Why the democratic party doesn't appeal to people

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Yeah, those smug bleeding heart liberal b------------- with all their pretense of social justice, equal rights, bullshit.

Don't get me started. Like who the F**** gives a d********* whether some woman doing the same job as her male counterpart gets PAID the same?? They're WOMEN. Nor does anyone care whether some poor sot can afford health insurance, or whether some joker with a pre-existing medical condition can get coverage at ALL. Coverage that WE have to pay for in taxes. Gimme a BREAK!

And all that whining about discrimination against minorities, questionable killings by cops (we're SO sick of hearing about it) and how black lives matter (as if they aren't killing each OTHER off fast enough)... and what's with this gay rights issue?? How far do they want to take THAT? NOTHING in the Constitution says we gotta treat people with the same kind of courtesy, consideration, dignity, and fairness that WE want. Besides, what about OUR right to choose who we want to live next to, or do business with, or serve in a restaurant?? We got rights TOO, including the right to be a hateful old -------- if we WANT to.

And this immigration reform baloney. Democrats don't give a flying about immigrants! All those stinking Dems want to do is stack the vote in THEIR favor, so they can TAKE CONTROL, pass more social welfare programs, and put even MORE people on the "dole."

And that's just for starters. Their blood sucking family planning clinics, their whining about how the wealthy don't pay their fair share in taxes, their CONSPIRACY to allow MASSIVE voter fraud (thank God we conservatives got a handle on THAT b.s.), their wanting to regulate industry out of existence (hell, a little pollution never hurt NO one)... I could go ON.

Gawd how I miss the good old days.
 

jaap_stam

Cherished Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
896
Media
0
Likes
291
Points
98
Location
Eindhoven, Jakarta
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Male
Yeah, those smug bleeding heart liberal b------------- with all their pretense of social justice, equal rights, bullshit.

Don't get me started. Like who the F**** gives a d********* whether some woman doing the same job as her male counterpart gets PAID the same?? They're WOMEN. Nor does anyone care whether some poor sot can afford health insurance, or whether some joker with a pre-existing medical condition can get coverage at ALL. Coverage that WE have to pay for in taxes. Gimme a BREAK!

And all that whining about discrimination against minorities, questionable killings by cops (we're SO sick of hearing about it) and how black lives matter (as if they aren't killing each OTHER off fast enough)... and what's with this gay rights issue?? How far do they want to take THAT? NOTHING in the Constitution says we gotta treat people with the same kind of courtesy, consideration, dignity, and fairness that WE want. Besides, what about OUR right to choose who we want to live next to, or do business with, or serve in a restaurant?? We got rights TOO, including the right to be a hateful old -------- if we WANT to.

And this immigration reform baloney. Democrats don't give a flying about immigrants! All those stinking Dems want to do is stack the vote in THEIR favor, so they can TAKE CONTROL, pass more social welfare programs, and put even MORE people on the "dole."

And that's just for starters. Their blood sucking family planning clinics, their whining about how the wealthy don't pay their fair share in taxes, their CONSPIRACY to allow MASSIVE voter fraud (thank God we conservatives got a handle on THAT b.s.), their wanting to regulate industry out of existence (hell, a little pollution never hurt NO one)... I could go ON.

Gawd how I miss the good old days.

If you did read the article and my OP, I'm not talking about value judgements on the actual political goals. But rather, how effective the party is at recruiting support and winning votes. The fact that Dem/GOP voting breakdown over the past few presidential elections have been fairly close to 50/50, and Dems got demolished in the last midterms after owning the White House, House, and Senate early in Obama's administration, from an electoral standpoint, there is something preventing the Dems from persuading these other voters.

The point of the Vox article is that simply dismissing those who vote otherwise as uneducated rednecks is both incorrect (as there are numerous educated, intelligent people who vote GOP for their own reasons), and is a frame of mind for trying to court back voters who have been leaving the party. Imagine what happens if a party emerges that doesn't take the black vote for granted.

