Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
34 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Some thoughts about the Democrats win on Tuesday rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
William Boykin
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
For BJ.....
Avatar
mb
Apologies up front; its cold for Texas, and Im writing this on my tablet while riding the bus home after riding 7 miles. So Mr Cranky, if you're still around? Fuck you.

kiss

I mean, HELL yes; finally some goddamn electoral traction against Trump, our wannabee Autocrat who is, THANKFULLY, too incompetant to actually to pull it off. The President we deserved, I guess- looked good on TV but what you see isnt always what you get.

So yah, yay the fuck Trump bandwagon. But Matt Taibbi, in a column he wrote for Rolling Stone cuz Im writing this on a tablet and Im the wrong side of 40 so duck you Millenial wankers....

Ahem.

As Mr. Taibbi points out- anti Trump isnt enough for the midterms. Not with the HUUUUUUGE electoral advantage the GOP has right now; it wasnt a ggod cycle to start with, made harder by some serious gerrymandering out there. Look at Virginia; Northam wins by 9 points, with the most votes votes, and the Dems MIGHT....MIGHT...eek out control of the State Assembly. Not to undermine the tremendous achievements here, but only to reiterate what a decade of GOP dominance can do to state. One need only look to North Carolina for more....

So its clear that the Democrats need to stand for something. ANYTHING? And this debate is currently being framed as a choice between Clintonista technocrats vs. Bernie Ideologues, with movements like Black Lives Matter pushed to the side. To wit; the concern is how to get white men and women to vote Democrat again.

So let me be frank.

Fuck white people. Chasing after the White vote is a waste of time, and plays into the culture war BS that the GOP is very good at playing. You can offer all the health care and free college you want, but, unfortunately, a lot of white voters will continue to view an expanded social net as a zero sum game; the only way MY needs as a straight, older white dude can be addressed is to fuck over those who arent real Americans anyway. Play that game, you lose.

Not to mention, you piss off the activists in the Hispanic and African American communities who are INCENSED about Trump but who have very real concerns of miltarized policing and deportations that need to be addressed, not taken for granted because who are people of color going to vote for Trump? Virginia shows a Blue Landslide only occurs with thier help. Hilary clearly shows the alternative.

But too often BLM and the Reistance and these other groups are just ignored by the Clintonistas and the Berniecrats, to obsessed with refighting the 2016 primary to look at 2018. They put off white voters, the logic goes, and so the seeds of another 2016 are sown.

This is a false dichotomy.

The concerns of the Resistance and BLM are not concerns of just Blacks and Latinos, but all Americans. Do we really want the Federal Government to encourage MORE Civil Asset Forfeiture? Or police departments funded by ticketing and fines? Isnt America better served by a sane immigration policy that rewards and encouragea those who might have come here in irregular fashion but who have stayed as hard working and law abiding people? Dont all Americans deserve to have the same safety net of health care, so we are all free to try and pursue our dreams of a bettter life and not have to be terrified about doctors appointments? Dont our children deserve to have the same access to higher education that Baby boomers had before the privatization of Sallie Mae and the severe reduction in Grant monies meant that students now pay more for college, wirh more debt, than thier parents?

Doesnt We, the People, mean anything anymore?

What is needed is to realize that the past twenty years of delegating government to business has made what remains of government increasingly predatory of those who can least afford it. And this transcends and includes issues of race.

Darilian
29 
 Thumb up
0.30
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
Avatar
mbmb
On behalf of Mr. Cranky: “eke”, not “eek”.

:-)
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree with you...



It is cold!



Oh.. And most of the rest too. Looks like we need old white people to die and young people of all groups go save us from turning authoritarian, nationalistic, and racist. Kinda the same as Brexit where young people voted to stay eu and in 10 years will Inherit a mess left by people who had one foot in the grave.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jorge Montero
United States
St Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
I'll take Manhattan in a garbage bag. With Latin written on it that says "It's hard to give a shit these days"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What Texas needs is for latinos to vote. Increase the latino participation to match California's, and suddenly Texas is not just a swing state, but it leans blue.

Making sure the DNC actually knows what they are doing also helps. The DNC didn't have a great digital system around vote predictions last year: They were very far off from the best private knowledge possible. They've been able to hire some pretty good people out of tech companies lately to properly compete there for 2018 and 2020. Good use of money, and flipping the right states would hurt the republican party for a decade.
13 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chief Slovenly
United States
Burlington
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
"This is what happens when the people vote."

