Maybe just avoid invective-soaked clickbait built on a skeleton of two remarks by old people which in no way constitute a platform plank or policy
― El Tomboto, Thursday, 7 June 2018 12:01 (six years ago) link
if major Dem players are pushing or even just appearing to push a dumb policy it seems worthy of public pushback in order to maaaybe help shame them into not doing that but clearly mileages vary
― Simon H., Thursday, 7 June 2018 12:02 (six years ago) link
Christ:
The Democrats haven’t won back the House of Representatives yet, but their leaders in the House already seem desperate to make sure everyone knows that if they do, they’ll do fuck all to put forward a positive vision for the country they want to run.
― Frederik B, Thursday, 7 June 2018 12:04 (six years ago) link
That won't shame anyone, that will just make Pelosi and the DCCC laugh all the way to the next donor meeting.
― Frederik B, Thursday, 7 June 2018 12:12 (six years ago) link
- if you wanted to discourage progressives from showing up to vote in November this is almost exactly what you should be publishing
So, hooray, good job.
― El Tomboto
relying on the splinter news constituency to bring about meaningful political change is about as warranted as expecting a tidal wave of 18 year olds to reshape the political map
― Arch Bacon (rushomancy), Thursday, 7 June 2018 13:38 (six years ago) link
the spell only works if you constantly say bad things about Republicans. the minute you slip from that and do something harmful like critical thinking, it stops the magic from happening
― Hazy Maze Cave (Adam Bruneau), Thursday, 7 June 2018 13:47 (six years ago) link
yeah, platform planks, always the basis of governance
― the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 7 June 2018 14:25 (six years ago) link
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/06/superdelegates-house-democrats-630357
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 7 June 2018 15:59 (six years ago) link
expecting a tidal wave of 18 year olds to reshape the political map
in general, people are more likely to vote when they perceive their stake in the outcome is sufficiently large to make the effort. that rarely applies to 18 year olds, whose stake is more about a theoretical future than an immediate present.
what I expect is that the cohort of young people who are already inclined to take this stuff seriously will enter the arena as more activist and radicalized than usual, but not in significantly larger numbers.
― A is for (Aimless), Thursday, 7 June 2018 16:19 (six years ago) link
what a monster
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/391214-pelosi-medicare-for-all-should-be-evaluated-if-dems-win-house
it's almost like her leadership is guided by what she knows her caucus will support
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 7 June 2018 19:44 (six years ago) link
yeah, it's almost like she's hedging and saying something totally non-committal because she sees writing on the wall
― Fedora Dostoyevsky (man alive), Thursday, 7 June 2018 19:48 (six years ago) link
So relieved that party centrists are paying vague lip service to policies they'll never actually support, democracy really works.
Also, you realize that this is only happening because of pushes from the crazy left wing of the party, right?
― Fedora Dostoyevsky (man alive), Thursday, 7 June 2018 19:50 (six years ago) link
it's happening because a majority of her caucus supports it. lol @ "never actually support" - if she has the votes, she'll pass it.
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 7 June 2018 19:56 (six years ago) link
which, yes, actually is how democracy is supposed to work
if the donor base supports it
― Fedora Dostoyevsky (man alive), Thursday, 7 June 2018 20:15 (six years ago) link
if she has the votes, she'll pass it.
― Οὖτις
also pelosi is a lifelong cat-herder with more ability than most to actually _get_ the votes
― Arch Bacon (rushomancy), Friday, 8 June 2018 00:22 (six years ago) link
itt talk about the nba hall of fame
(not many posts and hasn't been pumped in four years)
― Clay, Friday, 8 June 2018 00:24 (six years ago) link
You saying Pelosi is a first-ballot HOFer, Clay?
― Martin Landau Ballet (Leee), Friday, 8 June 2018 00:30 (six years ago) link
― Arch Bacon (rushomancy)
not to mention that her closest opposition Tim Ryan is less liberal
― morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 8 June 2018 01:02 (six years ago) link
oh lol leee i didn't get that joke until i just now realize i posted on the wrong thread AS USUAL
― Clay, Friday, 8 June 2018 01:05 (six years ago) link
Lily Geismer and Matthew Lassiter put the Clinton campaign and the contemporary Democratic Party in long-term historical perspective. https://t.co/gfnoIbqqUJ pic.twitter.com/hGldn8IBoP— corey robin (@CoreyRobin) June 10, 2018
― the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Monday, 11 June 2018 21:59 (six years ago) link
this sucks
Unsurprising, but disappointing that @SenGillibrand didn’t even bother to talk to nor consider me before endorsing.You‘d think a progressive leader would at least be interested in how a no-corporate money Bronx Latina triggered the 1st NY-14 primary in 14 years on prog issues. https://t.co/A5ZswcUpW9— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@Ocasio2018) June 11, 2018
― Simon H., Tuesday, 12 June 2018 01:32 (six years ago) link
Gillibrand is def running for prez in 2020.
― A is for (Aimless), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 01:45 (six years ago) link
that much is clear
― Simon H., Tuesday, 12 June 2018 01:49 (six years ago) link
This is basically the same thing as when Gillibrand endorsed Cuomo. She's a sitting US Senator who has a vested interest in maintaining working/workable relationships with the people who are likely to win. It sucks, but so does politics.
― Johnny Fever, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 02:33 (six years ago) link
If the Crowley/O-C race were a coin flip, she might have acted differently.
