It's poor optics for sure but I think that this is one of the downsides of being a big tent party. You have a lot of different voters spread across the political spectrum. People like Bloomberg (completely baffling but there are a small group of voters among Dems but I think he is primarily for the Independents and Republicans looking to vote Biden) and Clinton appeal to different people than AOC. Saying that Dems should remove Bloomberg and Bill and give that time to AOC basically cuts down on the time meant to focus on the people Bloomberg and Bill are meant to target. I don't think that is necessarily wise. Could they find someone else that could target a similar group of voters? Perhaps? With the same name rec? Probably not.
Workers seizing the power of the state, abolishing private property, liberating all foreign colonies, returning all native land, ending the military industrial complex and setting about creating a fair and just society.
Clearly, posting about it on a video game forum is the first important step.
Discussion guidelines
Official Staff Communication
The topic at hand is the DNC. Necessarily, the people speaking at the convention and their histories are going to come up. If you feel so much disagreement with other posters on this or other topics that you're compelled to mock, belittle, or antagonize them for their takes, I encourage you to use your ignore list rather than indulging in the aforementioned behavior. Failure to do so will be harshly moderated from this point on.
Bloomberg isn't being invited because he's a strategically good choice, he's being invited because he's well connected with the party's right wing.
This is not a productive argument at all, and Kuwabara has a legit point.
But I'm definitely sure that it begins by not meddling in other countries' affairs, specially if it involves bombing people, and specially if they are children. EDIT: Just saw the staff communication, will leave this as it is, but won't comment any further.
The most offensive thing to me about tonight's stream was how boring it was. I must not be Michelle's target demo because I don't understand what that kind of passive, pleading voice is supposed to awaken in people.
We need to fire people up, tell them we're going to rip Trump's rat nest off his head and make sure his scum cabinet are prosecuted to the full extent. Give people the fucking spite vote that drove Trump into office. Make people understand that their vote is a knife to his cold, Crisco-lined heart.
The RNC is going to be a fucking circus compared to this, and it's definitely going to give the psychotic MAGA crowd the energy they need to zerg rush the polls.
We need to fire people up, tell them we're going to rip Trump's rat nest off his head and make sure his scum cabinet are prosecuted to the full extent. Give people the fucking spite vote that drove Trump into office. Make people understand that their vote is a knife to his cold, Crisco-lined heart.
The RNC is going to be a fucking circus compared to this, and it's definitely going to give the psychotic MAGA crowd the energy they need to zerg rush the polls.
This is the correct take. You gotta have a real left movement at the local level and not just an appearance when it's time for the general election.
We probably ought not have racists or serial harassers/abusers speaking at the convention as representatives of the party, no matter their supposed strategic value, though? The Democratic Party loses credibility, especially running against a virulently racist and sexist ticket like Trump/Pence, when it brings in similar elements. I'd rather they find someone else without these issues to speak to those blocs of voters. This is the politics of protecting the powerful and established and it's just nasty.
I'd say that it is more for the money! But I do think that he appeals to a group of right leaning Dems for sure and never!Trumpers.
Honestly, inviting Kasich isnt thaaat wild to me. I get it, as much as I despise the man.
parading around with cops is what really angered me. It felt like a slap to the face of so many grieving families
parading around with cops is what really angered me. It felt like a slap to the face of so many grieving families
I don't think he brings in anybody that Biden and Kasich don't.
I still can't believe they had an InfoWars cop on. Unreal.
exactly. general elections are important and should be utilized (mostly for harm reduction) but there are many other avenues where change can be brought about from like organizing groups and unions
So who talks about mending relations with our allies, John Kerry?
and will Tammy Duckworth call President trump 'Cadet Bone Spurs?'
and will Tammy Duckworth call President trump 'Cadet Bone Spurs?'
Yeah, that was really gross to watch/listen to. Especially the one guest who also had a history appearing on InfoWars, absolute fucking trash.
I doubt he was vetted properly. Probably just told them he was "one of the good ones" and that was that
there are thousands of stateless minority groups worldwide and very few countries (if any?) that are controlled by the "natives" (which is something that would also be hard to define in any non new world country), so i dont think its a realistic goal to expect something like that to be possible without a humongous global government regulating things
This whole "let's get the republicans on board" thing just doesn't seem right. Specially adding a goddamn cop that went on Alex Jones, when we're at the height of protests against police brutality.
And yes, I've heard the arguments about bringing in republicans. But then they let Kasich have a bit of spotlight and the first thing he does is go after the left and AOC. So our fears keep getting validated.
They should be protecting her. Not putting her alongside people who want to tear her down.
And yes, I've heard the arguments about bringing in republicans. But then they let Kasich have a bit of spotlight and the first thing he does is go after the left and AOC. So our fears keep getting validated.
They should be protecting her. Not putting her alongside people who want to tear her down.
Thats exactly what this is. It's an equivocation between Trump and Obama, and as a result, Trump and Biden. Because this is a thread about how Democrats are making case for why Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are a better option for America than Trump and Mike Pence, and yet, a vocal minority of this forum are obsessed with steering that discussion, to the argument that Barack Obama is a war criminal. If there was nuance in the arguments then it wouldn't be thar way, but there's no nuance, there's no food for thought. There's just denunciation of Obama.
