• Sidebar and Width settings will now no longer reset after 4 hours of inactivity! We have implemented a new system that will remember these preferences on each browser, for both members and guests. This allows you to choose different settings on different devices if you so desire.

Democrats to AOC "You aren't supposed to go after other Democrats" as they hope to get her to fall into line

Oct 25, 2017
1,475
That's what got Trump elected. And his government has been an absolute failure. You can't elect someone who only knows how to bloviate.
Sure, but that's why the Dems could go a long way by actually working with people at the grassroots level to cultivate the next generation of democrat leaders who can electrify voters while actually getting work done in congress.

Again, we need more people like AOC, and it's not going to be that difficult to find those people if they actually try and understand why she's so effective this early in her career.
 

Kitsunelaine

My favorite cake is pie
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,011
that's not what i said at all, but go off i suppose
Your problem with democrats is that they're, in your eyes, all talk and no action-- i.e, "they bloviate well". our point is that AoC currently just knows how to bloviate well, which is a valulable skill and a great way to get good PR, but you seem to protray it as an actual solution to our problem of people only being able to bloviate well.

This is why you rally around politicians who have actual solutions. This is why solutions are important. You're getting excited over the thing you're angry about and fighting against; just because it's worded better.
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2017
2,088
Your problem with democrats is that they're, in your eyes, all talk and no action-- i.e, "they bloviate well". our point is that AoC currently just knows how to bloviate well, which is a valulable skill and a great way to get good PR, but you seem to protray it as an actual solution to our problem of people only being able to bloviate well.

This is why you rally around politicians who have actual solutions. This is why solutions are important.
that's a completely substanceless take on what i've been saying.

my problem with democrats is that they're largely bad, in that they're pro-capital and when they do pass something good it's always internally compromised to the point where it usually collapses on itself in short order. i think they're actually very good at accomplishing their goals, but their goals are making a lot of money and pleasing their donors.

i think AOC is good not because she's good at talking but because she takes a principled stand against all that. reducing all of this to surface-level drama is ridiculous but par for the course when it comes to the democratic party.
 

Kitsunelaine

My favorite cake is pie
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,011
having bedrock moral principles is a different thing than saying platitudes on the TV, and just because AOC can do the latter doesn't mean she's reducible to the former
There is no difference unless you actually give a shit about a path to act on it.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,800
They don't like it only because it scares them and that's great. If any Dems are worried she may embolden someone to primary them they ought to look at their policies and course correct sooner rather than later.
I agree with this whole heartedly. Being an elected official shouldn't be a career with comfortable long term job security. Primary elections shouldn't be something to be feared. Should always be ready for a chellenger.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,720
Can someone tell me what exactly she needs to fall in line for? There certainly is something to be said about learning the ropes from people who have been doing this a long time but people didn't elect her to fucking be a normal boring ass democrat. She won on her platform and her personality. To an extent your old boring asses need to embrace it.

She's 29, you have to embrace the young energy. Not pray she falls in line.
 
Oct 27, 2017
187
It's not "ERA's", its lefties who use it as a slur against anyone to the right of "overthrow capitalism."

Why would need help when there's nothing wrong with the statement?

It's used as an insult, invective, etc. (whatever you want to call it) by some rather than being used as a boring neutral descriptor the way it's used everywhere else.
1. The word "insult" doesn't have the same degree as the very loaded term "slur"

2. It's problematic to imply that "centrist" is in the same ballpark as something like the homophobic f slur or the racist n slur by legitimizing the view that just any word can be a slur. It also legitimizes statements like " liberals use alt-right, republican, incel etc. as a slur"
 
Nov 2, 2017
790
Outside
*extremely white voice*

"For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin. "
 
Oct 25, 2017
18,230
*extremely white voice*

"For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin. "
This actually happened in 2018!

The election pattern is basically Robbie Mook's revenge.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,655
*extremely white voice*

"For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin. "
And this the party shifts right
 

Kitsunelaine

My favorite cake is pie
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,011
well so far she's doing all the right things

we'll just have to see if that lasts
our fundamental disagreement here is the fact that saying =/= doing

you care about the former and conflate it with the latter; i mostly just care about the latter. If all you care about is the fact that she slags off democrats you're in for a bad time
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
18,230
And this the party shifts right
No, it doesn't, because replacing socially conservative economically liberal representatives (populists) w socially liberal economically moderate representatives (liberal<-> libertarian range) is going to make your net economic policy because racism is a bigger roadblock to implementing a better welfare state than someone's actual economic views.