You can have the most noble political philosophy in the world, but you won't win any supporters if you can't have a conversation without getting offended at the first sign of criticism of disagreement...
 

jaap_stam

Cherished Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
896
Media
0
Likes
291
Points
98
Location
Eindhoven, Jakarta
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Male
There's plenty wrong with the Democratic Party, and with any political party you can name. I would be happy to consider a viable alternative, but our system makes that difficult at best.

Of course. But again, there is a thread about why the GOP is turning people off, so why not one about the Dems. Really crappy graph below that shows the Dem/GOP share of electoral college (top) and popular (bottom) votes from 1924 to 2008.

upload_2016-5-9_12-55-9.png


For as much good that liberalism promises (feminism, civil rights, etc), my question is why haven't voters responded? I was hoping to see - given that this board slants very liberal - if there was any introspection about this beyond just "non Dems are a bunch of racist morons."
 
  • Like
Reactions: tripod

tripod

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Posts
6,686
Media
14
Likes
1,893
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Has anyone actually read that looooooooooong article? Or are they just responding to the thread title and article headline?

I wasn't looking forward to a good article and was skeptical coming into the article. I actually LOVE true liberal criticism coming from the left but usually fugging HATE liberal criticism coming from the right.

As a Democrat that lives and exists entirely outside of the liberal bubble... I can only say that there are many points in the article that were familiar to me. It's a good article BTW.

Liberas ARE smug as shit... fucking horrible quality in a human. Liberals think they are full of empathy and are the most caring people on the planet... the truth is that their empathy levels aren't unique... they are average. Most liberals have a "caring and empathy" that they wear proudly on their sleeve... they wear it like a war hero wears his medals. The line you get from the liberals are that their priorities are the most advanced and they are superior to conservative priorities or even progressive priorities... it's more of that smug bullshit again.

I know full and well that they are smug because they dish out the same smug douchiness to progressives that they dish out to conservatives... it's no different. This excerpt from the article illustrates that point quite well IMHO.

"Liberal Democrats, distressed by the notion that Indiana would allow bakeries to practice open discrimination against LGBTQ couples, threatened boycotts against the state, mobilizing the considerable economic power that comes with an alliance of New York + Hollywood + Silicon Valley to punish Gov. Mike Pence... but had NO SUCH PASSION when the SAME governor of the SAME state joined 21 others in refusing the Medicaid expansion."

Progressives were FREAKING OUT about this yet liberals did NOTHING. Well... they actually did worse than nothing. THEY fucking took that as a moment to dish out more smugness by coming out with their defend-Obama-at-any-cost defensive strategy and ridiculed, fought, diminished and bullied us until the corporate media quickly moved on from the story.

And that happened over and over and over again throughout the Obama administration. Liberals ran roughshod over progressives until we were sidelined and pushed out of the mainstream media.

I cringe every time a liberal makes fun of the GOP electorate... the Daily Show, John Oliver, Stephanie Miller and the other partisan assholes don't know SHIT about their enemy... they literally are waging a war with faulty intelligence... sort of how we fought Vietnam.

Progressives understand conservatives, we respect them and treat them like human beings. We don't make fun of them, we don't call them rubes and we don't need to diminish them in order to feel superior.

For those who won't read it, the article is basically a cautionary tale for liberals. Not as eloquent as Thomas Franks but in a similar vein. A cautionary tale about overconfidence and hubris.

The article details how that smugness could be a big reason why Trump will crush Hillary Clinton this November.

I feel like not reading the article while typing paragraphs of a sarcastic response only reinforces the article's point on how liberal's have a smugness problem.

We simply HAVE to get our heads out of our asses. I've been trying all year to get my head out of my ass and I am seeing NO effort on liberal's behalf to do the same. We have a huuuuuuge battle coming up and I fear that the liberals are simply out shape and overconfident.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jaap_stam

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
If you did read the article and my OP, I'm not talking about value judgements on the actual political goals. But rather, how effective the party is at recruiting support and winning votes. The fact that Dem/GOP voting breakdown over the past few presidential elections have been fairly close to 50/50, and Dems got demolished in the last midterms after owning the White House, House, and Senate early in Obama's administration, from an electoral standpoint, there is something preventing the Dems from persuading these other voters.