It's every thread. It's every argument against Trump. This is a thread, literally in the title of it, about the case for voting for Biden over Trump in November, and for a group of community members here their best rebuttal to that is "Obama is a war criminal, Biden was his VP, so nothing matters." It's every thread. It's every discussion. And beyond that I don't even know what the objective is, because even if you're, say, a Sanders supporter...... Sanders authorized the use of force that Obama used to commit his war crimes. So did Elizabeth Warren. AOC wasn't elected yet but she's endorsed the candidate who stood behind the war criminal.
"but nobody here is saying that Trump is better than Obama/Biden," no you don't have to, you're equivocating to the point that the case doesn't even have to be made. And this is the result, the America we live in right now is the result and it's a *worse version of America* than it was 5 years ago.
You're not "informing anybody," you're spreading misinformation. You're *uninforming* people, because any of the posts that have nuance, are dismissed as apologizing for a war criminal.
There are plenty of opportunities to discuss Obama's alleged war criminality and in threads about that subject I'm not going to steer it back to "....well he's better than Trump" because that's not the place for it and the arguments deserve to be made, but In threads that are specifically about the case for Biden over Trump in November, to steer it continually back to Obama's apparent war criminality is to equivocate between Biden and Trump. It's, in effect, an argument for Trump. Im sure you don't want it to be -- "nobody is arguing for Trump here" the defense will go -- but in a thread about the candidacy of Joe Biden vs Donald Trump, in the general election, when it's steered back towards Obama's apparent war crimes over and over and over and over that's exactly what the argument is, it's a nihilistic equivocation that Trump is no worse than Obama, Biden, Sanders, AOC, Warren, and anybody else. And I object to that argument. *Trump is worse than all of them*
*Edit*
After finishing this post I see there's a mod warning about not engaging with other posters on topics we disagree with, in regard to people who speaks at the DNC. I wrote this post before that warning went up and I think just got it in time, so I figure you and others don't have time to reply. I do want to say because you might not be able to engage in earnest with this post that you have legitimate beef with the Obama admin, and a beef I agree with largely tho perhaps not to the same conclusions. I don't want your inability to engage to seem like an invalidation of your opinion on Obama or American foreign policy. I think your gripe is legitimate, though we might not he able to engage with one another without facing a ban or warning. I'm cool with anybody rebutting my points here, though I won't reply to it and argue back and forth because I don't feel like getting banned and. It being able to discuss other stuff over the next 3-4mos.
Last edited:
Specially putting a cop that appeared on Alex Jones just to the left of the mother of a minority who was murdered by fascist cops absolutely blows my mind, and I can't believe they let that slide and soured me on the whole thing. It's like the party is attempting to do a conciliatory strategy, but fuck, if you pay attention with these little details, you can feel you are gonna get more of the same into a potential Biden administration in some aspects. You won't get the structural changes that allowed the situation to be this shitty.
I really just want America to exist as a country where voting in anyone other than a Republican is possible and that's what I'm focused on right now.
The fact they are giving Bernie and AoC a platform shows they are willing to work together.
We have never had an avowed Socialist(let alone two) be given any platform by a major party in the US. They both get one, so keep pushing and who knows what we can accomplish.
The thing is, I don't think they needed to drag this on for 3 more days. What is there to say that hasn't already been said today?
Bill Clinton is was a two-term Democratic President and the Clinton machine is still a powerful influence in the party. Michael Bloomberg is the ~8th richest American.
Beyond that I got nothing.
An InfoWars cop managed to sneak in and talk about how good cops are with Biden right in front of a mother who lost her child to police brutality, you tell me.
Bill Clinton's a phenomenal speaker and had a rather solid presidency that Dems can point to as proof that they can lead effectively. Do I think he's a good person, especially with this baggage surrounding him and Epstein? Gotta say no to that
To answer your Bloomberg question:
Bloomberg pledges $60M to boost House Democrats: report
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg reportedly intends to put $60 million toward helping to boost House Democrats’ chances in the fall. A Bloomberg adviser told The Washington Post pa…
thehill.com
Yup. It's nice to see from his speech that Sanders seems to understand the gravity of the situation at hand and how not voting Biden is grave for the future of leftism.
Clinton's presidency is still fondly remembered by many Democrats.
Bloomberg...¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Sure. Ideally they would find someone better than those two to speak to that group but name recognition becomes an issue. They could certainly find others but how many with the level of name recognition as Bill? Very very few I'd imagine. Though Bill's Star has certainly declined! Give it a few more years and he may be reviled.
It's about reinforcement. You want to pound in the message that those voters can and should vote for Biden and having similar people reinforce that goes a long way.
To answer your Bloomberg question:
Bloomberg pledges $60M to boost House Democrats: report
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg reportedly intends to put $60 million toward helping to boost House Democrats’ chances in the fall. A Bloomberg adviser told The Washington Post pa…
Quite the downgrade from 1 billion to 60 million.
Pros: he's a good speaker and was president
Cons: He's a rapist with multiple sexual assault and harassment allegations
Bloomberg is still the only "democrat" this election period that I've seen run some really scathing anti Trump ads in swing states during prime time TV. I hope the Biden campaign has at least a few of those up their sleeve. The current Biden ads are incredibly toothless, but I assume they're aimed at people who doing like nasty ads.
Bloomberg enforces negative things about the party though. There is a transactional cost to promoting a figure as reviled as him.
He was full of shit the entire time and frankly I think Democrats were marks to ever believe him.