Quoting myself, from yesterday:
Those moderate Democrats are almost all economically moderate, but socially liberal.

The 2019 Dem caucus is much more consistently socially liberal due to how realignment moved competitive seats away from "White Working Class" areas and opened up THE OC instead.

And this is going to result in a more liberal caucus overall because social conservatism leads to MUCH more conservative economic policy than simply having moderate economic beliefs.

I do not understand your obsession with desperately seeking out the "white working class" voters who have clearly told you what their priorities are.
 

Kitsunelaine

My favorite cake is pie
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,011
"Years of warped lukewarm centrism has made it so I don't know the difference between principles and posturing."
"years of seeing politicans saying one thing and doing the other (or not doing anything at all) has made me not care one bit about what politicans are actually saying as far as their stances on policy go because none of it actually matters"
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,655
No, it doesn't, because replacing socially conservative economically liberal representatives (populists) w socially liberal economically moderate representatives (liberal<-> libertarian range is going to make your net economic policy because racism is a bigger roadblock to implementing a better welfare state than someone's actual economic views.

Quoting myself, from yesterday:
Those economically moderates will still perpetuate and vote for systemically racist policies even if they are socially liberally.

 
Aug 27, 2018
347
"years of seeing politicans saying one thing and doing the other (or not doing anything at all) has made me not care one bit about what politicans are actually saying"

your star girl and star boy are no exception dude
How much do you want done from someone who's been in office for just over a week? Like, wtf are you talking about?
 
Oct 25, 2017
18,230
Those economically moderates will still perpetuate and vote for systemically racist policies even if they are socially liberally.
Your social moderates will be even worse because the racism overrides everything else.

Why did the American "working class" never unify here like it did elsewhere? Because the "white working class" didn't want to.
 

Kitsunelaine

My favorite cake is pie
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,011
How much do you want done from someone who's been in office for just over a week? Like, wtf are you talking about?
If you think that's what I've been saying you need to read my posts again without inserting your own conclusions.

Thinking people shouldn't gravitate towards politicians based solely on their own PR isn't an earth shattering take.
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,655
Your social moderates will be even worse because the racism overrides everything else.

Why did the American "working class" never unify here like it did elsewhere? Because the "white working class" didn't want to.
They’re not mine, let’s get that straight. And let’s not forget that those white moderates are still racist even if they might be socially liberal. They want to keep the white supremacist infrastructure because they benefit from it.
 
Aug 27, 2018
347
If you think that's what I've been saying you need to read my posts again without inserting your own conclusions.

Thinking people shouldn't gravitate towards politicians based solely on their own PR isn't an earth shattering take.
I think your expectations are a little whack. Some of us consider her proposal and stances--voicing them and making them actual talking points where they would not have been before--doing something positive insofar as how much is even possible yet.
 

Kitsunelaine

My favorite cake is pie
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,011
I think your expectations are a little whack. Some of us consider her proposal and stances--voicing them and making them actual talking points where they would not have been before--doing something positive insofar as how much is even possible yet.
Only "a little"? Is that why you jumped in this thread to flat out mock them? Hard to have a good faith conversation with someone who's only interested in dunking on other participants, so don't pretend that's what we're doing here.
 
Oct 30, 2017
1,703
I guess I really don’t see what the issue would be here. Congress is an entity where deal making and relationship building is crucial to getting things done. Her advocating for sitting members in her own party to be primaried doesn’t be help build those relationships. No one wants AOC to become the Ted Cruz of the left.
 
Nov 7, 2017
2,070
This is what I'm most concerned with, I think naturally any person will begin to feel beat down and succumb to compromise on some of her positions when even those in her own party aren't in line with what's best for the poor and middle class. I hope she is able to keep that fervor for true progressive values.
 
Oct 25, 2017
18,230
They’re not mine, let’s get that straight. And let’s not forget that those white moderates are still racist even if they might be socially liberal. They want to keep the white supremacist infrastructure because they benefit from it.
They're much less racist because they've grown up, lived and worked with nonwhite people their entire lives.

No one's trying to say they're perfect unicorns. But they're a hell of a lot better when it comes to being reliable votes for progressive legislation because "wait we don't want to help the Welfare Queens" isn't going to be a roadblock for them. The bigger issues are going to be with some of them being YIMBYs locally, but that's largely irrelevant at the federal level.