-- some Muslim
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jordan Ackerman
United States
Stevenson Ranch
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If the same tired establishment policies are what the Democrats are still pushing, then I don't think people should vote Democrat. The party leaders are paid losers and have been for over thirty years now.

It's the perfect time for a mass movement to a third party. Does any normal person really want to destroy the environment and have endless war? Why do both parties unanimously approve endless war with no type of town hall discussion or negotiation? The answer is because killing is a business and the capitalist model of endless growth and profit applies to the military industrial complex, just as in every other aspect of the economy.

Should killing people and imprisoning people be a for-profit industry? I can't believe an overwhelming majority of people wouldn't be against killing humans for profit, but according to our senators and representatives, this is how the general public wants them to vote one hundred percent of the time. Do you not question even that about how the country operates?

I want cheaper healthcare. I want everyone to have good schools, not just rich people. I want everyone to make a living wage. I want a clean environment and good public transportation. The Democrats do not want you to have these things because they are paid to not want you to have them.

When Nancy Pelosi says there's just no way to pay for cheaper healthcare when she started out a somewhat normal citizen and made over $100 million dollars in her political career, then it's pretty obvious how the Democratic party is run from the top.

Yes Trump is full of awful ideas and his party is just fine with it, but voting Democrat out of fear is not the answer. Without a third party, things are going to get worse.



3 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
Avatar
mbmb
rutherford82 wrote:
The party leaders are paid losers and have been for over thirty years now.


Could you clarify what you mean by this? The most superficial reading of it seems so blatantly false I can't imagine you mean what I'd have thought.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oldies but Goodies ... Avalon Hill and
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
rutherford82 wrote:
The party leaders are paid losers and have been for over thirty years now.


Could you clarify what you mean by this? The most superficial reading of it seems so blatantly false I can't imagine you mean what I'd have thought.

Really? Wind the clock back forty years and Democrats had solid and consistent Congressional majorities and actually controlled plenty of governorships and state legislatures. When you fritter away that much power over a forty-year period, you're losers. When you're reduced to the presidency and maybe the U.S. Senate as your only buttresses against the other side, you're losers. When half measures are the best you can do when your party is actually in power, you're losers.

Face it. Democrats are losers. They're airing out their dirty laundry from 2016 instead of focusing on 2018 and 2020. They're assuming that Trump will fuck things up so badly that all they'll need is a "D" after their names in the next election cycle. They're hoping against hope that demographics will save them, but millennials are disgusted with the process and tired of seeing the same old hacks making the same old mistakes. And that's a charitable assessment. "Mistake" implies an honest error. Too many in positions of leadership have jumped on the gravy train and become dishonest in spirit, or worse.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
Avatar
mbmb
SPIGuy wrote:
rinelk wrote:
rutherford82 wrote:
The party leaders are paid losers and have been for over thirty years now.


Could you clarify what you mean by this? The most superficial reading of it seems so blatantly false I can't imagine you mean what I'd have thought.

Really? Wind the clock back forty years and Democrats had solid and consistent Congressional majorities and actually controlled plenty of governorships and state legislatures. When you fritter away that much power over a forty-year period, you're losers. When you're reduced to the presidency and maybe the U.S. Senate as your only buttresses against the other side, you're losers. When half measures are the best you can do when your party is actually in power, you're losers.

Face it. Democrats are losers. They're airing out their dirty laundry from 2016 instead of focusing on 2018 and 2020. They're assuming that Trump will fuck things up so badly that all they'll need is a "D" after their names in the next election cycle. They're hoping against hope that demographics will save them, but millennials are disgusted with the process and tired of seeing the same old hacks making the same old mistakes. And that's a charitable assessment. "Mistake" implies an honest error. Too many in positions of leadership have jumped on the gravy train and become dishonest in spirit, or worse.



That’s asinine. This isn’t the story of a monotonic decline in power. It was less than a decade ago that Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency. They lost badly in 2016, won big in 2017 (wish it mattered more). Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. Describing that as always losing is lying.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Edgar the Woebringer
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
mb
I agree that there are a large number of white voters that will NEVER change their vote. I have some in my family. They hate Democrats with a passion (in particular, they believe Hilary Clinton is the anti-christ).
I recently got to hear an anguished rant from one of them about how all the lazy poor of Puerto Rico are siphoning off our money; that's the Christian way I guess, stress over money and which bums are trying to steal yours....They believe wacky, horrible non-facts due to the "news" they immerse themselves in. They live in perpetual fear of the enemy at their gate--whether that be illegal immigrants, gays, trannies, commies, muslims, whoever. Guess which party plays those fears up? They are in a perpetual state of fight-or-flight anxiety. You ever notice how angry most of them are, over just about everything?

