|
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 February 12 2017 02:45 Tachion wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 01:58 LegalLord wrote:
She was lucky that every other day, her opponent did something that should have disqualified him from being president. I'm still amazed by this part here personally. When 2020 rolls around, will he still get special treatment?
He gets no special treatment anymore. Starting not in 2020, but starting November 9, 2016.
If he fucks up, that's all on him. Hillary Clinton's campaign is no longer relevant here. It's worth bringing up HRC if people ask "how did you elect this loser" but beyond that, everything is on him and his administration.
|
On February 11 2017 12:17 Plansix wrote:
Apparently there are numerous reports of ICE going door to door in south Texas asking for people papers and detaining people who can't produce them.
Why is it always Friday? Is that Trumps "shit on brown people" day?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(propaganda)
This page can probably explain. Basically it's an old PR trick when there's a story you think will damage you to put it out right before the weekend to avoid too much press about it. Didn't seem to work for the travel ban EO, because it's still in the news, but maybe it'll work this time.
|
On February 12 2017 02:24 LegalLord wrote:
Fundamental liberal values are losing ground across most of the Western world - the US among them. That's been the trend for at least the past decade and it's not ending any time soon.
What fundamental liberal values are you referring to, that have been losing ground over the past decade in the western world?
|
On February 12 2017 03:01 oneofthem wrote:
what if 'voters' or 'you' have factually wrong or imbalanced beliefs?
That is expected and should be assumed, you think the general voting population in some sort of rational based gods who read the policy list of each candidate and then ignore the rest? They are just average people like you and me who have their own biases and imbalanced beliefs.
|
On February 12 2017 03:03 Plansix wrote:
The primaries were rigged in Clinton favor(forget several million votes), so the whole "earn peoples votes" argument doesn't apply here.
Primaries aren't really fairly measured in terms of votes, in that much of it is decided well before any votes are cast by whom the party coalesces around. And the party coalesced around Clinton so very hard, harder than they have coalesced around anyone before. The DNC leaks show that high-ranking DNC folk wanted Hillary and were actively seeking to undermine Sanders.
Would she have won in a "fair" contest between herself and Sanders? I would not say that the chances are poor. She was the more "grounded" candidate, the problematic aspects of her candidacy aside. But the progressives were given every reason to think that she saw them as little more than leftist distractions to her desire for a rightward shift, and some of them decided to "break rank" in the general, leading to a loss.
|
On February 12 2017 03:03 Plansix wrote:
I think the current irritation is that the super progressives take the "we told you so" high ground, while also saying Clinton didn't earn their votes. The primaries were rigged in Clinton favor(forget several million votes), so the whole "earn peoples votes" argument doesn't apply here. The discussion is circular, frustrating and will not matter a year from now.
Well, we did tell you so, so we do have the high ground. Hopefully we're going to use this high ground to destroy incorrect arguments like "a centrist has a better chance of getting elected by default because America", rather than just to assert superiority with no purpose. We can be wrong too, and I'm sure you have examples where we have been wrong. It's never fun to be wrong, I understand that, and especially not when that caused orange to be the new black, but at some point we're going to have to move on from this and we need to move in the right direction.
|
On February 12 2017 03:11 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2017 12:17 Plansix wrote:
Apparently there are numerous reports of ICE going door to door in south Texas asking for people papers and detaining people who can't produce them.
Why is it always Friday? Is that Trumps "shit on brown people" day? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(propaganda)This page can probably explain. Basically it's an old PR trick when there's a story you think will damage you to put it out right before the weekend to avoid too much press about it. Didn't seem to work for the travel ban EO, because it's still in the news, but maybe it'll work this time.
Likely will sadly. There are large sections of the country have no exposure to immigrants, let alone the complex communities of working illegal immigrants. They will just see them as criminals who broke the law. The immigration political football is a problem we will never solve.
|
On February 12 2017 03:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 02:24 LegalLord wrote:
Fundamental liberal values are losing ground across most of the Western world - the US among them. That's been the trend for at least the past decade and it's not ending any time soon. What fundamental liberal values are you referring to, that have been losing ground over the past decade in the western world?
