned awhile back. You were already invalidated because of who you are, even if you wanted to be an ally, or had a helpful suggestion, it didn't matter because you are a white straight male.

 

You just did that to this board. Where does that get us? I get your point, it's valid to question why white males are "deciding" what's best for women, but that doesn't mean they can't help and they shouldn't be allies.

 

That's my problem with SJW out there, they are so damn focused on certain issues or so pissed at white establishment that they throw out any potential contribution from whites. And then people are confused why white suburbia (just a general expression for this) doesn't understand social justice issues. We aren't going to them as allies, and maybe some don't deserve even that much, but it's off-putting to one's you could win over.

 

The above is why I think BLM is struggling with so many people compared to the LGBTQ movement. BLM is "f*** the establishment" and LGBTQ is more "influence and change the establishment." Those are general, extremely simple views of them though.

 

I literally did none of this.

[bigruss]

And it is sad, I mean there's plenty of video evidence out there that is shocking, cruel, etc that should provide plenty of humanizing support for the movement.

 

But many conservatives I talked to about this topic would get so upset about how the black community kills itself, commits crimes against themselves, etc. They wouldn't hear any arguments against the police, which to me when you watch some of those videos is asinine. And I think there is a lot of sticking your head into the sand type stuff going on, and white people are to blame for a lot of this s***. But all of that said, the movement has not made the progress it should have. And I think that's a really interesting case study right there as to why. It isn't just racism, there is definitely a % of that but it isn't wholly that.

[Reddy]

Though if that's how y'all perceived it, then maybe I should reflect on how I can better state my case. Thanks.

[Reddy]

And it is sad, I mean there's plenty of video evidence out there that is shocking, cruel, etc that should provide plenty of humanizing support for the movement.

 

But many conservatives I talked to about this topic would get so upset about how the black community kills itself, commits crimes against themselves, etc. They wouldn't hear any arguments against the police, which to me when you watch some of those videos is asinine. And I think there is a lot of sticking your head into the sand type stuff going on, and white people are to blame for a lot of this s***. But all of that said, the movement has not made the progress it should have. And I think that's a really interesting case study right there as to why. It isn't just racism, there is definitely a % of that but it isn't wholly that.

 

But I think it has made progress. Police forces across the country are being forced to have stricter oversight, body cameras, etc, etc. The cop from GA that decked a black guy in the face and kicked him for no reason was fired immediately. These are all steps in the right direction, and are only happening because of BLM.

[Jenksismyhero]

But I think it has made progress. Police forces across the country are being forced to have stricter oversight, body cameras, etc, etc. The cop from GA that decked a black guy in the face and kicked him for no reason was fired immediately. These are all steps in the right direction, and are only happening because of BLM.

 

Is it because of BLM or media coverage + technology (the ability to have video from just about anywhere)?

[Reddy]

Is it because of BLM or media coverage + technology (the ability to have video from just about anywhere)?

Yes.

[southsider2k5]

Is it because of BLM or media coverage + technology (the ability to have video from just about anywhere)?

 

Media coverage is absolutely #1. Video going viral does a million times more than any single organization.

[Reddy]

Media coverage is absolutely #1. Video going viral does a million times more than any single organization.

Yes, and let's invalidate that it's the context of the BLM movement that makes those videos so particularly poignant. We're talking about BLM right now, so obviously they've done a great job at becoming a household name. And every time another video like that comes out it re-validates and re-energizes the movement. It's a symbiotic relationship. Those videos spread like wildfire because of the heightened awareness and societal context, and in return they strengthen the movement, which gives each new video more power. It's a cycle.

 

Or do you think it's a coincidence that all these videos have come out SINCE the BLM movement began? The movement makes the videos that much more sensationalist for news media outlets, so they love it - and that's why we've seen more of them.

[caulfield12]

And the whole character attacks back and forth between Clinton and Sanders was yet another reason the Dems lost the election.

 

At a certain point, the truth about a candidate becomes less important than the perception.

 

Clinton pissed off a lot of moderates and centrists by fighting so hard to be cool and win back Bernie's youth vote. Then the damage from the 2008 South Carolina primary alone couldn't be reversed, as the African American votes her husband took for granted resisted jumping on her bandwagon. Didn't matter how many celebs she had in the fold. Even today, the Dems are still perceived as being more out of touch with those middle class voters in Ohio, PA, MI and Wisconsin. After everything Trump has done and threatens to do, there's a sense that he's fighting for them, even though the idea that Hillary was a fighter for the middle class was one of the dominant themes of her campaign.

 

Honestly, Sanders was much easier on Clinton than he could have been. He backed off when it became obvious the Dem establishment was never going to support him. In fact, an argument can be made that had he been tougher, she would have been better prepared for dealing with Trump's tactics in the general election.

 

For every Reddy, there was a Greg out there impressed with his authentic and sincere devotion to his economic message of fighting for the average person. Hillary never figured that out her entire political career, how to connect to people and get them to run through walls for her to get her elected. It was like a slog or duty to get behind her, almost like an obligation.

[Reddy]

And the whole character attacks back and forth between Clinton and Sanders was yet another reason the Dems lost the election.

 

At a certain point, the truth about a candidate becomes less important than the perception.

