|
Clinton supporters deserved to lose but the rest of the country doesn't deserve this poo poo.
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 03:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 03:31 |
|
|
Mister Fister posted:Clinton supporters deserved to lose but the rest of the country doesn't deserve this poo poo. Agreed. But without Trump these idiots wouldn't be mad and self owning on twitter. https://twitter.com/grandoftwo/status/913953404736565248 https://twitter.com/grandoftwo/status/914305753888038912 Probably not worth dealing with Trump, but at least we can bathe ourselves in 4 years of beautiful schadenfreude. It's not like Trump is going to start a foreign war that Hillary wouldn't have dove into face first.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
Mister Fister posted:Clinton supporters deserved to lose but the rest of the country doesn't deserve this poo poo. If the Democrats hadn't spent the last 45 years triangulating to swing conservative voters instead of their own voters, maybe the base would still be voting Dem instead of staying at home.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:If the Democrats hadn't spent the last 45 years triangulating to swing conservative voters instead of their own voters, maybe the base would still be voting Dem instead of staying at home. Hmm yes the story of Democrats before 1972 was one of harmony with those true "leftists" of their base, southern white people. Tell us more about US politics with your keen Canadian knowledge of this country. yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Oct 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Hmm yes the story of Democrats before 1972 was one of harmony with those true "leftists" of their base, southern white people. Tell us more about US politics with your keen Canadian knowledge of this country. Democrats didn't have any problem winning election after election without the "harmony" with or even relying on the South FYI   
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Democrats didn't have any problem winning election after election without the "harmony" with or even relying on the South FYI I got bad news for you about the math on those 1948 and 1960 maps. They both incorporated southern states to win. And those votes were not "leftist" in any way the modern champions of that word would care to claim. The party in those days kept a truce with white supremacists which was only broken once the issue was forced. yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 05:40 on Oct 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
Let's pretend 1964 didn't happen because it didn't fit *~the narrative*~ Those we're all examples of Democrats winning despite Southern defections, and 1964 didn't rely on a single Southern EV. Because it turns out if you offer the people something they want they vote for you. If you tell them what they want will never happen they don't, that's why you have to start pandering to racists by say shopping around a picture of your primary opponent in Somali garb and talking out of both sides of your mouth about whether he's a Muslim, or advising party attaches to remind the public what a Jewy Jew your opponent is, or appeal to islamaphobic smears as a last ditch tactic to win an intraparty leadership race.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 06:03
|
|
|
Yes a blue Texas would really change the math.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 06:21
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Hmm yes the story of Democrats before 1972 was one of harmony with those true "leftists" of their base, southern white people. Tell us more about US politics with your keen Canadian knowledge of this country. Who said anything about harmony, the only thing that matters is victory, and they've been sliding backwards ever since they told the unions and poors to gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 06:57
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:This gives me hope that I, a fat neckbearded goon, can walk into the local political arena, say "hey everybody I'm socialist", and have a decent shot at winning.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 07:25
|
|
|
MoaM posted:Why does everyone have to care about this bad president so intently? Do everything you can to legally oppose his bad policies and refrain from the ad-hominem, I say. The more we care about Drump doing Drump things the more we allow low-hanging fruit to the usually-awful-idiots to distract from how awful they are! Maybe I think social wellfare should be cut, but I'm not as bad as DRUMP who wants to ban the transgenders and can't spell things properly on twitter and is hilariously fat! Do what you can to illegally oppose him too
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 08:22
|
|
|
Nice to see yronic with the bold take that dems can't try to win because that wouldn't be woke enough.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 08:29
|
|
|
yronic just understands that if a racist votes for you then you're clearly pandering to racism.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
Racists gravitate toward racist campaigning? How shocking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Let's pretend 1964 didn't happen because it didn't fit *~the narrative*~. Of course it happened, but you can't cherry-pick history. It's not like Democrats in all the other years they lost to Nixon, Reagan, and Eisenhower didn't support the Great Society programs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Of course it happened, but you can't cherry-pick history. It's not like Democrats in all the other years they lost to Nixon, Reagan, and Eisenhower didn't support the Great Society programs. Aw that's precious coming from you neoliberal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
Yes what could have been wrong with the Democratic Party before the 70s? "If I come out for the anti-lynching bill now, they will block every bill I ask Congress to pass to keep America from collapsing. I just can't take that risk."