The values of the "liberal order" that make up the core of what Hillary actually seems to deeply care about. Free trade, active American FP, "Western values" and the like.
|
On February 12 2017 03:11 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2017 12:17 Plansix wrote:
Apparently there are numerous reports of ICE going door to door in south Texas asking for people papers and detaining people who can't produce them.
Why is it always Friday? Is that Trumps "shit on brown people" day? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(propaganda)This page can probably explain. Basically it's an old PR trick when there's a story you think will damage you to put it out right before the weekend to avoid too much press about it. Didn't seem to work for the travel ban EO, because it's still in the news, but maybe it'll work this time.
An important part of why Friday makes it better is that the stock market is closed over the weekend. Don't know to what extent that applies to immigration-related matters but that will give a few days for people to think it over before the markets react.
|
On February 12 2017 03:16 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 03:03 Plansix wrote:
I think the current irritation is that the super progressives take the "we told you so" high ground, while also saying Clinton didn't earn their votes. The primaries were rigged in Clinton favor(forget several million votes), so the whole "earn peoples votes" argument doesn't apply here. The discussion is circular, frustrating and will not matter a year from now. Well, we did tell you so, so we do have the high ground. Hopefully we're going to use this high ground to destroy incorrect arguments like "a centrist has a better chance of getting elected by default because America", rather than just to assert superiority with no purpose. We can be wrong too, and I'm sure you have examples where we have been wrong. It's never fun to be wrong, I understand that, and especially not when that caused orange to be the new black, but at some point we're going to have to move on from this and we need to move in the right direction.
But you need the centrist votes to win. Do you think you are going to get them by talking down to centrist? I understand that it is the default state of liberals to talk down to Republicans, but I don't think its going to be any more effective on middle of the road democrats.
I get the joy of being right, but at some point bury the hatchet.
|
On February 12 2017 02:57 Nebuchad wrote:
You know, if I hadn't seen this forum I would think that the notion that people attempt to blame something else than Clinton for Clinton losing to Trump was just progressive propaganda.
You are not owed any votes. Not even for being objectively better than your opponent. Every vote that you don't get is a vote that you failed to get. It doesn't matter that the people who didn't vote for you or voted against you made a mistake based on their own interest (and they did). It's still your fault.
This is a basic idea that is understood just about everywhere. You are responsible for the votes you get. And I'm not saying that from a bernieorbust point of view, I did argue that you should vote for Clinton against Trump as a leftist cause, you know, I'm able to observe reality; that has consistently been my point of view as soon as Bernie lost to her. Now that we're here, you just need to snap out of this cause you're not learning the lessons that you should be learning.
Clearly this is the best mindset when campaigning or trying to improve your campaigning, but outside of that context it's frankly rather horrifying because it completely strips the voters of any form of agency or responsibility for their actions.
|
Maybe, the US is in fact not less left than europe, maybe the normal left in the us just didnt have a voice? It tried with obama and he dissapointed... maybe there is a sizeable real left in the US that is just fed up enough to call bullshit when they get served bullshit.
|
On February 12 2017 03:24 ThaddeusK wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 02:57 Nebuchad wrote:
You know, if I hadn't seen this forum I would think that the notion that people attempt to blame something else than Clinton for Clinton losing to Trump was just progressive propaganda.
You are not owed any votes. Not even for being objectively better than your opponent. Every vote that you don't get is a vote that you failed to get. It doesn't matter that the people who didn't vote for you or voted against you made a mistake based on their own interest (and they did). It's still your fault.
This is a basic idea that is understood just about everywhere. You are responsible for the votes you get. And I'm not saying that from a bernieorbust point of view, I did argue that you should vote for Clinton against Trump as a leftist cause, you know, I'm able to observe reality; that has consistently been my point of view as soon as Bernie lost to her. Now that we're here, you just need to snap out of this cause you're not learning the lessons that you should be learning. Clearly this is the best mindset when campaigning or trying to improve your campaigning, but outside of that context it's frankly rather horrifying because it completely strips the voters of any form of agency or responsibility for their actions.