Working-class whites in bad shape due (mostly) to automation taking their jobs seem to listen to bald-faced lies about their jobs coming back...so maybe there's some there if the Democrats get better at shoveling shit.

Young people need to get out and vote (same old story).
Black people needed to get out and vote in the numbers that they did for Obama; they didn't.
All the Bernie supporters that got so pissed off that they voted Johnson needed to remember that perfect is the enemy of the good...I knew a number of these people (though maybe in the end they have it right...that Trump will crash the GOP and it'll burn down to a point. Though I hate the damage he may do first.)

If any of those three groups above *really* turned out we wouldn't have Trump.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
fightcitymayor
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
"This is a really weird game, and you’ll find that most people will not want to play this."
Avatar
mb
maxo-texas wrote:
Looks like we need old white people to die and young people of all groups go save us from turning authoritarian, nationalistic, and racist.
Here's the problem: Young white liberal voters tend to turn into old white conservative voters. Once you've engaged in age warfare, you are voluntarily closing off a lot of doors to the segment of the population that actually votes. And you do that at your peril.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Third party is not going to happen in this country.

Not that I am necessarily against that, I frankly think a legitimate third party worth voting for would keep the other two honest, making them look over their shoulder, at what's coming down the pipe.

But unless this is some type of movement that obtains funding quickly, and is seen in the eyes of converts as legitimate, and worthy of a vote that does not end up being inconsequential, you can forget about it in the U.S.

We are too entrenched in a two party system, to change, unless there is massive funding, and massing impetus to do so.

The Repubs will rejoin ranks, after Trump is gone, and we will be back to politics as usual.

The key question is, whether the Dems will be able to capitalize on Republican divisions, and offer up a palatable candidate in 2020, that can garner a large swath of varied voters, including white rich men, working women, minorities, LGBT community, and middle class non-college educated whites (Trumps base).

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Henry
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
rutherford82 wrote:
...It's the perfect time for a mass movement to a third party....

That's the only thing that could save the Republicans, and I expect to see a lot of fake news encouraging it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Pennsylvania
msg tools
badge
Bitter acerbic harridan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
No offense, Dar, but I think the handwringing about how badly the Democrats often are about messaging is wrong. We need enthusiasm for voting. People really seldom vote because of platforms, but because either (a) they like the candidate; or (b) they hate the other guy. Preferably you have both and the other guy is doing a bunch of stupid shit that alienates your side.

Further, you claim that we shouldn't get bogged down in the culture war, but of course, that's what's going to happen anyway if candidates support BLM more vocally. Isn't that exactly the sort of culture war that's going on with respect to NFL? With respect to confederate monuments?

I, for one, would really like the Democrats to not sit around like a bunch of nervous nellies that pore over everything we do wrong. Introspection is good up to a point, but enthusiasm is better.

We should be focused on change, even if that change is just throw these selfish, racist bastards out of office.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trey Chambers
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rutherford82 wrote:
If the same tired establishment policies are what the Democrats are still pushing, then I don't think people should vote Democrat. The party leaders are paid losers and have been for over thirty years now.

It's the perfect time for a mass movement to a third party. Does any normal person really want to destroy the environment and have endless war? Why do both parties unanimously approve endless war with no type of town hall discussion or negotiation? The answer is because killing is a business and the capitalist model of endless growth and profit applies to the military industrial complex, just as in every other aspect of the economy.

Should killing people and imprisoning people be a for-profit industry? I can't believe an overwhelming majority of people wouldn't be against killing humans for profit, but according to our senators and representatives, this is how the general public wants them to vote one hundred percent of the time. Do you not question even that about how the country operates?

I want cheaper healthcare. I want everyone to have good schools, not just rich people. I want everyone to make a living wage. I want a clean environment and good public transportation. The Democrats do not want you to have these things because they are paid to not want you to have them.

When Nancy Pelosi says there's just no way to pay for cheaper healthcare when she started out a somewhat normal citizen and made over $100 million dollars in her political career, then it's pretty obvious how the Democratic party is run from the top.