The point of the Vox article is that simply dismissing those who vote otherwise as uneducated rednecks is both incorrect (as there are numerous educated, intelligent people who vote GOP for their own reasons), and is a frame of mind for trying to court back voters who have been leaving the party. Imagine what happens if a party emerges that doesn't take the black vote for granted.

You can have the most noble political philosophy in the world, but you won't win any supporters if you can't have a conversation without getting offended at the first sign of criticism of disagreement...

I read ENOUGH of the article, jaap, to get the gist of it. But seeing as how you presented your thread as something "for the sake of parity," I decided to employ that "liberal smugness" to offer up a satirical response based upon some of the arguments that, over time, have been presented herein by critics of "liberals" and "the left"... for the "sake of parity" (or parody?). My prerogative (being the smug liberal b---------- that I apparently AM).

And not just characterizations offered by those from the right, but also from the extreme left as well, while people like Trump talk from all sides of his mouth, spew hate based ideology, and while his right winged supporters unapologetically embrace it ALL.

BTW, glad you mentioned having "a conversation without getting offended at the first sign of criticism of [sic] disagreement." Especially since SOME want to engage in generalizations, assumptions, and over simplifications of their OWN, yet cry foul and "bully" when such positions are questioned or challenged, the same as anyone ELSE'S.

As for what DEMOCRATS TRIED to accomplish during the Obama administration, only to have their efforts blocked and OBSTRUCTED by those VERY same people who "progressives understand" here's a little REMINDER:


    • Recovery and Reinvestment Act, blocked
    • Small Business Job Act, blocked
    • Veterans Jobs Bill, blocked
    • American Jobs Act, blocked
    • Extension to Unemployment Benefits, blocked
    • Wall Street Reform Bill, blocked
    • Immigration Reform, blocked
    • Emergency Funding Border Bill, blocked
    • Political Ad Disclosure, blocked
    • Affordable Care Act, GOP voted 67 TIMES (and counting) to repeal it
    • Tax On Companies Shipping Jobs Overseas, blocked
    • Repeal of Don't Act Don't Tell, Blocked MULTIPLE times
    • Healthcare for 9/11 First Responders, blocked
    • Benefits for Homeless Veterans, blocked
    • Oil Spill Liability, blocked
    • Dream Act, blocked
    • Minimum Wage Increase, blocked
    • Unemployment Insurance Extension, Blocked
    • Bill Aimed at Curbing Wage Theft, Blocked
    • Student Loan Refinancing Bill, Blocked
    • Veterans Education, Jobs, and Health Benefits Bill, blocked
    • Employment Non Discrimination Act (which would have made it illegal to discriminate in the hiring of gays), blocked
    • Anti-Rape Amendment, GOP blocked that, and cast some 55 anti women votes for policies that threaten to undermine women's health and defund institutions that provide support for women.
    • Paycheck Fairness Act (that provided for equal pay for women), blocked FOUR TIMES
    • Buffet Rule (which would have required that wealthy 1% to pay the same percentage of their income in taxes that those of the middle class do), blocked
    • GOP obstruction of presidential appointments and judicial nominees, resulting in long term vacancies in judgeships
    • GOP Government Shut Down, in efforts to defund the ACA
    • Planned Parenthood, numerous GOP efforts to undermine operations and obstruct funding for
    • Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, numerous GOP efforts to undermine, obstruct, and obstruct funding for



 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: deleted15807

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,678
Media
0
Likes
2,812
Points
333
Location
Greece
Has anyone actually read that looooooooooong article? Or are they just responding to the thread title and article headline?

I wasn't looking forward to a good article and was skeptical coming into the article. I actually LOVE true liberal criticism coming from the left but usually fugging HATE liberal criticism coming from the right.

