|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 11 2016 13:59 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 13:43 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 11 2016 12:42 xDaunt wrote:
The more important point is this: Trump fought to win this election. And by fighting so hard to win it, he rallied a lot of people to his cause. I was tired of all of the hand-wringing pansies that the GOP kept trotting out to fight the democrats and leftist interests. Trump is the first legitimate fighter that the republicans have had since Reagan. Donald Trump Is A Fighter + Show Spoiler +Re: Reagan.. ."A Time For Choosing" is the greatest political speech I've ever heard. EDIT: actually make that 2nd best. P.E.T.'s "just watch me" is #1 because he was being peppered with questions; was thoroughly unprepared and just spoke off the cuff. Pierre Elliot Trudeau was a great politician. Probably one of the most popular in Canada's history. He had a lot of good and bad, but he was very good at speaking and had strong convictions with the safety of Canada and the best for everyone at heart. I think his biggest misstep was the white paper, but the intention was understandable with that one - the way it was done though not so good. You can see how much P.E.T cared about the indigenous people of Canada through his son. Sadly the reality of the world makes it really hard to help them effectively without misgivings, its just way too complicated an issue to fix in any way without a 20 or 30 year plan to be honest. Brian Mulroney was probably the best conservative in modern Canadian history though. He did so many important things for this country as well. Alas this is US politics not Canadian 
Reagan, Carter, P.E.T., Joe Clark, and Ed Broadbent are mega geniuses compared to the gang at the top of the major political parties in the US and Canada today. oh how far we have fallen.
|
+ Show Spoiler +FREEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOMMMMMMM!!!!!
Oh man the analysis here has been oh so bad, save a few on either side.
Not sure what to pick apart first...
Let's start with a surprise, Donald Trump did not win because of racism, people pushing that are doing what Republicans are accusing you of and making it worse and displaying you clearly don't get why she lost.
Hillary lost white voters who voted for Obama, if racism was why they voted for Trump, they wouldn't have voted for Obama in the first place. That's not to say racist people didn't vote Trump, or that the larger cloud of racism hovering over our country didn't play a role, but blaming this loss on racists is lazy, dishonest, and counter productive, so stop please.
And since I suspect people will bring up/ask the questions about the other stuff people got so wrong by topic I'll wait on that and mention Trump's tweet.
The most upsetting thing for me and many other people on the left isn't him (or most/all? of the conservatives here) not saying anything about people like Clark calling for torches if he lost. It's how right he is about a group of protesters, that even I seriously question.
If people were wondering, no, it's not Bernie supporters out there, those are Hillary "supporters". The righteous ones would be out there regardless of who won, the rest should go home and figure out why they didn't work harder for the only candidate who wanted to fix this mess.
EDIT: The media screwed this all up so bad, and now they are covering the holy hell out of these protests meanwhile people are getting all sorts of abused at the NODAPL protests by private security and police and no one pays any attention. I'm thoroughly disappointed in the immediate postmortem of Hillary's candidacy.
Silver lining, this is a great opportunity to rebuild the DNC. Unsurprisingly, Hillary's camp is still in denial and thinking Dean is an option to lead the DNC.
|
Also I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding about the so called loonies on both sides. Like as a left leaning person I find the extreme left loonies unbearable and insufferable for various reasons depending on their specific type of behaviour (the more illicit of which is also pretty deplorable)... But I still generally share their underlying views or either at least respect them or find them harmless views.
So when people say things like well both sides have loonies or the left has loonies too... It's not at all comparable. I accept how annoying those people are and understand that if you sit under the same umbrella you have to be complicit with their beliefs (even in the case of terrible actions you disvow). So you can see why its a big deal when people point to literal racists and they get merely dismissed as both sides having loonies.
@ above yeah the DAPL under coverage is pretty awful.
|
On November 11 2016 14:09 GreenHorizons wrote:+ Show Spoiler +FREEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOMMMMMMM!!!!! Oh man the analysis here has been oh so bad, save a few on either side. Not sure what to pick apart first... Let's start with a surprise, Donald Trump did not win because of racism, people pushing that are doing what Republicans are accusing you of and making it worse and displaying you clearly don't get why she lost. Hillary lost white voters who voted for Obama, if racism was why they voted for Trump, they wouldn't have voted for Obama in the first place. That's not to say racist people didn't vote Trump, or that the larger cloud of racism hovering over our country didn't play a role, but blaming this loss on racists is lazy, dishonest, and counter productive, so stop please. And since I suspect people will bring up/ask the questions about the other stuff people got so wrong by topic I'll wait on that and mention Trump's tweet. The most upsetting thing for me and many other people on the left isn't him (or most/all? of the conservatives here) not saying anything about people like Clark calling for torches if he lost. It's how right he is about a group of protesters, that even I seriously question. If people were wondering, no, it's not Bernie supporters out there, those are Hillary "supporters". The righteous ones would be out there regardless of who won, the rest should go home and figure out why they didn't work harder for the only candidate who wanted to fix this mess. EDIT: The media screwed this all up so bad, and now they are covering the holy hell out of these protests meanwhile people are getting all sorts of abused at the NODAPL protests by private security and police and no one pays any attention. I'm thoroughly disappointed in the immediate postmortem of Hillary's candidacy. Silver lining, this is a great opportunity to rebuild the DNC. Unsurprisingly, Hillary's camp is still in denial and thinking Dean is an option to lead the DNC.