 

Clinton pissed off a lot of moderates and centrists by fighting so hard to be cool and win back Bernie's youth vote. Then the damage from the 2008 South Carolina primary alone couldn't be reversed, as the African American votes her husband took for granted resisted jumping on her bandwagon. Didn't matter how many celebs she had in the fold. Even today, the Dems are still perceived as being more out of touch with those middle class voters in Ohio, PA, MI and Wisconsin. After everything Trump has done and threatens to do, there's a sense that he's fighting for them, even though the idea that Hillary was a fighter for the middle class was one of the dominant themes of her campaign.

 

Honestly, Sanders was much easier on Clinton than he could have been. He backed off when it became obvious the Dem establishment was never going to support him. In fact, an argument can be made that had he been tougher, she would have been better prepared for dealing with Trump's tactics in the general election.

 

For every Reddy, there was a Greg out there impressed with his authentic and sincere devotion to his economic message of fighting for the average person. Hillary never figured that out her entire political career, how to connect to people and get them to run through walls for her to get her elected. It was like a slog or duty to get behind her, almost like an obligation.

 

I agree on your assessment of Clinton. She would've made a hell of a better President than she made Presidential candidate.

[Reddy]

And just to touch on this for the last time:

 

My point was not to shut anyone here down about their views on misogyny/Bernie/women's issues - I was just saying that it seems fruitless to have a conversation about all of those issues without including ANY female perspectives and voices. The difference between what I said, and what SS is trying to correlate, is that that conversation was happening between a group of many women and a few men, where at least the sides are represented.

 

For a bunch of white guys to debate whether or not something is or isn't misogynist seems....... fundamentally flawed.

[southsider2k5]

Yes, and let's invalidate that it's the context of the BLM movement that makes those videos so particularly poignant. We're talking about BLM right now, so obviously they've done a great job at becoming a household name. And every time another video like that comes out it re-validates and re-energizes the movement. It's a symbiotic relationship. Those videos spread like wildfire because of the heightened awareness and societal context, and in return they strengthen the movement, which gives each new video more power. It's a cycle.

 

Or do you think it's a coincidence that all these videos have come out SINCE the BLM movement began? The movement makes the videos that much more sensationalist for news media outlets, so they love it - and that's why we've seen more of them.

 

BLM is a product of the media coverage, and not the other way around. The media coverage came first.

[Reddy]

BLM is a product of the media coverage, and not the other way around. The media coverage came first.

BLM is a product of grassroots organizers, who saw an opportunity and a need that yes - was initially reported on by the media.

[Jenksismyhero]

Yes, and let's invalidate that it's the context of the BLM movement that makes those videos so particularly poignant. We're talking about BLM right now, so obviously they've done a great job at becoming a household name. And every time another video like that comes out it re-validates and re-energizes the movement. It's a symbiotic relationship. Those videos spread like wildfire because of the heightened awareness and societal context, and in return they strengthen the movement, which gives each new video more power. It's a cycle.

 

Or do you think it's a coincidence that all these videos have come out SINCE the BLM movement began? The movement makes the videos that much more sensationalist for news media outlets, so they love it - and that's why we've seen more of them.

 

Nah, those videos are still damning with or without BLM. And it's not a coincidence that those videos came out after the BLM movement. It lines up with the availability of affordable technology that gives everyone a video camera in their pocket.

[Jenksismyhero]

And just to touch on this for the last time:

 

My point was not to shut anyone here down about their views on misogyny/Bernie/women's issues - I was just saying that it seems fruitless to have a conversation about all of those issues without including ANY female perspectives and voices. The difference between what I said, and what SS is trying to correlate, is that that conversation was happening between a group of many women and a few men, where at least the sides are represented.

 

For a bunch of white guys to debate whether or not something is or isn't misogynist seems....... fundamentally flawed.

 

Kinda like a bunch of white people trying to tell black people what is/isn't racist. But people still do it.

[Reddy]

Kinda like a bunch of white people trying to tell black people what is/isn't racist. But people still do it.

I'm not sure how this is a counterpoint to my argument...

[Reddy]

Nah, those videos are still damning with or without BLM. And it's not a coincidence that those videos came out after the BLM movement. It lines up with the availability of affordable technology that gives everyone a video camera in their pocket.

Yes. The narrative had nothing to do with it. Ok.

[bmags]

Couldn't endorse this more:

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/201...ma-speaking-fee

[southsider2k5]

Couldn't endorse this more:

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/201...ma-speaking-fee

 

Yet it is completely not surprising either.

[LittleHurt05]

Couldn't endorse this more:

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/201...ma-speaking-fee

 

LOL. The guy put with up 8 years of all the s*** a President has to deal with, and now he is expected to not reap the benefits of it?

[bmags]

LOL. The guy put with up 8 years of all the s*** a President has to deal with, and now he is expected to not reap the benefits of it?

 

There are so many ways for him to make money that don't involve this skeezy backdoor speech circuit. He has a $60 mill book deal and was a many millionaire from his previous books. He wants to stay involved and "mold the next generation of leaders" then this is a good start.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

I'm only okay if he's using it to funnel the wealth from plutocrats to something good, but it's just going to his own bank account I'm sure.

 

It really is like the final blow to the optimism people placed on him in 2008.

[StrangeSox]

 

https://charlotteobserver.relaymedia.com/am...e146486019.html