Yes Trump is full of awful ideas and his party is just fine with it, but voting Democrat out of fear is not the answer. Without a third party, things are going to get worse.





This is exactly the wrong time to move to a third party. You would just fragment the vote anyone left-of-center and make the Republican Party more dominant than it already is. Yes, establishment Democrats suck, but lots of voters LIKE those establishment Democrats. They're not going to vote for third party just because something shiny and new springs up. Remember, Clinton won the primary. Nefarious methods or not, she got more votes than the anti-establishment candidates.

The problem with pie-in-the-sky arguments like this is that it lacks all perspective and pragmaticism. Stay home, don't vote, and you'll just let Trump coast to a 2nd term.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pontifex Maximus
United States
CA
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
abadolato01 wrote:
Third party is not going to happen in this country.

Not that I am necessarily against that, I frankly think a legitimate third party worth voting for would keep the other two honest, making them look over their shoulder, at what's coming down the pipe.

But unless this is some type of movement that obtains funding quickly, and is seen in the eyes of converts as legitimate, and worthy of a vote that does not end up being inconsequential, you can forget about it in the U.S.

We are too entrenched in a two party system, to change, unless there is massive funding, and massing impetus to do so.

The Repubs will rejoin ranks, after Trump is gone, and we will be back to politics as usual.

The key question is, whether the Dems will be able to capitalize on Republican divisions, and offer up a palatable candidate in 2020, that can garner a large swath of varied voters, including white rich men, working women, minorities, LGBT community, and middle class non-college educated whites (Trumps base).



There may be a strategic error concentrating on an outreach to Trump supporters. Any still left right now would seem to be motivated more by base emotions (hatred, bigtory, etc) so any outreach that would appeal to them would alienate the Democratic base. Learn from the GOP. Mine your own base, which is larger than the GOP base. And we have evidence of the "joys" of conservatives in power. Be progressive and not apologize about it. You energize your own base and this leads to wins like in VA. Also as a strange by product you actually do help Trump's base (although they would probably never admit it)


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Boykin
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
For BJ.....
Avatar
mb
Sue_G wrote:
No offense, Dar, but I think the handwringing about how badly the Democrats often are about messaging is wrong. We need enthusiasm for voting. People really seldom vote because of platforms, but because either (a) they like the candidate; or (b) they hate the other guy. Preferably you have both and the other guy is doing a bunch of stupid shit that alienates your side.

Further, you claim that we shouldn't get bogged down in the culture war, but of course, that's what's going to happen anyway if candidates support BLM more vocally. Isn't that exactly the sort of culture war that's going on with respect to NFL? With respect to confederate monuments?

I, for one, would really like the Democrats to not sit around like a bunch of nervous nellies that pore over everything we do wrong. Introspection is good up to a point, but enthusiasm is better.

We should be focused on change, even if that change is just throw these selfish, racist bastards out of office.


Its not messaging, per se...rather, its a fundamental statement of principle. Democrats almost always run a laundry list of policy papers and then try to combine with a bow and sell it to their disparate interest groups. Whereas conservatives, until now, have enjoyed a more or less consistent set of guiding principles- small government, lower taxes, strong defense, family values.

The reason Dems havent need to articulate principle is because thier values are that of Liberalism itself- liberty, equality, fraternity. But what is shaking the West now is that no one is apeaking up for, and defendinf, the very concept of liberal democracy as a good thing, superior to the alternative. Dems didnt need to until Trump; The GOP wasnt in favor of much of what the Dems wanted but we were all Liberals. Ethno nationalism, however, is requirinf a robust response wherein we connect WHY alll of these disparate policies are connected; because, in America, we hold these truths to be self evident: that all are created equal, and endowed with the rifhts to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Darilian
3 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oldies but Goodies ... Avalon Hill and
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
SPIGuy wrote:
rinelk wrote:
rutherford82 wrote:
The party leaders are paid losers and have been for over thirty years now.


Could you clarify what you mean by this? The most superficial reading of it seems so blatantly false I can't imagine you mean what I'd have thought.

Really? Wind the clock back forty years and Democrats had solid and consistent Congressional majorities and actually controlled plenty of governorships and state legislatures. When you fritter away that much power over a forty-year period, you're losers. When you're reduced to the presidency and maybe the U.S. Senate as your only buttresses against the other side, you're losers. When half measures are the best you can do when your party is actually in power, you're losers.