As a Democrat that lives and exists entirely outside of the liberal bubble... I can only say that there are many points in the article that were familiar to me. It's a good article BTW.

Liberas ARE smug as shit... fucking horrible quality in a human. Liberals think they are full of empathy and are the most caring people on the planet... the truth is that their empathy levels aren't unique... they are average. Most liberals have a "caring and empathy" that they wear proudly on their sleeve... they wear it like a war hero wears his medals. The line you get from the liberals are that their priorities are the most advanced and they are superior to conservative priorities or even progressive priorities... it's more of that smug bullshit again.

I know full and well that they are smug because they dish out the same smug douchiness to progressives that they dish out to conservatives... it's no different. This excerpt from the article illustrates that point quite well IMHO.

"Liberal Democrats, distressed by the notion that Indiana would allow bakeries to practice open discrimination against LGBTQ couples, threatened boycotts against the state, mobilizing the considerable economic power that comes with an alliance of New York + Hollywood + Silicon Valley to punish Gov. Mike Pence... but had NO SUCH PASSION when the SAME governor of the SAME state joined 21 others in refusing the Medicaid expansion."

Progressives were FREAKING OUT about this yet liberals did NOTHING. Well... they actually did worse than nothing. THEY fucking took that as a moment to dish out more smugness by coming out with their defend-Obama-at-any-cost defensive strategy and ridiculed, fought, diminished and bullied us until the corporate media quickly moved on from the story.

And that happened over and over and over again throughout the Obama administration. Liberals ran roughshod over progressives until we were sidelined and pushed out of the mainstream media.

I cringe every time a liberal makes fun of the GOP electorate... the Daily Show, John Oliver, Stephanie Miller and the other partisan assholes don't know SHIT about their enemy... they literally are waging a war with faulty intelligence... sort of how we fought Vietnam.

Progressives understand conservatives, we respect them and treat them like human beings. We don't make fun of them, we don't call them rubes and we don't need to diminish them in order to feel superior.

For those who won't read it, the article is basically a cautionary tale for liberals. Not as eloquent as Thomas Franks but in a similar vein. A cautionary tale about overconfidence and hubris.

The article details how that smugness could be a big reason why Trump will crush Hillary Clinton this November.

I feel like not reading the article while typing paragraphs of a sarcastic response only reinforces the article's point on how liberal's have a smugness problem.

We simply HAVE to get our heads out of our asses. I've been trying all year to get my head out of my ass and I am seeing NO effort on liberal's behalf to do the same. We have a huuuuuuge battle coming up and I fear that the liberals are simply out shape and overconfident.

If you live in a vacuum of your own entitlement you will learn, maybe, that you can see things but you hear nothing, even if you were ever listening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bluegrassguy

jaap_stam

Cherished Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
896
Media
0
Likes
291
Points
98
Location
Eindhoven, Jakarta
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Male
I read ENOUGH of the article, jaap, to get the gist of it. But seeing as how you presented your thread as something "for the sake of parity," I decided to employ that "liberal smugness" to offer up a satirical response based upon some of the arguments that, over time, have been presented herein by critics of "liberals" and "the left"... for the "sake of parity" (or parody?). My prerogative (being the smug liberal b---------- that I apparently AM).

And not just characterizations offered by those from the right, but also from the extreme left as well, while people like Trump talk from all sides of his mouth, spew hate based ideology, and while his right winged supporters unapologetically embrace it ALL.

BTW, glad you mentioned having "a conversation without getting offended at the first sign of criticism of [sic] disagreement." Especially since SOME want to engage in generalizations, assumptions, and over simplifications of their OWN, yet cry foul and "bully" when such positions are questioned or challenged, the same as anyone ELSE'S.

