|
Yinlock posted:
The US has a substantially larger percentage of minorities which also lends to having a larger percentage of white people who aren't afraid of minorities. If we had the demographics of 1972 things would be different. But thank god we don't so the comparison does not work at any level.
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:09
|
|
in the uk a referendum ran on complete open racism and won.
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 09:51 |
|
|
botany posted:of course they are, I'm just tired of US posters pointing at the EU, which by and large has a lot more openly racist rhetoric but much less structural racist policies, to make themselves feel better. I do not disagree. Though I find it concerning that Europe seems to be trending more racist and right wing, in relative terms. But that's a problem to be addressed, not a loving contest.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
botany posted:so no then yeah I admit you got me with the statistics, the prison one especially, I'm Canadian so I was unaware of the specifics. I concede. that image is still real loving dire though
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:yes please tell me what tenets of American leftism you would like the Democratic Party to abandon *kramers into room* identity politics are a privileged distraction, my droog
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Canadian poster completely wrong about something, news at 11. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
quote:On an individual level, of course, many people’s political views evolve over the course of their lives. But academic research indicates not only that generations have distinct political identities, but that most people’s basic outlooks and orientations are set fairly early on in life. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/09/the-politics-of-american-generations-how-age-affects-attitudes-and-voting-behavior/ young people being further left isn't going to change much as they age
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:yeah I admit you got me with the statistics, the prison one especially, I'm Canadian so I was unaware of the specifics. I concede. thanks for admitting that. and yeah, the picture was really goddamn concerning, especially to me as a german. also sorry for assuming you were a US citizen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/09/the-politics-of-american-generations-how-age-affects-attitudes-and-voting-behavior/ at least I can still be right about baby boomers being the worst
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:yes please tell me what tenets of American leftism you would like the Democratic Party to abandon Maybe we need the Dixiecrats back if Trump is so unstoppable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
greatn posted:What could they possibly do? Policy wise they have given them everything they asked for, Save Hillary and Debbie's heads on pikes! It's less about policy and more about the narrative of change. Turns out a lot of people want to see the establishment burn when the status quo doesn't work for them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:yeah I admit you got me with the statistics, the prison one especially, I'm Canadian so I was unaware of the specifics. I concede. this feels like the perfect distillation of every Canadian concern trolling about how aw gee guys Hillary's totally too right wing or Trump's totally gonna win or whatever things they don't actually know about but just now heard of. "Yea I admit you got me with actual facts but I posted a scary image..."
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:Thank you, folks should read this and relax a hair. So this is white women and white men only? Can you link the source? I'm looking at New Mexico in particular.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:yes please tell me what tenets of American leftism you would like the Democratic Party to abandon Can we keep the tenets but drop the leftists?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Kaal posted:People are voting for Donald Trump because progressive politics are failing to articulate a compelling message. This is both because the message is insufficiently compelling (aka the battle between Clinton's pursuit of Obama-style progressivism vs. Sanders leftists who want their nebulous revolution) and because the message is being garbled by competing ideas (aka every liberal group/discussion/protest ever). If American liberals can't get together to craft a message that can challenge Trump's outright fascism, then frankly the ideology is just fatally flawed. I actually agree. "The" progressive political agenda has largely failed over the past few decades, in large part due to the decline of organized labor. Non-college educated whites as a demographic have seen a measurable decline