Face it. Democrats are losers. They're airing out their dirty laundry from 2016 instead of focusing on 2018 and 2020. They're assuming that Trump will fuck things up so badly that all they'll need is a "D" after their names in the next election cycle. They're hoping against hope that demographics will save them, but millennials are disgusted with the process and tired of seeing the same old hacks making the same old mistakes. And that's a charitable assessment. "Mistake" implies an honest error. Too many in positions of leadership have jumped on the gravy train and become dishonest in spirit, or worse.



That’s asinine. This isn’t the story of a monotonic decline in power. It was less than a decade ago that Democrats controlled both houses of Congress and the Presidency. They lost badly in 2016, won big in 2017 (wish it mattered more). Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. Describing that as always losing is lying.

What's asinine is looking at how the political landscape has changed over the past forty years and pointing out a one-year anomaly which was quickly reversed.

Go back to 1977. Democrats had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and almost 150 more House seats than Republicans. They had full control of 35 state legislatures and total control of 27 state governments. The numbers for Republicans were 4 and 1. This was not a one-off. Every cycle but one from 1956 to 1992, Democrats had full control of more state legislatures than Republicans did. Every cycle from 1970 to 1993, Democrats controlled more governorships than Republicans.

Look at the current situation. Republicans control the House, Senate, and presidency. They control 32 state legislatures. They have total control of 25 state governments. The numbers for Democrats are 12 and 5. This, also, is not a one-off. The number of Republican-controlled state legislatures has been inconsistently increasing since 1994. States totally controlled by Republicans have increased from 4 in 1994 to 25 today.

These numbers show a steady erosion of Democratic power, particularly at the state level. What's controlled at the state level? Redistricting. Where are the new political stars born? At the state level. What is the latest flap within the Democratic Party? That the Clinton campaign starved state party organizations in order to fund a losing presidential bid.

At some point, Democrats have to step back and look at the big picture rather than just count up the 104 electoral votes in California, New York, and Illinois and then hope they can pick up enough Senate seats to eke out a majority there. It's not enough when the rest of the country is gradually tinting red. And they can't necessarily count on demographics to save them - especially when their socially liberal agenda is at odds with the social views of many prospective Democratic voters.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
Avatar
mbmb
SPIGuy wrote:

What's asinine is looking at how the political landscape has changed over the past forty years and pointing out a one-year anomaly which was quickly reversed.


Dude.

The first thing that comes up in a search for "years in which democrats gained house seats" is this. It only lists presidential election years, but it looks like they gained House Reps in 1976, 1988, 2004, 2008, and 2012. In the Senate, they gained in 2000, 2008, and 2012.

Which one year did you even have in mind?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oldies but Goodies ... Avalon Hill and
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
SPIGuy wrote:

What's asinine is looking at how the political landscape has changed over the past forty years and pointing out a one-year anomaly which was quickly reversed.


Dude.

The first thing that comes up in a search for "years in which democrats gained house seats" is this. It only lists presidential election years, but it looks like they gained House Reps in 1976, 1988, 2004, 2008, and 2012. In the Senate, they gained in 2000, 2008, and 2012.

Which one year did you even have in mind?

The anomaly I was referring to is the one you pointed out: 2009 to 2010. So...great. Democrats gained House seats in some elections. The trend is still clear. Democrats have gone from the dominant political party, nationally and at state level, to one which is dominated, particularly at the state level.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelsey Rinella
United States
Rochester
New York
flag msg tools
I am proud to have opposed those who describe all who oppose them as "Tender Flowers" and "Special Snowflakes".
badge
Check out Stately Play for news and reviews of games worth thinking about.
Avatar
mbmb
SPIGuy wrote:
rinelk wrote:
SPIGuy wrote:

What's asinine is looking at how the political landscape has changed over the past forty years and pointing out a one-year anomaly which was quickly reversed.


Dude.

The first thing that comes up in a search for "years in which democrats gained house seats" is this. It only lists presidential election years, but it looks like they gained House Reps in 1976, 1988, 2004, 2008, and 2012. In the Senate, they gained in 2000, 2008, and 2012.

Which one year did you even have in mind?

The anomaly I was referring to is the one you pointed out: 2009 to 2010. So...great. Democrats gained House seats in some elections. The trend is still clear. Democrats have gone from the dominant political party, nationally and at state level, to one which is dominated, particularly at the state level.