I really hope you guys take back your party. The entrenched power structure is vulnerable now that Hillary's toast, and the only bright lights are from the next generation. DWS gone so there's no big established DNC head calling the shots with stature, Tim Kaine's a nonstarter, Bernie might do another campaign but not party apparatus and message from the front. Best of luck; I'd rather fight principled and honest Dems than the Clinton gang and their media and party sycophants.
|
On November 11 2016 14:23 Logo wrote:
Also I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding about the so called loonies on both sides. Like as a left leaning person I find the extreme left loonies unbearable and insufferable for various reasons depending on their specific type of behaviour (the more illicit of which is also pretty deplorable)... But I still generally share their underlying views or either at least respect them or find them harmless views.
So when people say things like well both sides have loonies or the left has loonies too... It's not at all comparable. I accept how annoying those people are and understand that if you sit under the same umbrella you have to be complicit with their beliefs (even in the case of terrible actions you disvow). So you can see why its a big deal when people point to literal racists and they get merely dismissed as both sides having loonies.
Yes, it's absurd also to suggest that Republicans didn't benefit from racism this election, Margret Hoover did a decent job on CNN last night. If Republicans want to honestly move forward they have to own that racism isn't 4 guys in a pick up truck, it's lightly sprinkled all over the country with some parts more heavily seasoned than others. Trump appealed to them in a variety of ways.
I've never thought of Trump as a racist (in the sense of the term most imagine) though, I've long been of the opinion that Trump is a "Trump supremacist" which leaves room for whatever ism is popular. If Trump thought he could win appealing to Black nationalists he'd have done that too, it wasn't about the racism for Trump, it was about not caring if he had to be racist, sexist, xenophobic, etc, to win/gain more followers.
Trump accurately read from the beginning that the Democrats planned on putting up the most hated candidate they had ever run, and Republicans planned on putting another Bush in office (speaking of their respective establishments).
He also accurately read that he didn't have a shot as a Democrat billionaire, and that Republican populism was the strongest (and empty) lane to the white house.
Trump didn't have any ideas of his own, all he knew how to do was read his audience and say what they wanted to hear. His rhetoric isn't a result of his own personal animosities, it's just what Republican's base (the most vocal) have wanted from candidates like McCain and Romney, but they refused (or in Romney's case was also just terrible at it).
McCain and Romney, both had that part of their brain that made them hesitate when they were going to say something they know they don't even believe, Trump had no such filter, and Republicans ate it up.
On November 11 2016 14:33 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 14:09 GreenHorizons wrote:+ Show Spoiler +FREEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOMMMMMMM!!!!! Oh man the analysis here has been oh so bad, save a few on either side. Not sure what to pick apart first... Let's start with a surprise, Donald Trump did not win because of racism, people pushing that are doing what Republicans are accusing you of and making it worse and displaying you clearly don't get why she lost. Hillary lost white voters who voted for Obama, if racism was why they voted for Trump, they wouldn't have voted for Obama in the first place. That's not to say racist people didn't vote Trump, or that the larger cloud of racism hovering over our country didn't play a role, but blaming this loss on racists is lazy, dishonest, and counter productive, so stop please. And since I suspect people will bring up/ask the questions about the other stuff people got so wrong by topic I'll wait on that and mention Trump's tweet. The most upsetting thing for me and many other people on the left isn't him (or most/all? of the conservatives here) not saying anything about people like Clark calling for torches if he lost. It's how right he is about a group of protesters, that even I seriously question. If people were wondering, no, it's not Bernie supporters out there, those are Hillary "supporters". The righteous ones would be out there regardless of who won, the rest should go home and figure out why they didn't work harder for the only candidate who wanted to fix this mess. EDIT: The media screwed this all up so bad, and now they are covering the holy hell out of these protests meanwhile people are getting all sorts of abused at the NODAPL protests by private security and police and no one pays any attention. I'm thoroughly disappointed in the immediate postmortem of Hillary's candidacy. Silver lining, this is a great opportunity to rebuild the DNC. Unsurprisingly, Hillary's camp is still in denial and thinking Dean is an option to lead the DNC. I really hope you guys take back your party. The entrenched power structure is vulnerable now that Hillary's toast, and the only bright lights are from the next generation. DWS gone so there's no big established DNC head calling the shots with stature, Tim Kaine's a nonstarter, Bernie might do another campaign but not party apparatus and message from the front. Best of luck; I'd rather fight principled and honest Dems than the Clinton gang and their media and party sycophants.