in their standard of living over the last ~30 years due to globalization. Progressives (under the umbrella of the Democrats) can't plausibly claim to be able to reverse this, in part because they've been politically neutered federally and decimated at the state level. With left-wing reform impossible they support Trump ie a right-wing "reformer". I don't get the surprise of people in this thread over the possibility that some fraction of the Democrat delegates are unhappy enough with the primary outcome that they're disrupting the convention. The party is not unified, and the DNC REALLY needs to take that seriously if they don't want to end up like UK's Labour. We all lose in that situation, as it guarantees a decade of Republican dominance.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/09/the-politics-of-american-generations-how-age-affects-attitudes-and-voting-behavior/ Where were you over the last two decades? People's politics shift greatly as a result of their environment. Eight years of Bush had a huge impact on the politics of the millennial generation that came of age during it. By the end of it, liberals were far more moderate in their policy goals. Eight years of Obama pushed that back the other way. Do you think that Democrats would have been seriously considering a self-described socialist if it hadn't been for Obama? Of course not. So what do you think the impact of a term or two of Kaiser Trump is going to have on the millennial generation and the post-millennial generation? Consider where we could have been if Gore had won the presidency, another Democrat who was spurned by leftists as ideologically impure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
This is some pretty amazing denialism. Trump is a result of the failure of both establishment parties whose center and center-right administrations have for the past few decades done little to help the working and middle-class and in many cases actively hosed them over. Berniebros won't significantly affect the election anyway, just how like the PUMAs and Hillaris44 crowd didn't do poo poo in 2008. But Trump is not the fault of leftists and progressives, they've been out of power and without a significant voice. It is the mainstream GOP and Dems producing the resentment that birthed Trump. Kaal posted:Where were you over the last two decades? People's politics shift greatly as a result of their environment. Eight years of Bush had a huge impact on the politics of the millennial generation that came of age during it. By the end of it, liberals were far more moderate in their policy goals. Eight years of Obama pushed that back the other way. Do you think that Democrats would have been seriously considering a self-described socialist if it hadn't been for Obama? Of course not. So what do you think the impact of a term or two of Kaiser Trump is going to have on the millennial generation and the post-millennial generation? Consider where we could have been if Gore had won the presidency, another Democrat who was spurned by leftists as ideologically impure. Actually I will stick with the Pew Research article and referenced scientific studies rather than your anecdotes and hypotheticals. Again, do you have a source that suggests peoples' voting habits or political ideologies change significantly with age?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
So are the Bernie delegates just the fringe of his supporters for some reason?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:My point was that the next Dem candidate will need to be to the left of Hillary to appeal to younger voters. Most Millenials will be well into their late 20s and 30s by that point. Most all current sanders supporters will go Republican mate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Mr. Wookums posted:Most all current sanders supporters will go Republican mate. i doubt that
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:this feels like the perfect distillation of every Canadian concern trolling about how aw gee guys Hillary's totally too right wing or Trump's totally gonna win or whatever things they don't actually know about but just now heard of. What? I wasn't concern-trolling, I was genuinely wrong and dumb and admitted it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
Pellisworth posted:This is some pretty amazing denialism. It's also a calculated effort by massive news agencies financed by billionaires to direct all anger at pretty much everything except the people actually causing the problems. Blaming leftists (which we apparently don't need to care about at all but are also always the reason elections are lost) that have effectively no power in the country in the face of that is silly. It's a lot easier to blame these nebulous leftists than actually look at why the Republicans are able to out message the Democrats with white people so easily (it's racism).