Fair enough, but that entirely undermines rutherford82’s point. If Democrats can’t win, then, yeah, those who oppose Republicans would do better to find an alternative. But if they can win, and have done so many times even in the recent past, and seem to be doing especially well right now specifically because they’ve started reversing the trend of declining power at the state level, rutherford82’s prescription that it’s time to jump ship is exactly wrong. It’s not the perfect time to vote third party; it’s the worst time. The Democrats have massive momentum right now, with generic Democrats polling above generic Republicans by almost 10 points. Why give up an advantage that large which just won landslide victories almost everywhere? How could that possibly be a sensible strategy?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jordan Ackerman
United States
Stevenson Ranch
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sorry to have dropped out of the conversation. My current job is eating me alive and I have a 90 minute commute each way.

I feel establishment Democrats are paid losers because they are largely ignoring the left of their party and in fact shame them into accepting center right candidates, such as Obama and the Clintons. Giving money to the war machine and Israel with almost no push back is losing, if you ask me. Pushing through a right wing health care plan is losing if you ask me. They would rather lose to Republicans than win with progressives because their foundations only get hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign donations if they do what the wealthy elite want. Here's a clue, the wealthy elite do not want regular folks to have better lives. The fact that big money comes to the leaders of the party, such as Clinton and Pelosi, means that they are being paid by outside interests to not create and support legislation that benefits the majority of the population, the workers. If you aren't okay with that, you are colluded against by the power holders of the party, which we have actual proof of with Hillary Clinton strong-arming the DNC (that appears to have been made possible by bankrupting them via continuing to fund consultants in off years).

I understand my message is confusing, but that's because the Democrats say all of the right things, but then do none of them. You think they are for equal rights and economic fairness, but all of their policies are to the contrary. Bailing out banks for their rampant widespread fraud is the most obvious example of this.

Arguing that a third party won't work is really hampering progress for the masses of regular folks out there. It doesn't matter who has the Presidency, we get endless war no matter what and we get establishment legislation no matter what. Would I prefer the leading party to not be overtly racists? Sure. However, using fear mongering to garner votes for the Democratic party is the exact thing enabling the Democrats to not put any progressive policies on the table.

Do you remember when Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente were campaigning. They dared to say that one of their main policies would be to end all ongoing wars immediately and bring all of the troops home. Where are these voices within the Democratic party? There was also the Green New Deal, which put people to work in jobs focused on cleaning the environment. Where is that plan from the Democrats? Obama opened up the arctic to drilling more than once and Hillary has pushed fracking more than just about any other politician out there.

The Democrats are not good and honest and they do not want to give the public any legislation that benefits the masses. Reforming that party is a fool's errand and urging others to not join a movement towards a major third party is only entrenching global society in crony capitalism even further. We are not doomed to have two crappy parties that mostly do awful things that only rich people want. We have the power to work together and demand better legislation to improve the lives of those who suffer. It isn't about left versus right. It's about up versus down.
1 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jordan Ackerman
United States
Stevenson Ranch
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shampoo4you wrote:
rutherford82 wrote:
If the same tired establishment policies are what the Democrats are still pushing, then I don't think people should vote Democrat. The party leaders are paid losers and have been for over thirty years now.

It's the perfect time for a mass movement to a third party. Does any normal person really want to destroy the environment and have endless war? Why do both parties unanimously approve endless war with no type of town hall discussion or negotiation? The answer is because killing is a business and the capitalist model of endless growth and profit applies to the military industrial complex, just as in every other aspect of the economy.

Should killing people and imprisoning people be a for-profit industry? I can't believe an overwhelming majority of people wouldn't be against killing humans for profit, but according to our senators and representatives, this is how the general public wants them to vote one hundred percent of the time. Do you not question even that about how the country operates?

I want cheaper healthcare. I want everyone to have good schools, not just rich people. I want everyone to make a living wage. I want a clean environment and good public transportation. The Democrats do not want you to have these things because they are paid to not want you to have them.

When Nancy Pelosi says there's just no way to pay for cheaper healthcare when she started out a somewhat normal citizen and made over $100 million dollars in her political career, then it's pretty obvious how the Democratic party is run from the top.

Yes Trump is full of awful ideas and his party is just fine with it, but voting Democrat out of fear is not the answer. Without a third party, things are going to get worse.