As for what DEMOCRATS TRIED to accomplish during the Obama administration, only to have their efforts blocked and OBSTRUCTED by those VERY same people who "progressives understand" here's a little REMINDER:


    • Recovery and Reinvestment Act, blocked
    • Small Business Job Act, blocked
    • Veterans Jobs Bill, blocked
    • American Jobs Act, blocked
    • Extension to Unemployment Benefits, blocked
    • Wall Street Reform Bill, blocked
    • Immigration Reform, blocked
    • Emergency Funding Border Bill, blocked
    • Political Ad Disclosure, blocked
    • Affordable Care Act, GOP voted 67 TIMES (and counting) to repeal it
    • Tax On Companies Shipping Jobs Overseas, blocked
    • Repeal of Don't Act Don't Tell, Blocked MULTIPLE times
    • Healthcare for 9/11 First Responders, blocked
    • Benefits for Homeless Veterans, blocked
    • Oil Spill Liability, blocked
    • Dream Act, blocked
    • Minimum Wage Increase, blocked
    • Unemployment Insurance Extension, Blocked
    • Bill Aimed at Curbing Wage Theft, Blocked
    • Student Loan Refinancing Bill, Blocked
    • Veterans Education, Jobs, and Health Benefits Bill, blocked
    • Employment Non Discrimination Act (which would have made it illegal to discriminate in the hiring of gays), blocked
    • Anti-Rape Amendment, GOP blocked that, and cast some 55 anti women votes for policies that threaten to undermine women's health and defund institutions that provide support for women.
    • Paycheck Fairness Act (that provided for equal pay for women), blocked FOUR TIMES
    • Buffet Rule (which would have required that wealthy 1% to pay the same percentage of their income in taxes that those of the middle class do), blocked
    • GOP obstruction of presidential appointments and judicial nominees, resulting in long term vacancies in judgeships
    • GOP Government Shut Down, in efforts to defund the ACA
    • Planned Parenthood, numerous GOP efforts to undermine operations and obstruct funding for
    • Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, numerous GOP efforts to undermine, obstruct, and obstruct funding for


Dude...we're not talking about the "rightness" of the liberal political platform. We're talking about why, in the past 80 years, there has been no broad upward trend in voter acceptance of that platform in terms of actual votes. By choosing to engage this topic sarcastically or "satirically" you are absolutely demonstrating why winnable voters continue to "vote against their interests" against you.
 

TexanStar

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Posts
10,496
Media
0
Likes
14,978
Points
183
Location
Fort Worth (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Of course. But again, there is a thread about why the GOP is turning people off, so why not one about the Dems. Really crappy graph below that shows the Dem/GOP share of electoral college (top) and popular (bottom) votes from 1924 to 2008.

This is my main reply to the afforementioned GOP thread that I made back in 2014.

"TO the topic at hand, the percentage of Americans who identify as Democrats is only like 1% off from the percentage who identify as Republican, and it's been that way for several years, so I'm not positive what this thread is about.

If it doesn't appeal to people, than neither does the Democratic party (entirely possible, since the percentage of people who identify as independent is higher than both of these).

I think the GOP stance on certain social issues (esp gay marriage) puts them at a general disadvantage in the one national election (president), but for everything else it's not like they're not competetive. They have a majority in the house, they're not unfathomably far from a majority in the Senate, and they have the political clout to brute force their own way through (e.g. refusal to seat judicial apppointees)."


The other thread has a false premise, and so this one does as well. It's mostly tinfoil hat wearers that took it to so many pages
 

jaap_stam

Cherished Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
896
Media
0
Likes
291
Points
98
Location
Eindhoven, Jakarta
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Male
This is my main reply to the afforementioned GOP thread that I made back in 2014.

"TO the topic at hand, the percentage of Americans who identify as Democrats is only like 1% off from the percentage who identify as Republican, and it's been that way for several years, so I'm not positive what this thread is about.

If it doesn't appeal to people, than neither does the Democratic party (entirely possible, since the percentage of people who identify as independent is higher than both of these).

I think the GOP stance on certain social issues (esp gay marriage) puts them at a general disadvantage in the one national election (president), but for everything else it's not like they're not competetive. They have a majority in the house, they're not unfathomably far from a majority in the Senate, and they have the political clout to brute force their own way through (e.g. refusal to seat judicial apppointees)."


