Jump to content

2018 Democrats thread


southsider2k5

Recommended Posts

On 7/20/2018 at 4:48 PM, The Beast said:

Why do you think that about Biden? Just curious.

He's run for President a few times and never did well at all, so he doesn't have a great track record there. Economically, his policies have long been to the right of Clinton. He is a war hawk as well. And I wouldn't be shocked if he's got a few of his own #MeToo skeletons in the closet as he also has a history of being borderline creepy.

He's good as a Dem hypeman and I'll always appreciate his dunking all over Paul Ryan in the 2012 VP debates, but I don't want someone with his ideology setting the tone for the party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The View’s Meghan McCain loses her mind as audience cheers socialism: ‘This makes my head explode’

 

Quote

“We had her on this show, and I asked her this question, what do you mean by Democratic-Socialist?” said co-host Sunny Hostin. “She went over her platform: Medicare for all, fully funded public schools and universities, paid family and sick leave, justice reform, immigration justice, infrastructure overhaul, clean campaign finance, economy of peace, housing as a human right.”

Quote

The conservative McCain was furious.

 

“This makes my head explode,” she said.

Lmao.  Watching McCain go nuts on this is great. 

Fully funded public schools!  Universal healthcare!  The horror!

Edited by GoSox05
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GoSox05 said:

The View’s Meghan McCain loses her mind as audience cheers socialism: ‘This makes my head explode’

 

Lmao.  Watching McCain go nuts on this is great. 

Fully funded public schools!  Universal healthcare!  The horror!

It's great when you remember that Meghan McCain owes everything she has entirely to the birth lottery and that her father voted for her to inherit millions of dollars tax free, yet she'll still whine about "handouts". this was even better though:

 

 

 

 

 

I love that they're giving AOC and her platform so much free airtime.

 

Edited by StrangeSox
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You think children deserve healthcare and an education, not in my America!

I also love the idea that a living wage, education and healthcare could never go over in Kansas.  People there don't need healthcare!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Reddy said:

wrong shade of green.

also it's absurd that you could possibly paint any dem as a war hawk when compared to what we're dealing with right now. 

For 13 years, my experience of this board has been "green text means sarcasm". Literally no one has ever mentioned shades until this post, so I have no idea what you're talking about. Also, slightly better than things are now seems to be your end goal in all things, but seeing as I have kids that I want to be able to inhabit this planet in 80 years and not be living in poverty shacks, and seeing the political progression of the last 40 years, I don't see the time for the slow, crawling change for which you advocate that can just be rolled back every time the Democrats lose an election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

It's great when you remember that Meghan McCain owes everything she has entirely to the birth lottery and that her father voted for her to inherit millions of dollars tax free, yet she'll still whine about "handouts". this was even better though:

 

 

 

 

 

I love that they're giving AOC and her platform so much free airtime.

 

Running on a platform of ideas that people like? HOW DARE THEY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

For 13 years, my experience of this board has been "green text means sarcasm". Literally no one has ever mentioned shades until this post, so I have no idea what you're talking about. Also, slightly better than things are now seems to be your end goal in all things, but seeing as I have kids that I want to be able to inhabit this planet in 80 years and not be living in poverty shacks, and seeing the political progression of the last 40 years, I don't see the time for the slow, crawling change for which you advocate that can just be rolled back every time the Democrats lose an election.

I'd love way better. You don't get to way better by skipping what's going on now. If you gash your arm, you put pressure on it and stop the bleeding, THEN you get the stitches. We're in the stop-the-bleeding phase where a dirty t-shirt is just as good as a clean gauze pad if it's they only thing you have around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Reddy said:

I'd love way better. You don't get to way better by skipping what's going on now. If you gash your arm, you put pressure on it and stop the bleeding, THEN you get the stitches. We're in the stop-the-bleeding phase where a dirty t-shirt is just as good as a clean gauze pad if it's they only thing you have around.

This thinking got us Trump and is going to get us a 2nd Trump term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've had a literal civil war that left hundreds of thousands dead.

Bland centrism that doesn't appeal to many people won't actually stop the bleeding, either. But either way, you kinda missed the opportunity to explain why Clinton's campaign wasn't the epitome of the thinking you're advocating, or why the 1000+ seats lost by Democrats after 2008 wasn't representative of it, either. It's not like the Democrats were out there forcefully advocating for things like M4A and free college and $15 and getting beat over and over, it was the opposite! Tepid technocratic incrementalism was the flavor of Obama's administration, running away from defending the ACA was common in Congressional races, and they lost state houses across the country. None of this happened because there was a socialist or left-wing insurgency that pushed radical candidates that couldn't win general elections.

Edited by StrangeSox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing about the Democratic Platform at the moment is tepid incrementalism, unless you think adopting all those Sanders-style policies is incrementalism. In which case I've got a lot more questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Reddy said:

We have never been at a more stop-the-bleeding moment in American history than we are right now. Do y'all really STILL not appreciate that?

The 1930s say hi. What stopped the bleeding back then? Worker protections, a strong pro-labor surge, and socialism. Why don't you think that's a good enough solution now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/07/24/ron-desantis-wants-to-be-governor-of-florida-a-particularly-odd-place-to-dismiss-a-young-hispanic-woman/?utm_term=.91d395f704f2

De Santis elevating national profile of Ocasio-Cortez, at least he could attempt to learn how to pronounce a Spanish name in Florida. Jackass!