You, as the candidate, are responsible for your own success. Blaming "the people" doesn't make you a winner.
|
On February 12 2017 03:26 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 03:24 ThaddeusK wrote:On February 12 2017 02:57 Nebuchad wrote:
You know, if I hadn't seen this forum I would think that the notion that people attempt to blame something else than Clinton for Clinton losing to Trump was just progressive propaganda.
You are not owed any votes. Not even for being objectively better than your opponent. Every vote that you don't get is a vote that you failed to get. It doesn't matter that the people who didn't vote for you or voted against you made a mistake based on their own interest (and they did). It's still your fault.
This is a basic idea that is understood just about everywhere. You are responsible for the votes you get. And I'm not saying that from a bernieorbust point of view, I did argue that you should vote for Clinton against Trump as a leftist cause, you know, I'm able to observe reality; that has consistently been my point of view as soon as Bernie lost to her. Now that we're here, you just need to snap out of this cause you're not learning the lessons that you should be learning. Clearly this is the best mindset when campaigning or trying to improve your campaigning, but outside of that context it's frankly rather horrifying because it completely strips the voters of any form of agency or responsibility for their actions. You, as the candidate, are responsible for your own success. Blaming "the people" doesn't make you a winner.
Perhaps, but as an observer of the american form of government I think the people should be responsible for their actions.
|
On February 12 2017 03:20 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 03:11 ChristianS wrote:On February 11 2017 12:17 Plansix wrote:
Apparently there are numerous reports of ICE going door to door in south Texas asking for people papers and detaining people who can't produce them.
Why is it always Friday? Is that Trumps "shit on brown people" day? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(propaganda)This page can probably explain. Basically it's an old PR trick when there's a story you think will damage you to put it out right before the weekend to avoid too much press about it. Didn't seem to work for the travel ban EO, because it's still in the news, but maybe it'll work this time. An important part of why Friday makes it better is that the stock market is closed over the weekend. Don't know to what extent that applies to immigration-related matters but that will give a few days for people to think it over before the markets react.
Don't know what market effect I'd expect, but it does seem like a lot of news sources either don't update or update less over the weekend. TPM, for instance, doesn't seem to put up new stories unless something big happens - I get the impression that's just Josh Marshall is just deciding case-by-case whether it's worth interrupting his weekend.
By the way, have people who are following the DNC chair race listened to Marshall's interviews with 3 candidates for the chair? He put them out on his usually-paywalled podcast, but made the episodes free because the DNC chair race is important.
|
On February 12 2017 03:16 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 03:03 Plansix wrote:
I think the current irritation is that the super progressives take the "we told you so" high ground, while also saying Clinton didn't earn their votes. The primaries were rigged in Clinton favor(forget several million votes), so the whole "earn peoples votes" argument doesn't apply here. The discussion is circular, frustrating and will not matter a year from now. Well, we did tell you so, so we do have the high ground. Hopefully we're going to use this high ground to destroy incorrect arguments like "a centrist has a better chance of getting elected by default because America", rather than just to assert superiority with no purpose. We can be wrong too, and I'm sure you have examples where we have been wrong. It's never fun to be wrong, I understand that, and especially not when that caused orange to be the new black, but at some point we're going to have to move on from this and we need to move in the right direction.
You're assuming that just because Hillary lost, she was less electable than Bernie. The latter does not follow from the former. We simply have no idea how Bernie would have done. Small consolation is that he could not have done worse. But what-if scenarios are really pointless here.
Bernie list the primaries, which were definitely unfair, which is a crying shame and the DNC should fix that, and try to repair the damage that did. But standing on your high ground and gloating, is both unfounded and rather silly.
|
On February 12 2017 03:21 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 03:16 Nebuchad wrote:On February 12 2017 03:03 Plansix wrote:
I think the current irritation is that the super progressives take the "we told you so" high ground, while also saying Clinton didn't earn their votes. The primaries were rigged in Clinton favor(forget several million votes), so the whole "earn peoples votes" argument doesn't apply here. The discussion is circular, frustrating and will not matter a year from now. Well, we did tell you so, so we do have the high ground. Hopefully we're going to use this high ground to destroy incorrect arguments like "a centrist has a better chance of getting elected by default because America", rather than just to assert superiority with no purpose. We can be wrong too, and I'm sure you have examples where we have been wrong. It's never fun to be wrong, I understand that, and especially not when that caused orange to be the new black, but at some point we're going to have to move on from this and we need to move in the right direction. But you need the centrist votes to win. Do you think you are going to get them by talking down to centrist? I understand that it is the default state of liberals to talk down to Republicans, but I don't think its going to be any more effective on middle of the road democrats. I get the joy of being right, but at some point bury the hatchet.