This is exactly the wrong time to move to a third party. You would just fragment the vote anyone left-of-center and make the Republican Party more dominant than it already is. Yes, establishment Democrats suck, but lots of voters LIKE those establishment Democrats. They're not going to vote for third party just because something shiny and new springs up. Remember, Clinton won the primary. Nefarious methods or not, she got more votes than the anti-establishment candidates.

The problem with pie-in-the-sky arguments like this is that it lacks all perspective and pragmaticism. Stay home, don't vote, and you'll just let Trump coast to a 2nd term.


I'm not even sure how to respond to this particular flavor of Stockholm Syndrome, but you are basically saying, 'A lot of people actually like corrupt, lying politicians, so why would we stop voting for them'. Quite bizarre.

If you are worried about Republicans getting even more control, then you should be looking to get a major 3rd and 4th party going (and possibly even more) in order to create good parties for conservatives to vote for. I personally am conservative on some issues, but why should I have to align with elitists that refuse to denounce the KKK in order to be tough on immigration laws? There are other options besides one bad party or the other bad one. There truly are.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
MGK
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rutherford82 wrote:
If you are worried about Republicans getting even more control, then you should be looking to get a major 3rd and 4th party going (and possibly even more) in order to create good parties for conservatives to vote for. I personally am conservative on some issues, but why should I have to align with elitists that refuse to denounce the KKK in order to be tough on immigration laws? There are other options besides one bad party or the other bad one. There truly are.


hi, we've had this argument on RSP more times than I can conveniently count so here are the high points

1) regardless of how much you might dislike two-party systems, they are the inevitable mathematical result of first-past-the-post voting

2) this is doubly the case in the USA, where as a result of the divided legislature/executive it makes even less sense to have more than two parties

3) as a general rule when you have more than two parties in a first-past-the-post system it's because of regional parties, which tend to create fractious national politics

4) the entire political history of the USA is one of two parties, and when a third party arises it is really only ever because one of the existing two parties' collapse; the Whigs replaced the Federalists, the Republicans replaced the Whigs, and that's about it

5) "more than two parties COULD work" is not actually an argument and never has been, and proponents of third-party voting in the American context don't have anything else other than "it's technically possible" and that's not actually a case worth making so whatevs
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oldies but Goodies ... Avalon Hill and
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
rinelk wrote:
SPIGuy wrote:
rinelk wrote:
SPIGuy wrote:

What's asinine is looking at how the political landscape has changed over the past forty years and pointing out a one-year anomaly which was quickly reversed.


Dude.

The first thing that comes up in a search for "years in which democrats gained house seats" is this. It only lists presidential election years, but it looks like they gained House Reps in 1976, 1988, 2004, 2008, and 2012. In the Senate, they gained in 2000, 2008, and 2012.

Which one year did you even have in mind?

The anomaly I was referring to is the one you pointed out: 2009 to 2010. So...great. Democrats gained House seats in some elections. The trend is still clear. Democrats have gone from the dominant political party, nationally and at state level, to one which is dominated, particularly at the state level.



Fair enough, but that entirely undermines rutherford82’s point. If Democrats can’t win, then, yeah, those who oppose Republicans would do better to find an alternative. But if they can win, and have done so many times even in the recent past, and seem to be doing especially well right now specifically because they’ve started reversing the trend of declining power at the state level, rutherford82’s prescription that it’s time to jump ship is exactly wrong. It’s not the perfect time to vote third party; it’s the worst time. The Democrats have massive momentum right now, with generic Democrats polling above generic Republicans by almost 10 points. Why give up an advantage that large which just won landslide victories almost everywhere? How could that possibly be a sensible strategy?

You may be right that Democrats still have a few bullets left in their gun at the national level, in addition to the extra ammo that Trump is providing them. What if you're wrong, though? Democrats have ceded control in state after state. It took a wave of revulsion at Bush II's wars and economic calamity to get us a Democratic Congress and president. Then, Democrats did their best Republican Lite impression and were tossed out in droves during the mid-terms.

Rutherford and Darilian are right in that Democrats must stand for something. If they don't then Republicans will continue to dominate the conversation, the talking points, and the ballot box. The Republican message is always going to be easier to formulate and pitch to voters. That's a disadvantage that Democrats must overcome, and "Fuck Trump" only goes so far.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.