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Kaal posted:How is this any different from saying that leftism can't fail, it can only be failed? The biggest flaw in leftist politics has always been its tendency to foster ideological infighting. It's a constant battle to wrangle enough liberals to work together to achieve anything of meaning. If American leftists can't band together long enough to defeat an outright fascist, then the ideology is just fundamentally broken here and we need to find a new path moving forward. Doubling down on a fatally flawed political system doesn't make any sense at all. Just because the Republicans represent the right-wing doesn't automatically make the modern Democratic Party leftist. At best, the Democratic Party is centrist, and at worst they're no more left-wing than pre-Reagan Republicans. This isn't a "No True Scotsman" thing*; we can look at leftist parties throughout history/the world and clearly see that the Democratic Party is significantly to the right of the vast majority. To put this another way, your logic can be used to defend the policy/ideology of a political party under nearly any circumstance. Any time people disagree with the direction of their political party, you can make the same "SO YOU'RE SAYING (INSERT IDEOLOGY) CAN'T FAIL, IT CAN ONLY BE FAILED???" comment. Generally speaking, if your same argument can be used in a situation where you're objectively wrong, it means there's a serious flaw in your argument. edit: To be clear, I want Clinton to win and believe that she'll probably accomplish some good things. I'm certainly not arguing in favor of leftists voting for third party candidates (much less Trump) in swing states. But this doesn't mean that Clinton is just a different flavor of the same ideology; there are very clear, significant differences between what most leftists want and what the mainstream Democratic Party wants. *"No True Scotsman" is probably my least favorite fallacy I see people reference constantly, because there are many situations where someone actually isn't a Scotsman. Words have meanings and saying "X is not a Y" is not inherently a fallacy. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Jul 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Radish posted:It's also a calculated effort by massive news agencies financed by billionaires to direct all anger at pretty much everything except the people actually causing the problems. Blaming leftists (which we apparently don't need to care about at all but are also always the reason elections are lost) that have effectively no power in the country in the face of that is silly. Exactly. 1) 90% of Bernie supporters are now supporting Clinton. Progressives will not throw this election for Clinton. 2) Progressives and leftists are not the people who have been in power for the last 30-40 years that resulted in this loving mess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Lots of weeping and gnashing of teeth over Bernie I see. But even if there was no slant towards Clinton at all, I don't think he was winning the primary. And the rebuttal is, of course, that Trump won the Republican nomination against the will of a significant bloc of the party, so why not Sanders? However, for a long time - 3 years some people say - it's been "Clinton vs ?". Hillary simply had too much in place, too much in terms of assets and strongholds, and she basically got to campaign unchallenged to her donors after she left government. She had plenty of money and time to fight the various "political scandals" (Benghazi, Server/emails). Maybe if Bernie had that same type of preparatory phase he would have stood a chance. What Bernie does for me is give me a tiny sliver of hope that the Democratic party can pull back left in the future, maybe across the next couple decades, and perhaps even get back in the state-level game to a greater extent. I really do like him, but I would prefer Clinton against Trump. I don't buy the "anybody can beat Trump" poo poo, cause no one thought he could get as far as he has. Yeah, he's alienated lots of people, but people can have really short memories as they line up to vote. Lastly, as much as I like Bernie, he's a tad slow to the draw. The debates will be upon us soon and though Trump may severely lack experience and political knowledge, he practically has a propaganda machine installed in his throat. He's going to know what's coming and will have the talking points ready to go, so for all of you hoping hes going to talk about rapist refugees or political conspiracies I think you'll be disappointed. I suspect he will easily strong arm the moderator and he's going to try and bully Clinton every chance he gets. I don't think we will get a defining moment of victory like we did with a strong incumbent like Obama ("Proceed, Governor.") and I think it's Clinton's job to make sure she doesn't get caught in what will surely be a hail of scrutiny and attacks on her character. She can surely win on almost all the issues, but Trump will be trying to keep her on the defensive constantly. But even though this worries me, I'm still really interested in the debates - who knows what happens once they come face to face.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Acid Haze posted:Lastly, as much as I like Bernie, he's a tad slow to the draw. The debates will be upon us soon and though Trump may severely lack experience and political knowledge, he practically has a propaganda machine installed in his throat. He's going to know what's coming and will have the talking points ready to go, so for all of you hoping hes going to talk about rapist refugees or political conspiracies I think you'll be disappointed. I suspect he will easily strong arm the moderator and he's going to try and bully Clinton every chance he gets. Trump isn't exactly known for staying on message though, all Hillary has to do is needle his ego and he'll be set off to the loving moon. You do have a point that it's something she needs to be prepared for, but the woman is used to dealing with irrational hate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