See this is a conversation where TM and oneofthem are explaining why Trump has been caused not by Clinton but by the evil leftists. And when I react to this clearly incorrect belief, I'm told that I should instead bury the hatchet. That doesn't sound like burying the hatchet to me. That just sounds like accepting that you're the one with the hatchet.
|
On February 12 2017 03:29 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 03:16 Nebuchad wrote:On February 12 2017 03:03 Plansix wrote:
I think the current irritation is that the super progressives take the "we told you so" high ground, while also saying Clinton didn't earn their votes. The primaries were rigged in Clinton favor(forget several million votes), so the whole "earn peoples votes" argument doesn't apply here. The discussion is circular, frustrating and will not matter a year from now. Well, we did tell you so, so we do have the high ground. Hopefully we're going to use this high ground to destroy incorrect arguments like "a centrist has a better chance of getting elected by default because America", rather than just to assert superiority with no purpose. We can be wrong too, and I'm sure you have examples where we have been wrong. It's never fun to be wrong, I understand that, and especially not when that caused orange to be the new black, but at some point we're going to have to move on from this and we need to move in the right direction. You're assuming that just because Hillary lost, she was less electable than Bernie. The latter does not follow from the former. We simply have no idea how Bernie would have done. Small consolation is that he could not have done worse. But what-if scenarios are really pointless here. Bernie list the primaries, which were definitely unfair, which is a crying shame and the DNC should fix that, and try to repair the damage that did. But standing on your high ground and gloating, is both unfounded and rather silly.
She didn't just lose. She lost to Donald J. Freaking Trump. But you know, that's all right, there's already a lot of progress for this conversation in what you have said here. "We have no idea who would do better" is much much better than the "She's obviously more electable" that we had before.
|
On February 12 2017 03:24 ThaddeusK wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 02:57 Nebuchad wrote:
You know, if I hadn't seen this forum I would think that the notion that people attempt to blame something else than Clinton for Clinton losing to Trump was just progressive propaganda.
You are not owed any votes. Not even for being objectively better than your opponent. Every vote that you don't get is a vote that you failed to get. It doesn't matter that the people who didn't vote for you or voted against you made a mistake based on their own interest (and they did). It's still your fault.
This is a basic idea that is understood just about everywhere. You are responsible for the votes you get. And I'm not saying that from a bernieorbust point of view, I did argue that you should vote for Clinton against Trump as a leftist cause, you know, I'm able to observe reality; that has consistently been my point of view as soon as Bernie lost to her. Now that we're here, you just need to snap out of this cause you're not learning the lessons that you should be learning. Clearly this is the best mindset when campaigning or trying to improve your campaigning, but outside of that context it's frankly rather horrifying because it completely strips the voters of any form of agency or responsibility for their actions.
It also has the big disadvantage of giving you people that are good at getting elected, not people who are good at governing. Usually these should at least partially overlap, but a few decades of destroying education with stuff like "teaching the controversy" on evolution apparently gives you a population that wants to be bullshit as hard as possible.
What Trump has shown is that what you currently need to do in the US to get elected is to lie as much as possible, promise people the sky, tell them the solution to their problems is easy, doesn't cost them anything and also everyone gets a free pony. Then when people tell the voters that that is impossible, say that they are lying and that you are correct.
Don't blame everything on the politicians. Voters should try to be as good of a voter as possible, and elect the people that are best at governing. Not the most charming orator, or the person who looks best on photos. (Of course, having a non-shit election system and not anti-educating people also helps promote this)
|
it's important to distinguish between fault in some sense of blameworthiness and liability, vs fault in a simple causative sense.
mostly though i'm trynig to say out of this discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