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:Do what you can to illegally oppose him too In some circumstances of blatantly unjust laws and if the US becomes a real thunderdome setting, yes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
on economic issues!! conservatives: https://twitter.com/JudLounsbury/status/914120248823042049 liberals: https://twitter.com/deep_beige/status/914547126683815937
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
SKULL.GIF posted:on economic issues!! Billionaires are a societal disease Mr Forbes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 19:27
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Let's pretend 1964 didn't happen because it didn't fit *~the narrative*~ You don't have to do that because even in 1964 the Democrats won a majority of southern electoral votes, defining the south as those states which seceded during the Civil War.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Johnson was of course a pro war centrist who ran largely on his opponent's nuttiness (sound familiar?). Beyond that his platform was the same Great Society stuff that Stevenson, Humphrey, Mondale, Carter and all the rest supported. But by all means let's gather round as Canadians tell us about a lost U.S. leftist party that never existed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Johnson was of course a pro war centrist who ran largely on his opponent's nuttiness (sound familiar?). Beyond that his platform was the same Great Society stuff that Stevenson, Humphrey, Mondale, Carter and all the rest supported. But by all means let's gather round as Canadians tell us about a lost U.S. leftist party that never existed. Yeah, this. Leftism in America has always been largely reactionary to ongoing political and economic events: reacting to the depredations of Capitalism during the Great Depression, reacting to the allure/threat of Communism during the Cold War, reacting to racial unrest during the Civil Rights era, reacting now to the rise of Fascism. We routinely forget about the values of socialism (I'm including welfare statism here as well) pretty much the moment the immediate problem it was meant to solve is at least temporarily ameliorated.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Johnson was of course a pro war centrist who ran largely on his opponent's nuttiness (sound familiar?). Beyond that his platform was the same Great Society stuff that Stevenson, Humphrey, Mondale, Carter and all the rest supported. But by all means let's gather round as Canadians tell us about a lost U.S. leftist party that never existed. Mondale ran on balanced budget poo poo. Nice try liar. Carter sold out the unions. So once again lying. Typical lying neoliberal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
Balancing an occasional budget through increased progressive income taxes is actually important for the health of a welfare state, dumbass.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Johnson was of course a pro war centrist who ran largely on his opponent's nuttiness (sound familiar?). Beyond that his platform was the same Great Society stuff that Stevenson, Humphrey, Mondale, Carter and all the rest supported. But by all means let's gather round as Canadians tell us about a lost U.S. leftist party that never existed. Actually, I'm not the one telling it, I'm only re-posting the words of a Kansas book writer. And "pro war"? Wasn't Johnson the guy that did the Flower girl nuke ad?
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Balancing an occasional budget through increased progressive income taxes is actually important for the health of a welfare state, dumbass. Making it a main plank is not something you do though. But then you know that. No different then the other neoliberals. Full of lies and dishonesty.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:Actually, I'm not the one telling it, I'm only re-posting the words of a Kansas book writer. hey hey lbj how many kids did you kill today
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
also, so quickly we forget literally the only good thing the nyt ever did
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
stone cold posted:also, so quickly we forget literally the only good thing the nyt ever did gently caress them, they supported the war in Iraq.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:gently caress them, they supported the war in Iraq.  i was referring to the pentagon papers, hence you know stone cold posted:literally the only good thing the nyt ever did
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:Actually, I'm not the one telling it, I'm only re-posting the words of a Kansas book writer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTyqoV1d2Ys
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:Actually, I'm not the one telling it, I'm only re-posting the words of a Kansas book writer. Oh well as long as you are just plagiarizing some dude from Kansas... Also apparently Kansas book guy didn't cover the Vietnam War.  I'm sure you can look up the documentary on the PBS website though if the US in the 60s is one of your interests.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
I thought Vietnam was mostly on Nixon's watch.  And I'm not plagiarizing. I literally post excerpts from Thomas Frank's book. At no time have I attempted to pass his work off as my own. Mister Facetious fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Oct 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
The world's wonderboy. https://twitter.com/Messina2012/status/747538956183552001 Jim is a Messina, Jim is a waste.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:I thought Vietnam was mostly on Nixon's watch. when did you think johnson was president what did you think the pentagon papers were on who do you think escalated who was all in on westmoreland's search and destroy
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:I thought Vietnam was mostly on Nixon's watch. Is this a thing that gets taught in some places or what? It reminds me somewhat of arguments I've heard that try to downplay Jackson's role in the Indian Removal Act and its repercussions by placing more of the blame on Van Buren's shoulders.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Oh well as long as you are just plagiarizing some dude from Kansas... I love how your ignoring that the Democrats actually had a debate about the war. Typical liar Also you never responded about why Mondale had a balanced budget as a central plank. But then that would undermine your whole much mountain of lies neoliberal. Now go join the gop. Sociopath.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
Adlai Stevenson posted:Is this a thing that gets taught in some places or what? It reminds me somewhat of arguments I've heard that try to downplay Jackson's role in the Indian Removal Act and its repercussions by placing more of the blame on Van Buren's shoulders. It's nothing like that, it's just that my knowledge of US history is stronger after 1980.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 03:31 |
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:I thought Vietnam was mostly on Nixon's watch. Johnson really shouldn't get off for putting us into Vietnam. A lot of his domestic achievements were important, albeit critically incomplete, but there is no getting around the fact he sent us into Vietnam for the express purpose of upholding a colonialist agreement with France that was absolutely, utterly worthless. It's right up there with antagonizing a potential ally in order to 'contain' communism. Anyway I guess this goes here. quote:An explosive allegation from prominent Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg last week is sparking a new wave of criticism and recriminations about Hillary Clinton’s campaign. quote:“Astonishingly, the 2016 Clinton campaign conducted no state polls in the final three weeks of the general election and relied primarily on data analytics to project turnout and the state vote,” Greenberg wrote in The American Prospect, published online late last week. “They paid little attention to qualitative focus groups or feedback from the field, and their brief daily poll didn’t measure which candidate was defining the election or getting people engaged.” quote:In October, about a month before Election Day, campaign officials pulled the plug on its deeper-dive state surveys — the messaging polls — over the objection of the campaign’s pollsters, who argued at the time that it was too risky to stop listening to voters beyond just the horse race, according to three sources associated with the campaign. The campaign continued, however, with its analytics polling, calling thousands of voters across battleground states every night to ask basic questions about candidate preference.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 23:20
|
|