2018 Democrats thread

[Reddy]

1 hour ago, GoSox05 said:

Conservatives and Republicans are going to call it socialism regardless of what you want it called.   Take it and run with it.  Stop being so scared of what Republicans are going to do. 

You don't think they called new deal policies socialist and communist back in the 30's?  It didn't matter the policies were overwhelmingly popular.

 

 

Take it and run with it despite a 24% approval rating? This is how you lose elections.

[Dam8610]

12 minutes ago, Reddy said:

Joe Lieberman isn't a Democrat.

But whatever you want to say to create a false narrative I guess...

Lieberman was a Democrat until he got primaried, ran as an independent, and retained his seat. Sound familiar?

[Jack Parkman]

I'm sick of the "young people expect instant gratification, and that is an unreasonable expectation" myth.  Of course it is reasonable. People, in general, have 70-80 years to walk this planet. That is a short amount of time in reality. The amount of bullshit younger people are willing to put up with is exponentially lower than older people.  Maybe it is management who needs to adjust expectations and show employees that they appreciate them by giving them opportunity, more responsibility and higher pay. I think there is going to be a lot of job turnover even in higher paying jobs going forward until this adjustment by management takes place. Maybe younger people have figured out that every day wasted in a dead end job is time you never get back. Once that realization comes, they already have one foot out the door. People spend 40% of of their waking hours as an adult working, so maybe people have learned that it isn't worth wasting time dealing with stressful bullshit anymore. You have to maximize your earning potential, and maximize your time on this earth. Life is short. Maybe management should come to that realization, and maybe other people should too. Nobody has time to put up with bullshit, whether it pays the bills or not. /end rant

Edited July 25, 2018 by Jack Parkman

[Reddy]

3 hours ago, Dam8610 said:

Lieberman was a Democrat until he got primaried, ran as an independent, and retained his seat. Sound familiar?

Not even a little bit. Lol

[Dam8610]

Just now, Reddy said:

Not even a little bit. Lol

Lieberman was a Democrat, lost his primary, then put himself on the ballot against the Democrat candidate.

Crowley was a Democrat, lost the primary, then put himself on the ballot against the Democrat candidate.

Does it sound familiar now?

[Reddy]

 

 Read this thread.

[Reddy]

Just now, Dam8610 said:

Lieberman was a Democrat, lost his primary, then put himself on the ballot against the Democrat candidate.

Crowley was a Democrat, lost the primary, then put himself on the ballot against the Democrat candidate.

Does it sound familiar now?

In fantasy land, maybe, but that's not what happened with Crowley, so... um... bye?

[Dam8610]

Just now, Reddy said:

In fantasy land, maybe, but that's not what happened with Crowley, so... um... bye?

Wow, you just gobble up every piece of garbage that the establishment feeds you, don't you?

Where are the calls for unity on this? Why didn't Pelosi tell Crowley to get off the ballot and let the candidate the people voted for have the best chance of winning?

[Dam8610]

4 minutes ago, Reddy said:

 

 Read this thread.

So you found a person willing to lie on Twitter for the democratic establishment. Congratulations? I'm sorry, but Obama was floating the idea of a corporate tax cut by the end of his second term, and Clinton was on board with the idea throughout the 2016 election cycle. She even said she'd support the repatriation holiday in a debate against Trump. Video evidence at the 2:40 mark below:

So to say that Clinton or Obama had a progressive tax policy is, IMO, a complete joke, especially by the end of Obama's second term. That's also the biggest issue to me personally, so I stopped reading after her complete lie on that point.

[Reddy]

4 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

So you found a person willing to lie on Twitter for the democratic establishment. Congratulations? I'm sorry, but Obama was floating the idea of a corporate tax cut by the end of his second term, and Clinton was on board with the idea throughout the 2016 election cycle. She even said she'd support the repatriation holiday in a debate against Trump. Video evidence at the 2:40 mark below:

So to say that Clinton or Obama had a progressive tax policy is, IMO, a complete joke, especially by the end of Obama's second term. That's also the biggest issue to me personally, so I stopped reading after her complete lie on that point.

(you mean like the lie about Crowley running against Ocasio as an independent?)

[Reddy]

16 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

Wow, you just gobble up every piece of garbage that the establishment feeds you, don't you?

Where are the calls for unity on this? Why didn't Pelosi tell Crowley to get off the ballot and let the candidate the people voted for have the best chance of winning?

You... you realize he can't legally vacate the ballot unless he dies or runs for another office, right?

[Dam8610]

6 minutes ago, Reddy said:

(you mean like the lie about Crowley running against Ocasio as an independent?)

 

5 minutes ago, Reddy said:

You... you realize he can't legally vacate the ballot unless he dies or runs for another office, right?

So then he should run for another office. I know that's what you'd be saying were the roles reversed. Also, very adept deflection to avoid answering about why you posted someone's twitter lie thread.

[Reddy]

1 minute ago, Dam8610 said:

 

So then he should run for another office. I know that's what you'd be saying were the roles reversed. Also, very adept deflection to avoid answering about why you posted someone's twitter lie thread.

No. It isn't. You're suggesting he commit fraud and run for an office he has no intention to hold if elected? Seriously?

Dude's not running. Not campaigning. Endorsed Ocasio. Like... what is your beef? Lol it's pretty pathetic.

[Dam8610]

1 minute ago, Reddy said:

No. It isn't. You're suggesting he commit fraud and run for an office he has no intention to hold if elected? Seriously?

Dude's not running. Not campaigning. Endorsed Ocasio. Like... what is your beef? Lol it's pretty pathetic.

So you're saying if elected back to the House, he would intend to hold that office? Because if not, it's fraud for him to be on the ballot same as if he ran for any other office, and if so, that's running against her.