I just ripped into Republicans a bit too but I do appreciate it, and do hope that like I can admit there was a democratic party that ignored wide swaths of people devastated/ignored by Democratic policy and it's not just racist misogynists that voted Trump in, hopefully your side can admit that there's wide swaths of voters that Republicans have ignored, and devastated as well and it's not just the worst examples of people on the left that supported Bernie (or Hillary in the general).
And hopefully people on both sides can admit that both candidates made appeals to some of the worst supporters they had. Hell I'll even throw Bernie in there.
|
|
|
I think its just Arizona that has finished. MI and NH are still at large
|
The same token there GH the left needs to learn how to talk to white men and recognize that racism sexism and all the rest isn't a willful act by people who disagree with them on those subjects. It lives and breaths in a culture that struggles but steady changes to the will of the people. Trying to accelerate the wheel by generating hate and division helps no one.
I really wish the republican party didn't include the reactionary right but at the same token I don't see how they can compete in a world of third way clinton-esque politics without them.
|
On November 11 2016 14:23 Logo wrote:
I accept how annoying those people are and understand that if you sit under the same umbrella you have to be complicit with their beliefs (even in the case of terrible actions you disvow).
Disagree strongly. While some of us do choose our umbrellas, a lot of us choose our position and get annoyed when an unsavory umbrella drifts over us. And then you want to hold us responsible for whomever's on the other side of the umbrella?
|
I think the most hilarious thing i've read is people saying the electoral college will actually vote against trump and elect hillary
|
The DNC needs to focus on winning state houses and state legislatures in 2020 to undo gerrymadnering with out doing it themselves and teaching millennials that not voting or voting third party is the same thing as voting republican. And they really need to make people realize that Berniecrats aren't electable. Taking the party way to the left is just going to lose elections. Honestly Clinton going high against bernie left the false impression that he was electable, leading to a whole bunch of angry protest votes or non votes. If she'd run adds about Bernie thinking all women have gang rape fantasies or that abstinence causes cancer, I highly doubt we'd have president Trump or people thinking that Bernie would have won if we did. Progressives didn't show up to defend Obama's legacy or the Supreme Court, conservatives showed up to kill it and hold the supreme court. In the end thats what did this.
|
|
|
On November 11 2016 15:27 plasmidghost wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 15:11 arb wrote:
I think the most hilarious thing i've read is people saying the electoral college will actually vote against trump and elect hillary Probably the same reason people still held out hope for so long that Bernie would get the nomination
I mean we did have that Bernie bro elector from Washington say he wouldn't cast his electoral vote for Clinton, and technically speaking he was right, the popular vote isn't always binding, but that would be a bigger disaster than a Trump presidency
|
On November 11 2016 15:13 Jaaaaasper wrote:
The DNC needs to focus on winning state houses and state legislatures in 2020 to undo gerrymadnering with out doing it themselves and teaching millennials that not voting or voting third party is the same thing as voting republican. And they really need to make people realize that Berniecrats aren't electable. Taking the party way to the left is just going to lose elections. Honestly Clinton going high against bernie left the false impression that he was electable, leading to a whole bunch of angry protest votes or non votes. If she'd run adds about Bernie thinking all women have gang rape fantasies or that abstinence causes cancer, I highly doubt we'd have president Trump or people thinking that Bernie would have won if we did. Progressives didn't show up to defend Obama's legacy or the Supreme Court, conservatives showed up to kill it and hold the supreme court. In the end thats what did this.
That's really the only path for Dems in the next 2-4 years. Dems want to cement their house majority by gemandering in their favor. But yeah, Repubs had their moments of somber in 2008, and was able to really change congress in 2010 moving forward, since Obama spent all of his political capital too early by ramming through ACA with their congressional majority before they lost it in 2010.
Fortunately for them, 2020 is an election year, whereas 2010 was a midterm year, so turnout should be in their favor, especially since they claim that trump will crater, so we will wait and see.
|
Honestly the fact that people think the DNC is more guilty of making the sausage than the RNC is pretty funny. I'm a political cynic, but I didn't see anything shocking on the DNC emails. Also Megan Kelly is saying that Trump was also tipped off to debate questions, which just confirms (for me) that politics is a messy bussiness and most people probably don't want to think about how it works.