The other thread has a false premise, and so this one does as well. It's mostly tinfoil hat wearers that took it to so many pages
Given that neithet party has made headway in total percentage, yet there have been demographic shifts in who votes for whom without eithet major party getting replaced by a third party, its still worth analyzing. I mean, if certain liberal values are so self evidently good, and GOP strategy so transparent, you'd tgink that liberals would eventually devise a strategy to gain a semi permanent advantage. Putting sole blame on GOP trickery and electorate stupidity kind of absolves liberals from any kind of self analysis or strategy improvement, no?
 

TexanStar

Worshipped Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Posts
10,496
Media
0
Likes
14,978
Points
183
Location
Fort Worth (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
if certain liberal values are so self evidently good, and GOP strategy so transparent, you'd tgink that liberals would eventually devise a strategy to gain a semi permanent advantage. Putting sole blame on GOP trickery and electorate stupidity kind of absolves liberals from any kind of self analysis or strategy improvement, no?

I never said that. The other thread is stupid, so using that as a preference to any discussion here would just inherit it.

If you want to start a new thread about some related topic I can give it a read, but both of these threads are just places for the fringe to call eachother names.
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Dude...we're not talking about the "rightness" of the liberal political platform. We're talking about why, in the past 80 years, there has been no broad upward trend in voter acceptance of that platform in terms of actual votes. By choosing to engage this topic sarcastically or "satirically" you are absolutely demonstrating why winnable voters continue to "vote against their interests" against you.

Given that neithet party has made headway in total percentage, yet there have been demographic shifts in who votes for whom without eithet major party getting replaced by a third party, its still worth analyzing. I mean, if certain liberal values are so self evidently good, and GOP strategy so transparent, you'd tgink that liberals would eventually devise a strategy to gain a semi permanent advantage. Putting sole blame on GOP trickery and electorate stupidity kind of absolves liberals from any kind of self analysis or strategy improvement, no?

Well, YOU introduced the thread as an alternative to the other.

Then tried to dictate the course of the discussion via the introduction of your link.

And maybe as a foreigner with no personal interests at stake in this presidential election, you can enjoy the luxury of an examination of how, why, to what degree the Democratic political platform "lost its way" (and I'm not necessarily saying that, by some measures, it HASN'T).


But I'm looking at, IF not the BIGGER picture, a much more IMMEDIATE one. This election.

Therefore I CHOSE (in my initial AND subsequent replies) to use it as a reminder of arguments made by the RIGHT in condemning "liberal" positions and causes, and to REMIND everyone of the positions they've taken AND of their OBSTRUCTIONISM.

CHOSE to DO so because of what is at STAKE in this critical moment, when perhaps the very "soul" of the country may be determined by who gains the presidency.

Furthermore, attacks on so-called liberals and Democrats from the LEFT are (IMO) indicators of the likelihood that SOME who think Democrats aren't/haven't BEEN "progressive" enough will choose to sit this one out. Like many did for the last two congressional elections. As if letting the GOP have it is going to get them any closer to what they want.

Which is EXACTLY why people like jjz, Drifterwood, and those of that ilk DELIGHT in divisions between "liberals" and "progressives" and attacks upon liberals from the left.

No doubt, over the last several weeks, they've been ingesting popcorn a'PLENTY.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: deleted15807
D

deleted15807

Guest
I read ENOUGH of the article, jaap, to get the gist of it. But seeing as how you presented your thread as something "for the sake of parity," I decided to employ that "liberal smugness" to offer up a satirical response based upon some of the arguments that, over time, have been presented herein by critics of "liberals" and "the left"... for the "sake of parity" (or parody?). My prerogative (being the smug liberal b---------- that I apparently AM).

And not just characterizations offered by those from the right, but also from the extreme left as well, while people like Trump talk from all sides of his mouth, spew hate based ideology, and while his right winged supporters unapologetically embrace it ALL.