[Reddy]

He's not running for the office bud. What aren't you getting about this? Lol. If she somehow loses to a man who isn't even campaigning, isn't raising money, has publicly said he's not running and who endorsed her, *maybe* she's got bigger problems. (Maybe she shouldn't be spending campaign funds in Kansas, for instance)

Honestly, Ocasio making a big shit about it (then apologizing for being wrong, btw) has probably convinced more people to vote for him because guess what - NO ONE WOULD'VE KNOWN ABOUT IT OTHERWISE.

Day after day she continues to make stupid, stupid mistakes. But y'all support her because of her policies despite her inexperience, ignorance, and inability to be tactful. Where oh where have I seen this play out before........ 

[Dam8610]

Just now, Reddy said:

He's not running for the office bud. What aren't you getting about this? Lol. If she somehow loses to a man who isn't even campaigning, isn't raising money, has publicly said he's not running and who endorsed her, *maybe* she's got bigger problems. (Maybe she shouldn't be spending campaign funds in Kansas, for instance)

Honestly, Ocasio making a big shit about it (then apologizing for being wrong, btw) has probably convinced more people to vote for him because guess what - NO ONE WOULD'VE KNOWN ABOUT IT OTHERWISE.

Day after day she continues to make stupid, stupid mistakes. But y'all support her because of her policies despite her inexperience, ignorance, and inability to be tactful. Where oh where have I seen this play out before........ 

That's not answering the question. If Crowley were to get elected as the representative of the 14th district, does he intend to hold the office?

Of course I don't expect an answer to that question, because there isn't a good one, which is why he should do whatever is necessary to remove himself from the ballot.

[Reddy]

Just now, Dam8610 said:

That's not answering the question. If Crowley were to get elected as the representative of the 14th district, does he intend to hold the office?

Of course I don't expect an answer to that question, because there isn't a good one, which is why he should do whatever is necessary to remove himself from the ballot.

Lol. So he should either actively commit fraud or die? Maybe Ocasio should just win the damn race instead of complaining. Btdubs have you started knocking on doors and making calls for candidates yet?

[Dam8610]

7 minutes ago, Reddy said:

Lol. So he should either actively commit fraud or die? Maybe Ocasio should just win the damn race instead of complaining. Btdubs have you started knocking on doors and making calls for candidates yet?

If you believe what he's saying, he's actively committing fraud by staying on the ballot. If you don't (which I'm inclined not to), he's actively doing the behavior the Democratic party has shunned from progressives for decades. The correct answer is to remove himself from the ballot. The answer I think establishment Democrats want is him to mount a third party campaign. Of course they could prove me wrong by telling Crowley to get off the ballot.

ETA: I've done a little work to help my district's state rep, but there's no way I would expend any effort to help the Visclosky or Donnelly campaigns. Way too far right for my tastes. Donnelly actually ran an ad touting praise from Trump.

Edited July 26, 2018 by Dam8610

[StrangeSox]

31 minutes ago, Reddy said:

Lol. So he should either actively commit fraud or die? Maybe Ocasio should just win the damn race instead of complaining. Btdubs have you started knocking on doors and making calls for candidates yet?

She did win the race though, by a big margin, because Crowley and what he represents sucks.

[Reddy]

1 minute ago, StrangeSox said:

She did win the race though, by a big margin, because Crowley and what he represents sucks.

So why is everyone complaining about the November ballot? (obviously that's the race I was referring to)

[Reddy]

29 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

If you believe what he's saying, he's actively committing fraud by staying on the ballot. If you don't (which I'm inclined not to), he's actively doing the behavior the Democratic party has shunned from progressives for decades. The correct answer is to remove himself from the ballot. The answer I think establishment Democrats want is him to mount a third party campaign. Of course they could prove me wrong by telling Crowley to get off the ballot.

ETA: I've done a little work to help my district's state rep, but there's no way I would expend any effort to help the Visclosky or Donnelly campaigns. Way too far right for my tastes. Donnelly actually ran an ad touting praise from Trump.

Who's Donnelly's opponent? Are they further left?

[Reddy]

By the way Dam, didn't you defend Bernie's behavior in the Vermont sen primaries to keep any other Dem from challenging him?

[Dam8610]

1 minute ago, Reddy said:

By the way Dam, didn't you defend Bernie's behavior in the Vermont sen primaries to keep any other Dem from challenging him?

Yes, which is consistent with my position that Crowley should get off the ballot. If the Democratic party truly wants the elected representative of the people in their primary to be the only person facing any potential Republican challenger, then they'd support both actions. Of course, the establishment wants establishment candidates, so they're not going to support the same idea they've pushed on progressives for decades when progressives start winning.

[Dam8610]

9 minutes ago, Reddy said:

So why is everyone complaining about the November ballot? (obviously that's the race I was referring to)

Because there's no right answer for him except to get off the ballot. If he stays on with no intention of holding the office, that's no less fraudulent than running for a different office. If he stays on with the intention of holding the office, he's running a third party campaign against Ocasio-Cortez which the establishment pretends to hate when it's a progressive running against an establishment Democrat.

How is this not obvious to you?

[Reddy]

1 hour ago, Dam8610 said:

Because there's no right answer for him except to get off the ballot. If he stays on with no intention of holding the office, that's no less fraudulent than running for a different office. If he stays on with the intention of holding the office, he's running a third party campaign against Ocasio-Cortez which the establishment pretends to hate when it's a progressive running against an establishment Democrat.

How is this not obvious to you?

He didn't actively seek the WFP endorsement. Actively seeking office he's not interested in holding is a completely different thing. How is this not obvious to you?