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dam8610 said:

The 1930s say hi. What stopped the bleeding back then? Worker protections, a strong pro-labor surge, and socialism. Why don't you think that's a good enough solution now?

1) it wasn't sold as "socialism" at the time and 2) people are UNWILLING to support the word "socialism" in 2018 in anywhere but the coasts and blue cities. I want to fix things. I don't want to lose again because we're being ignorant to political realities.

https://www.newsweek.com/could-bernie-sanders-beat-trump-2020-majority-say-they-wouldnt-vote-socialist-1040676?utm_campaign=NewsweekTwitter&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social 
 

Quote

"Seventy-six percent of Americans said they would not vote for a “socialist” political candidate, while just 24 percent said they would, according to a new Hill.TV/HarrisX American Barometer poll released Tuesday."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/12/2018 at 8:51 AM, Jenksismyhero said:

And as I argued yesterday, which you ignored, ANY effort, ANY means of voting is necessarily going to impact more liberals than conservatives simply based on class. Voter registration itself is a suppressive tactic according to you simply because the end result is more D's will be left home than R's. I fundamentally disagree with that. 

And as I prefaced my first post on this topic, I have no idea if it's even a big deal to keep someone on a registry, so this may be a completely  unnecessary move by the state of ohio. That's a separate argument. All i'm arguing is that requiring that someone turn in a pre-addressed/pre-stamped postcard AND vote in a four year period of time is not an oppressive barrier to voting.

look at the good that automatic voter registration does:

More voters, higher participation. Voter registration hurdles and purges have a clear goal and purpose.

 

 

Quote

 

The main finding of this analysis is clear: by a variety of measures, AVR was successful in improving registration and voting in Oregon and is a reform that ought to be pursued in other states. AVR makes state registration systems more accurate, efficient, and cost-effective, and the data here demonstrate that it can increase the level of participation in a state’s elections. It provides more citizens with an opportunity to use their voices in America’s democracy.

Through AVR, hundreds of thousands of Oregonians became registered voters. Almost 100,000 of those new registrants voted in the 2016 election—constituting 4.7 percent of all voters. Evidence is strong that tens of thousands of those citizens would not have voted if not for the AVR system.

The findings regarding who registered and turned out to vote because of Oregon’s first-in-the-nation registration modernization also provide a great deal of information for other states moving forward with their own AVR plans. To many, the effects may seem unexpected:

  • AVR disproportionately reached one of the lowest participating groups in the nation: young people.
  • AVR registrants and voters were less urban than traditional registrants.
  • AVR registrants and voters lived in areas with lower incomes and less education than traditional registrants.
  • AVR registrants and voters lived in areas that were more Latino than traditional registrants.

 

  •  
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Reddy said:

1) it wasn't sold as "socialism" at the time and 2) people are UNWILLING to support the word "socialism" in 2018 in anywhere but the coasts and blue cities. I want to fix things. I don't want to lose again because we're being ignorant to political realities.

https://www.newsweek.com/could-bernie-sanders-beat-trump-2020-majority-say-they-wouldnt-vote-socialist-1040676?utm_campaign=NewsweekTwitter&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social 
 

 

The packaging doesn't matter, the policies do. Sell it however you want, but the policies have to be correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dam8610 said:

The packaging doesn't matter, the policies do. Sell it however you want, but the policies have to be correct.

Then why are you using and advocating for packaging that doesn't work? What you just suggested IS what the Dem Party is trying to do, but people like you scream at them for not calling it socialism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

The packaging doesn't matter, the policies do. Sell it however you want, but the policies have to be correct.

e.g.

 

Poll says majority of Northeast Ohioans want Medicare for all

 

Quote

 

People in nearly every demographic said they thought health care was a right. And 60 percent of respondents said the government should provide Medicare - the federal program that provides health care coverage for the elderly - for all.

More than 40 percent of respondents said their service on Medicare or Medicaid - a similar program that covers people with low incomes and disabilities - was adequate, compared with 18 percent who said it was not.

Nearly 75 percent of respondents said insurance companies should have to cover preexisting conditions, and 67 percent said the government should regulate drug prices.

The survey also showed cost prevented 47 percent of respondents from having a recommended procedure. A quarter of respondents said cost prevented them or someone in their family from accessing mental health services.

 

 

It turns out that good things are actually popular even in non-coastal areas! Wow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Reddy said:

Then why are you using and advocating for packaging that doesn't work? What you just suggested IS what the Dem Party is trying to do, but people like you scream at them for not calling it socialism.

No, the Democratic party does not, by and large, endorse most of the policies of people like Ocasio-Cortez, despite all of her policies polling at 60+% publicly. Further, "Democrats" like Joe Lieberman write scathing op-eds about why voters shouldn't vote for the candidate they prefer, but rather the candidate that will play better with the Republicans. This is not a display of support for these policies or for a candidate who supports them. This is a smear campaign by an apparatus of power afraid of the inevitable loss of said power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

No, the Democratic party does not, by and large, endorse most of the policies of people like Ocasio-Cortez, despite all of her policies polling at 60+% publicly. Further, "Democrats" like Joe Lieberman write scathing op-eds about why voters shouldn't vote for the candidate they prefer, but rather the candidate that will play better with the Republicans. This is not a display of support for these policies or for a candidate who supports them. This is a smear campaign by an apparatus of power afraid of the inevitable loss of said power.

Joe Lieberman isn't a Democrat.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...