EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2237
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23713 Posts
On April 09 2020 05:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Except that argument was literally disproven by Biden winning the 2020 primary after Clinton lost the 2016 general election. I also don't even like discussing the "electability" term because it's so nebulous, and plenty of Sanders supporters consistently argued that Sanders was more electable too, in the same way that Biden supporters argued that Biden is more electable. I don't understand. What's wrong with voting for someone who shares some of your positions over someone who shares none of them? Do you completely disagree with all of Biden's positions listed in the link in my post that you replied to? Are you implying that we shouldn't be thinking of the consequences if Trump wins again? I need a little elaboration, please. And to think: We could easily stop this from happening if people just unified behind the person running against the Trumps. Why bother even having a primary if people aren't going to unify behind the winner, and instead basically help throw the election by not supporting the primary winner? I like this analogy: Voting isn't marriage; it's public transport... you're not waiting for "the one" who's absolutely perfect; you're taking whichever bus gets you closest to your destination. In this analogy you're forgetting about the people they don't let on the bus and what the ones on there had to do to get on or sit where they please. It took enduring great violence at the hand of the state and their minions all the way down to school children. That's not just a Black struggle either, disabled people went through much of the same (and got bus accommodations even later) | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
On April 09 2020 05:19 TheTenthDoc wrote: While I agree that's the pragmatic approach, it's also a virtually guaranteed neoliberal Democratic candidate for eternity. The purple primaries were not kind to Sanders this cycle (those margins in Michigan, North Carolina, and Florida...oof) nor are they kind to progressives in general. His "rust belt support" just failed to materialize-people in that area just really hated Clinton for (sometimes good) reasons. I'm not seriously advocating that as a good system, I'm just using it as an illustration of how sick and fucked the US system is. The only thing fully removing states from the primary process would accomplish is make even more transparent how little votes matter in most of the US. I'd rather we ditch first past the post so that everyone can feel that their vote means something and we wont have to be nailed to this shitty RED VS. BLUE AT ALL COSSSSTTTTSSSSSS political landscape. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3304 Posts
On April 09 2020 05:19 TheTenthDoc wrote: While I agree that's the pragmatic approach, it's also a virtually guaranteed neoliberal Democratic candidate for eternity. The purple primaries were not kind to Sanders this cycle (those margins in Michigan, North Carolina, and Florida...oof) nor are they kind to progressives in general. His "rust belt support" just failed to materialize-people in that area just really hated Clinton for (sometimes good) reasons. I think this approach (weighting states more heavily in the primary if they were close in the last general election) is interesting, but how do you deal with the weird gamesmanship it will create in the general? If a bunch of Californians decide they’re going to vote Republican to give their state more weight in the next primary, it undermines the purpose of the weighting system, and might even create wonky outcomes where very blue states accidentally go red trying to get more voice in future primaries. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12410 Posts
| ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
As opposed to everyone voting with no differences in apathy, where the same Blue vs Red dynamic plays out each time with precisely no difference, and they can safely send out shittier and shittier candidates in our lovely little race to the bottom. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23713 Posts
On April 09 2020 05:27 JimmiC wrote: Not voting at all is not getting on the bus by choice. Which does not tell people, I don't like the bus. It tells people you were to lazy/apathetic. + Show Spoiler + added for completeness At the very least you should still vote and put Bernie's name as a write in. Then at least people can see how many would have. It won't accomplish anything, but it will at least tell the Dems this % of people was would have been willing to vote if he was the candidate. And be prepared to be shocked about how few that is. It is shocking how few people there are that actually vote compared to those fed up online or even willing to go on a march or riot. Bold take on the strategy of the Montgomery bus boycott I think most would disagree with. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23713 Posts
On April 09 2020 05:36 JimmiC wrote: For people that are actually not allowed on the bus I would not make that analogy. But that is what we are talking about here. People who can vote but are choosing not to because they don't like the candidate. edit: also your habit of pulling quotes of of context and replying to them is one of the many disingenuous moves you pull on the regular. Stop it. You didn't even quote anything in your response. For the record though they were allowed on the bus and chose not to get on in order to express their contempt with the system. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On April 09 2020 05:32 Zambrah wrote: If a party's candidate loses and they note that its due to increased voter apathy maybe the next time they choose their candidate they'll be incentivized to consider what about their last candidate made voters more apathetic. Maybe then they'd figure that out and work on that with the next candidate. As opposed to everyone voting with no differences in apathy, where the same Blue vs Red dynamic plays out each time with precisely no difference, and they can safely send out shittier and shittier candidates in our lovely little race to the bottom. This type of attitudes requires vastly stronger parties and party organization-what you're suggesting is the party overrule the voters when they decide they have picked the wrong candidate based on their analyses. The appetite for this is virtually nil in the US (except among those who do not care hold democracy in terribly high regard, of course, which is a reasonable perspective but one people will do everything they can to dance around saying out loud). People want weaker parties, not stronger ones. Unless, of course, it would be overruling the voters to pick one's own preferred candidate, in which case everyone is all for it. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35172 Posts
| ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
No, I don't think this is likely, I think its more like our next candidate is a senile, sexual assaulting, conservative with some other bad attribute thrown in for good measure, and I think even if Biden lost this would still be the direction the DNC would opt for. I cant remember if it was here or another politically inclined place I go to, but I'd rather lose the presidency, take Congress and stonewall the piss out of anything Trump did. Need a congressional appointment for a judge? Stonewall it. Full Mitch McConnell style. Trump wants to do wipe his ass with triple ply toilet paper? By god if we can stonewall him and force it down to single ply I'd advocate it. I'm choosing to focus on down ballot progressive initiatives from here on out, the presidency doesn't concern me any more, I won't vote for a sexual assaulting dementia patient. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23713 Posts
On April 09 2020 05:52 Gahlo wrote: If it wasn't for RGB I'd say fuck the whole election, honestly. In the unlikely scenario Biden won and RGB stepped down, there is absolutely no guarantee that Republicans would let Democrats replace her. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23713 Posts
On April 09 2020 05:58 JimmiC wrote: How do you plan on making your contempt for the system known? Because simply not voting is not going to accomplish what you think, since there is a huge number who do not and have not, and the system is not changing, your countries politics are moving right not left, since less participation helps what you are supposedly against. Obviously the direct mass action part. It is literally our only hope at this point imo (I made that clear the whole primary). | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6223 Posts
On April 09 2020 05:56 GreenHorizons wrote: In the unlikely scenario Biden won and RGB stepped down, there is absolutely no guarantee that Republicans would let Democrats replace her. If Republicans refuse to replace her, they'd also have to maintain control of senate in 2020, 2022 and 2024 and win presidency in 2024. That's a bit of a tall order. They've already massacred the federal judiciary though, so I wouldn't be surprised if they continue to grind away democracy. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
On April 09 2020 06:09 Lmui wrote: If Republicans refuse to replace her, they'd also have to maintain control of senate in 2020, 2022 and 2024 and win presidency in 2024. That's a bit of a tall order. They've already massacred the federal judiciary though, so I wouldn't be surprised if they continue to grind away democracy. Im not even sure its that tall of an order, I dont think beating Biden in 2024 is going to be that hard given his cognitive decline (I think the only reason he'll win this election is because Trump is actually that bad and enough people have seen how bad he is that he wont razor thin margin himself through this time.) and Democrats have historically been shittier at the non-presidential election. If we get more progressive candidates and we see the kind of intense turn out of older white people that turncoat to the republican side it could totally happen that Republicans maintain control over the Senate and get the presidency in 2024. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
| ||