If you haven't read Osita Nwanevu's piece on the failure of Jesse Jackson's 1988 campaign I strongly, strongly recommend doing so. https://agenda-blog.com/2017/07/03/...cs-neoliberalism-and-the-white-working-class/
 
Oct 28, 2017
5,655
They're much less racist because they've grown up, lived and worked with nonwhite people their entire lives.
No, they’re still racist, they’re just expressing it systemically instead of in-your-face slurs and shit. Like they’ll talk about equality and shit but stil gentrify the shit out of your neighborhood.
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,385
I wonder if Congress is the best office for her. So much of the job is building alliances and compromise. It'd be cool to see her give mayor a shot.
 

Kitsunelaine

My favorite cake is pie
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,011
I wonder if Congress is the best office for her. So much of the job is building alliances and compromise. It'd be cool to see her give mayor a shot.
If nothing else it'll teach her the realities of holding a political position. One would hope, anyway.

We're seeing it with Trump. Going out of your way to make everyone your enemy means nobody will work with you and you will not be able to accomplish anything you actually set out for.
 
Aug 27, 2018
347
Is it so wrong to go to Washington with the intention to change the game rather than play it as it is? Especially considering the side everyone agrees is the greatest threat, are not playing by the games rules?
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,178
SoCal
Reminds me when Tea Partiers first started getting elected and the establishment Republicans said the incoming freshmen would learn how to go about things the right way and learn their place in the pecking order.

A few years later, Boehner was out on his ass and their caucus was setting the agenda for their Party.
 
They're much less racist because they've grown up, lived and worked with nonwhite people their entire lives.

No one's trying to say they're perfect unicorns. But they're a hell of a lot better when it comes to being reliable votes for progressive legislation because "wait we don't want to help the Welfare Queens" isn't going to be a roadblock for them. The bigger issues are going to be with some of them being YIMBYs locally, but that's largely irrelevant at the federal level.

If you haven't read Osita Nwanevu's piece on the failure of Jesse Jackson's 1988 campaign I strongly, strongly recommend doing so. https://agenda-blog.com/2017/07/03/...cs-neoliberalism-and-the-white-working-class/
If you like that article. you should follow Osita Nwanevu on Twitter, you could learn a lot from his perspective on liberalism and the Democratic Party
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,404
Reminds me when Tea Partiers first started getting elected and the establishment Republicans said the incoming freshmen would learn how to go about things the right way and learn their place in the pecking order.

A few years later, Boehner was out on his ass and their caucus was setting the agenda for their Party.
Except this is about what people want, and not billionaire asshole, astroturfing, scum like the tea party. It's strange that people that want to do good for the greater whole have to go through the gauntlet of hate because comfortable pieces of shit think their meal ticket will end.
 
Oct 25, 2017
18,230
No, they’re still racist, they’re just expressing it systemically instead of in-your-face slurs and shit. Like they’ll talk about equality and shit but stil gentrify the shit out of your neighborhood.
The amount a house rep has to do with local gentrification is approximately 0. Which is another reason why trading more-racist "working class" reps for less racist metropolitan reps is a positive trade.

Like, unless you're trying to literally convey that you believe all white people are equally racist regardless of where they live, and thus the only thing that matters is class. Which would be completely wrong based on the data we have showing gigantic differences in how metropolitan white voters perceive the world as opposed to rural ones.
If you like that article. you should follow Osita Nwanevu on Twitter, you could learn a lot from his perspective on liberalism and the Democratic Party
I do! I'm not opposed to good-faith criticism! Like, I want Lipinski gone, I want whatshisface in Texas gone, I would have voted Nixon in NY, etc.

I gotta find the story on Grossman's timeline, but they actually found (via surveys from people asked to bet on election results) that learning about how politics works inherently moderates people's political opinions. It doesn't make their core views moderate, but it changed how they were approaching the subject.
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,385
No, they’re still racist, they’re just expressing it systemically instead of in-your-face slurs and shit. Like they’ll talk about equality and shit but stil gentrify the shit out of your neighborhood.
Gentrification is not something that people do because they're racist. It's also not the sort of thing you can hold one individual responsible for, it's only problematic when it reaches a tipping point. That's why the solution is collective protections, not just expecting people to stay in their "own" neighborhoods and reinforce traditional segregation of housing.

And I say this as someone whose home neighborhood was gentrified entirely out of existence. I lived through that, I know what it's like. We bought my childhood home for $11,000 because we couldn't afford anything better, and now it's worth a half million bevause they bulldozed the neighborhood and built a hipster paradise around it.