(source on Trump being tipped off)
|
On November 11 2016 15:39 Mysticesper wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 15:13 Jaaaaasper wrote:
The DNC needs to focus on winning state houses and state legislatures in 2020 to undo gerrymadnering with out doing it themselves and teaching millennials that not voting or voting third party is the same thing as voting republican. And they really need to make people realize that Berniecrats aren't electable. Taking the party way to the left is just going to lose elections. Honestly Clinton going high against bernie left the false impression that he was electable, leading to a whole bunch of angry protest votes or non votes. If she'd run adds about Bernie thinking all women have gang rape fantasies or that abstinence causes cancer, I highly doubt we'd have president Trump or people thinking that Bernie would have won if we did. Progressives didn't show up to defend Obama's legacy or the Supreme Court, conservatives showed up to kill it and hold the supreme court. In the end thats what did this. That's really the only path for Dems in the next 2-4 years. Dems want to cement their house majority by gemandering in their favor. But yeah, Repubs had their moments of somber in 2008, and was able to really change congress in 2010 moving forward, since Obama spent all of his political capital too early by ramming through ACA with their congressional majority before they lost it in 2010. Fortunately for them, 2020 is an election year, whereas 2010 was a midterm year, so turnout should be in their favor, especially since they claim that trump will crater, so we will wait and see.
What exactly do you mean by gerrymandering in their favor when they just lost the electoral college but won the popular vote? I doubt that they could do much more than attempt to even it out in four years.
Also, I really hope the nomination of Myron Ebell is a joke or false.
|
they need to win state legislatures who rewrite the districts after the 2020 census. Thats how the repubs did it in 2010. You got some funky ass districts in states like South Carolina (or north) and the like because of that. It would be hard to gain control of the house without winning state legislatures first,.
|
On November 11 2016 15:13 Jaaaaasper wrote:
The DNC needs to focus on winning state houses and state legislatures in 2020 to undo gerrymadnering with out doing it themselves and teaching millennials that not voting or voting third party is the same thing as voting republican. And they really need to make people realize that Berniecrats aren't electable. Taking the party way to the left is just going to lose elections. Honestly Clinton going high against bernie left the false impression that he was electable, leading to a whole bunch of angry protest votes or non votes. If she'd run adds about Bernie thinking all women have gang rape fantasies or that abstinence causes cancer, I highly doubt we'd have president Trump or people thinking that Bernie would have won if we did. Progressives didn't show up to defend Obama's legacy or the Supreme Court, conservatives showed up to kill it and hold the supreme court. In the end thats what did this.
I agree, but they need a plan for 2018 too so they don't lose even more at the national level. Berniecrats are perfectly electable if we just nominate them, for Democrats they will always be closer to getting what they want from them than the Republican (save some specific areas).
Hillary's strategy was to appeal to centrist Republicans, that failed disastrously, the lesson isn't to move further away from the progressives.
Your examples of when progressives didn't show up, leads me to believe you still don't understand why.
Finally, you mention that stupid article from the 70's practically every time you mention Bernie. You know that came out right from the start and even the Hillary sexist brigade thought it was stupid to talk about. Did you ever actually read it yourself or are you just assuming it was terrible?
|
On November 11 2016 15:53 Mysticesper wrote:
they need to win state legislatures who rewrite the districts after the 2020 census. Thats how the repubs did it in 2010. You got some funky ass districts in states like South Carolina (or north) and the like because of that. It would be hard to gain control of the house without winning state legislatures first,.
The reason the Dems will continue to lose the House isn't because of gerrymandering, it's because 90% of the Dems live within a small radius of each other. The Dems are so tilted to large cities that they've pretty much isolated themselves from 90% of the country. Should look at a distribution on a map sometime.
|
Even this year Democrats won the popular vote, they don't have to do abusrd gerrymandering to have a serious wave effect when fixed districts take effect. They do need to get young voters to the polls with out going far enough to the left to lose votes from the center. That means less Bernie and more populists with workable policies.
On November 11 2016 15:57 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 15:53 Mysticesper wrote:
they need to win state legislatures who rewrite the districts after the 2020 census. Thats how the repubs did it in 2010. You got some funky ass districts in states like South Carolina (or north) and the like because of that. It would be hard to gain control of the house without winning state legislatures first,. The reason the Dems will continue to lose the House isn't because of gerrymandering, it's because 90% of the Dems live within a small radius of each other. The Dems are so tilted to large cities that they've pretty much isolated themselves from 90% of the country. Should look at a distribution on a map sometime.
Districts are meant to be based on population, not geography. Thats why Alaska has fewer districts than Maryland
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