BTW, glad you mentioned having "a conversation without getting offended at the first sign of criticism of [sic] disagreement." Especially since SOME want to engage in generalizations, assumptions, and over simplifications of their OWN, yet cry foul and "bully" when such positions are questioned or challenged, the same as anyone ELSE'S.

As for what DEMOCRATS TRIED to accomplish during the Obama administration, only to have their efforts blocked and OBSTRUCTED by those VERY same people who "progressives understand" here's a little REMINDER:


    • Recovery and Reinvestment Act, blocked
    • Small Business Job Act, blocked
    • Veterans Jobs Bill, blocked
    • American Jobs Act, blocked
    • Extension to Unemployment Benefits, blocked
    • Wall Street Reform Bill, blocked
    • Immigration Reform, blocked
    • Emergency Funding Border Bill, blocked
    • Political Ad Disclosure, blocked
    • Affordable Care Act, GOP voted 67 TIMES (and counting) to repeal it
    • Tax On Companies Shipping Jobs Overseas, blocked
    • Repeal of Don't Act Don't Tell, Blocked MULTIPLE times
    • Healthcare for 9/11 First Responders, blocked
    • Benefits for Homeless Veterans, blocked
    • Oil Spill Liability, blocked
    • Dream Act, blocked
    • Minimum Wage Increase, blocked
    • Unemployment Insurance Extension, Blocked
    • Bill Aimed at Curbing Wage Theft, Blocked
    • Student Loan Refinancing Bill, Blocked
    • Veterans Education, Jobs, and Health Benefits Bill, blocked
    • Employment Non Discrimination Act (which would have made it illegal to discriminate in the hiring of gays), blocked
    • Anti-Rape Amendment, GOP blocked that, and cast some 55 anti women votes for policies that threaten to undermine women's health and defund institutions that provide support for women.
    • Paycheck Fairness Act (that provided for equal pay for women), blocked FOUR TIMES
    • Buffet Rule (which would have required that wealthy 1% to pay the same percentage of their income in taxes that those of the middle class do), blocked
    • GOP obstruction of presidential appointments and judicial nominees, resulting in long term vacancies in judgeships
    • GOP Government Shut Down, in efforts to defund the ACA
    • Planned Parenthood, numerous GOP efforts to undermine operations and obstruct funding for
    • Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, numerous GOP efforts to undermine, obstruct, and obstruct funding for



++ and what amazes me about the "we haven't done enough" crowd is how lucky you are the ATM still works and the banks and the economy we know it hasn't collapsed. John Boehner is out simply because he thought more of the country than to let it go over the fiscal cliff and made a deal with the democrats twice to keep anarchy from reigning down on us(government shuttered and bankrupt). And we are talking anarchists who think Washington needs to be blown up. The hell with liberal and progressive hopes and wet dreams. And now they hate Paul Ryan. We are lucky we're not at the bottom of the North Atlantic spooning with the Titanic.
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
++ and what amazes me about the "we haven't done enough" crowd is how lucky you are the ATM still works and the banks and the economy we know it hasn't collapsed. John Boehner is out simply because he thought more of the country than to let it go over the fiscal cliff and made a deal with the democrats twice to keep anarchy from reigning down on us(government shuttered and bankrupt). And we are talking anarchists who think Washington needs to be blown up. The hell with liberal and progressive hopes and wet dreams. And now they hate Paul Ryan. We are lucky we're not at the bottom of the North Atlantic spooning with the Titanic.

Fact is, Sargon, I believe many (not ALL) of the ideas and principals of those further left are quite valid and NOT without merit, and I have said so. I've also said I believe that the Democratic party, generally, goes more so in the direction their constituency takes it, rather than where their leaders CHOOSE to take it. My contention being that those seeking change to the direction in which the party moves should do so from within, via participation in the process, via representation, and via the power of their VOTE.
 

jaap_stam

Cherished Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
896
Media
0
Likes
291
Points
98
Location
Eindhoven, Jakarta
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Male
Well, YOU introduced the thread as an alternative to the other.

Then tried to dictate the course of the discussion via the introduction of your link.