WE'RE ALL GOING TO loving DIE, DROWN THE KIDS IN THE BATHTUB https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/757661563763486720
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
As a black man, I wonder, how is it white privilege that we are unhappy with whom this mess of a party has given us as our opposition against Trump which is now causing turmoil within the party, yet it wasn't white privilege for those people to vote for the candidate who was not seeking to change the system which white privilege has still been strong for the past 8 years, instead of voting for a candidate who wanted to see that we all get a fair chance? gently caress the polls that long stated Bernie beats Trump easier than Hillary does right? Now that it's a scary looking picture that he could actually win the general election (he won't, ever) you point the finger and blame those unhappy democrats or independents that don't want the candidate that was clearly, with bias, favored to be the candidate from the start? They should just rally behind the candidate they don't want to prevent a future you don't want? But that couldn't have gone the other way during the primary, now could it have? Gangsta Boogie fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Jul 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
potato of destiny posted:WE'RE ALL GOING TO loving DIE, DROWN THE KIDS IN THE BATHTUB Seems almost all of that was Republicans coming home. He didn't win any more Ds or Is. Bunch are either third party or undecided. Room for Hill to grow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Lotta dumb posters coming out of the woodwork in this thread.Quorum posted:Donald loving Trump and Zodiac Killer represent the middle class, said nobody sane ever The largest block of Republicans voters are working and middle class whites. Kaal posted:Where were you over the last two decades? People's politics shift greatly as a result of their environment. Eight years of Bush had a huge impact on the politics of the millennial generation that came of age during it. By the end of it, liberals were far more moderate in their policy goals. Eight years of Obama pushed that back the other way. Do you think that Democrats would have been seriously considering a self-described socialist if it hadn't been for Obama? Of course not. So what do you think the impact of a term or two of Kaiser Trump is going to have on the millennial generation and the post-millennial generation? Consider where we could have been if Gore had won the presidency, another Democrat who was spurned by leftists as ideologically impure. Did it occur to you that major events like financial crashes or failed wars, or the demographic collapse of the white working class, might actually impact political sentiments a lot more than which party is in power?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
Gangsta Boogie posted:But that couldn't have gone the other way during the primary, now could it have? Yes it could have? I mean, are you suggesting Hillary supporters wouldn't have voted for Sanders? Mel Mudkiper fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Jul 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
PPP is the best trollster  
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Yes it could have? I'm saying, why are people pushing such hard blame now, when this was all clearly going to be the outcome long before. Why isn't the blame with those who voted this nightmare into reality. Why is it "Bernie Bros cant get over their white privilege and just cooperate so now we're gonna lose"? It's highly annoying because we support him because he was absolutely an Anti-Trump and Anti-Privilege candidate but somehow that's what we are being attacked for? And I'm not even loving white haha
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
PPP was the one who asked the Zodisc question right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
Well, the band sounds better than at the RNC, that's something
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Yes it could have? I'll be perfectly honest, with round two of Hillary missing out on the nomination, and to an old white man this time, I could see things having gotten much worse from women and minorities who felt disenfranchised. Hillary winning is probably the way better outcome here, with regards to party unity anyhow. Bernie has done more moving the party left than he likely would've actually winning. He now has the opportunity to say he "won," while bowing out and not having to take any of the poo poo Hillary will in the campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
greatn posted:What could they possibly do? Policy wise they have given them everything they asked for, Save Hillary and Debbie's heads on pikes! How about an honest attempt at campaign reform and getting Big Money to stay the gently caress out of elections? If Hillary openly rejected corporate donations, I'd certainly feel better about having to vote for her.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Wait, this fart-in thing is real? I'm actually seeing articles about this. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
hail satan
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
Gangsta Boogie posted:I'm saying, why are people pushing such hard blame now, when this was all clearly going to be the outcome long before. Why isn't the blame with those who voted this nightmare into reality. Why is it "Bernie Bros cant get over their white privilege and just cooperate so now we're gonna lose"? the big ironic thing is that if Trump were the democratic nom, most democrats would vote for him because the republican candidate would probably be so much more evil and everyone would be all "loving Hillary Bros let it go".
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 09:51 |
|
|
The main difference in these polls seems to be some say 90% of Bernie supporters are voting for Hillary, some say %50.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2016 21:03
|
|