― Johnny Fever, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 02:34 (six years ago) link
if you endorse the challenger and they lose, the incumbent hates you; if you endorse the incumbent and they lose, the challenger is not going to hate you quite so much, is a reasonable calculation to make, all else being equal
― valorous wokelord (silby), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 02:36 (six years ago) link
"reasonable" but also disgusting given that genuinely progressive candidates need all the help they can get
― Simon H., Tuesday, 12 June 2018 02:47 (six years ago) link
No one succeeds in becoming a major party nominee without engaging in some pretty disgusting calculated behavior. Probably the least compromised nominee in my lifetime was George McGovern, and we all know what happened to him.
― A is for (Aimless), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 02:50 (six years ago) link
I guess I just don't see the Huge Risk here, people endorse opponents and then work together down the line all the time
― Simon H., Tuesday, 12 June 2018 02:52 (six years ago) link
I don't believe Gillibrand to be the progressive-in-disguise that a lot of Bernie twitter believes her to be, but she's definitely set herself apart from the stock DNC presidential hopeful template. Until further notice, I trust she knows what she's doing here. There's not really any good public polling on NY-14, but I guarantee you she's got access to some numbers.
― Johnny Fever, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 03:00 (six years ago) link
In which case she could have just stayed out of it
― Simon H., Tuesday, 12 June 2018 03:03 (six years ago) link
I just don't see the Huge Risk here
Those who think they have a strong shot at the nomination tend to become risk averse. Especially early in the game, when you are putting together your national organization and defining yourself to the insiders in every state, it doesn't have to be a huge risk to deter you, just an obvious risk with unclear consequences. Once you've won enough delegates to be a top two contender for the nomination, then risk taking becomes more of a virtue, since you can focus more sharply on surpassing just one opponent.
― A is for (Aimless), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 03:04 (six years ago) link
I should've worded that better. Bernie twitter believes her to be a fake progressive. xps
― Johnny Fever, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 03:05 (six years ago) link
I think we all got the idea
Anyway it'll be an interesting race to watch, that's for sure. Crowley might be ahead right now but there's weeks to go and he's not much of a campaigner.
― Simon H., Tuesday, 12 June 2018 03:15 (six years ago) link
really liked the article morbz/corey robin linked
― the bhagwanadook (symsymsym), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 04:16 (six years ago) link
― Simon H.
if elections were decided by endorsements, i guess this would be a big deal, but they seem to be more decided by how much the voter pool specifically knows and likes the candidates in question. not endorsing would piss off any possible eventual winner and probably not make that much difference!
― Arch Bacon (rushomancy), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 04:23 (six years ago) link
Yeah, who are endorsements even for? People who wait until the last possible moment to decide which candidate to vote for—everyone else has already made a choice—so an endorsement for the incumbent in a house race is basically nothing. Lots of people don't even know the name of their congressional rep until they're reminded of it on the ballot.
To that end, maybe Gillibrand putting in a good word for Ocasio-Cortez could've been a small boon, but in the end we're talking about a house race and, sadly, as far as the electorate is concerned, that's only a step above school board.
― Johnny Fever, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 04:30 (six years ago) link
When I am less than familiar with the details of a candidate's positions, I pay attention to endorsements from labor unions, environmental groups, and politicians I think are credible. They often tell a coherent story.
― A is for (Aimless), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 04:35 (six years ago) link
ICYMI: pure Bernie spite
https://truthout.org/articles/dnc-adopts-rule-forcing-presidential-candidates-to-be-members-of-democratic-party/
― the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 06:47 (six years ago) link
Surely he can do just what he did in 2016 and become a Democrat for the season if he runs?
(I really don't quite understand why 'our candidate should, you know, be a member of our party' is quite a contentious thing…)
― carson dial, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 09:14 (six years ago) link
Ocasio-Cortez went on TheIntercept the other day, so I can understand Gillibrand not wanting to endorse her.
― Frederik B, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 09:59 (six years ago) link
whut
― Simon H., Tuesday, 12 June 2018 11:05 (six years ago) link
Fred, you're ... kinda feckless.
carson went there, huh. the artcle sez why.
― the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 11:55 (six years ago) link
If, as some Twitter buffoon states in that piece, "there are more independents than Democrats in the US," then independents will do just fine running as independents. They don't need the Democratic party - they've got the numbers! Really! They do! You just can't see 'em, 'cause...'cause...'cause fuck you, dad!
― grawlix (unperson), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 12:14 (six years ago) link
average people think about politics 2 hours a year
ie most Dem voters know the Dems suck
― the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 12:16 (six years ago) link
most GOP voters know the GOP sucks. To oppose a party is a natural human condition.
― morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 12:20 (six years ago) link
still smdh at unswerving party loyalty = adulthood. is that as good as it gets, unperson?
― the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 12 June 2018 12:21 (six years ago) link
I interviewed @Ocasio2018 today. We'll have the video up early in the week. She's one of the most impressive, interesting, and inspiring new candidates we've seen in awhile. If you want to change US politics, it's going to be by supporting people like her: https://t.co/Jac6RMhYOQ— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) June 8, 2018
I mean, I'll paraphrase that, and say that if you want to build a movement to change things, the Intercept are the kind of people you should avoid like the plague. Ocasio-Cortez to me kinda seems like another candidate who confuses virality for movement-building, and I don't know, but they don't seem to have the biggest success rate on the ground.
― Frederik B, Tuesday, 12 June 2018 12:31 (six years ago) link
It should be patently obvious that, as the system stands, someone with a D or an R is going to win the Oval Office and the vast majority of Federal seats every election. Do the Democrats want candidates who are going to bring more people to the polls, or do they only want candidates who will say a magic word in public? Christ, I've voted as a "loyal" Democrat for three decades and I get why this is a dumb idea, and I'm not very smart.
― Eliza D., Tuesday, 12 June 2018 12:33 (six years ago) link