As the OP, isn't that my prerogative? To introduce a specific discussion?

And maybe as a foreigner with no personal interests at stake in this presidential election, you can enjoy the luxury of an examination of how, why, to what degree the Democratic political platform "lost its way" (and I'm not necessarily saying that, by some measures, it HASN'T).


A pretty disingenuous argument, when you consider the extent to which US policy shapes the economic conditions across the globe, particularly in developing nations like where my parents are from. The whole world has a personal stake in the outcome of these power struggles.



But I'm looking at, IF not the BIGGER picture, a much more IMMEDIATE one. This election.

Well, to win an election, you must have votes. And it's clear, by your demographic focus (ie Trump voters are "uneducated" "racists") you miss the fact that psychographics are becoming much more pivotal determinants of voting patterns. They may look the same to some liberals who assume blacks, latinos, and women vote in blocs and will continue to do so because "libs protects rights" and "voting left is in their 'best interest'". But we are already seeing the psychograhpic split of the female vote in which groups of women support Bernie vs Hillary. Similar things are happening across black and latino groups of voters.

Therefore I CHOSE (in my initial AND subsequent replies) to use it as a reminder of arguments made by the RIGHT in condemning "liberal" positions and causes, and to REMIND everyone of the positions they've taken AND of their OBSTRUCTIONISM.

CHOSE to DO so because of what is at STAKE in this critical moment, when perhaps the very "soul" of the country may be determined by who gains the presidency.

Furthermore, attacks on so-called liberals and Democrats from the LEFT are (IMO) indicators of the likelihood that SOME who think Democrats aren't/haven't BEEN "progressive" enough will choose to sit this one out. Like many did for the last two congressional elections. As if letting the GOP have it is going to get them any closer to what they want.


An outcome functionally no different that dropping winnable votes because you couldn't be bothered to actually understand the voters you're trying to court

Which is EXACTLY why people like jjz, Drifterwood, and those of that ilk DELIGHT in divisions between "liberals" and "progressives" and attacks upon liberals from the left.

No doubt, over the last several weeks, they've been ingesting popcorn a'PLENTY.

I don't get it. I recall your giddiness at the prospect of a contested GOP convention and party implosion. You just sound like a sore loser now the shoe's on the other foot. What is the saying? If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
 

jaap_stam

Cherished Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
896
Media
0
Likes
291
Points
98
Location
Eindhoven, Jakarta
Sexuality
Unsure
Gender
Male
I never said that. The other thread is stupid, so using that as a preference to any discussion here would just inherit it.

If you want to start a new thread about some related topic I can give it a read, but both of these threads are just places for the fringe to call eachother names.

My understanding of the original premise of the first one was to understand where the GOP went wrong. Kind of an objective analysis. I thought it would be interesting to explore from the other side as well. I stumbled on the article I posted, and realized that it was the first really introspective article about the American left that I've read in years and wanted to share.
 

tripod

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Posts
6,686
Media
14
Likes
1,893
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Listen liberals, if you can't find the decency to read the entire article with the presence of mind required for understanding...

... then every single character you are typing in this thread does nothing but set up a big fucking strawman that allows you to have the kind of argument YOU would rather have.

You aren't responding to the article, just tilting at windmills with the same tired old kneejerk response of circling the wagons, admitting you did nothing wrong and carrying on like usual... THAT is what the article is about. It's about your smug sense of entitlement to being the "good guy" and the "smartest guys in the room".

Despite the obvious reality that liberals aren't "the smartest guys in the room" and by no means are the "good guys", they feel a sense of entitlement to these two distinctions... this sense of entitlement eventually leads to overconfidence and hubris.

Just to refresh anyone's memory... overconfidence and hubris are tragic mistakes.

Keep on running around shouting DNC slogans... it's making you liberals look like idiots and reinforced every word of that article.

If you had ANY fucking balls, you would read the entire article with an open mind and THEN, you can figure out what you do or don't agree with and respond with an intelligent and thoughtful post that quotes the article in question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mercurygirl