It's incredibly telling and depressing that you conflate ending endless warfare with isolationism.
Oh and and it's super cool that drones prevent troop deaths but I'm a little more concerned with the innocent people getting murdered for no reason.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Democrats to AOC "You aren't supposed to go after other Democrats" as they hope to get her to fall into line
- Thread starter Tovarisc
- Start date
Oh and and it's super cool that drones prevent troop deaths but I'm a little more concerned with the innocent people getting murdered for no reason.
And yet they're still destroyed and things aren't getting much better even after 20 years. Afghanistan is especially fucked after all this and we have enabled tyrants and fundamentalists in the name of "rebuilding"
This is one of those "it depends" situations.
Any Dem that resides in a pure blue state needs to hop aboard the progressive bandwagon. Red and purple state Dems need to be afforded space to quibble but AOC shouldn't back down to any of their demands... just allow them the opportunity to gripe. They need to be afforded the opportunity to criticize the ideals she stands for otherwise there's a pretty good chance their constituents won't keep them around.
Manchin shouldn't be expected to evolve. Sinema shoudn't be expected to evolve.
Blue state Dems... primary those fuckers out if they don't get with the program.
Saying we must stay in wars perpetually because "we have commitments" is just an excuse by the military machine to perpetually keep it up.
You created those "commitments" intentionally to create a situation where endless warfare is the most profitable and the only recourse from a perspective of intransigence.
To clean America's wounds, they will have to be reopened, and its going to hurt in numerous ways,
You created those "commitments" intentionally to create a situation where endless warfare is the most profitable and the only recourse from a perspective of intransigence.
To clean America's wounds, they will have to be reopened, and its going to hurt in numerous ways,
Enjoying thinking about the people out there sweating when they think about what to do when she endorses Bernie.
Protecting people that we have taken responsibility for and assisting allies in self-defense is not being a "war hawk."
This is pure fiction.
Funny, then, that Bernie Sanders' foreign policy positions in 2016 were almost entirely just copy/pasted from Barack Obama. From Iran Deal, Syria strategy, all the way down to drone strikes.
Stop posturing. No one who is even remotely informed buys this.
It was not obvious when he was saying trump was "doing whats right" and "nationalism is right" -- people avoid that phrasing when describing political spectrum for obvious reasons
"She's new here, feeling her way around," added Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.). "She doesn't understand how the place works yet."
next time you're asking why supermajorities in our favor don't get a great deal accomplished, think about quotes like these
next time you're asking why supermajorities in our favor don't get a great deal accomplished, think about quotes like these
the most sustained and consistent criticism sanders gets from the left is on foreign policy, and he has been moving away from the dem consensus there recently
It's a twisting of a quote where Obama says he could have been a moderate Republican in the 80s. Which is true, because the post-Civil Rights realignment was still in progress where parties were still much more ideologically diverse, and at that time, Elizabeth Warren was still a moderate Republican.
2008 Obama is nowhere close to being a moderate Republican - a moderate Republican would be someone like Boehner. (as in, not very moderate, but also not insane)
Giving reasons to never recede is the mindset of a warhawk. AMerica is the number one super power and the strongest and most abrasive military force in the world three times over. What your arguing for is a continuation Bush's axis of evil, what the GOP back then advocated for as the US's god given right of military dominance of the world perpetually, for any reason.
At one time, there was an actual left wing prominent counterpoint to that, which was "um, no." , but we're moving way too far to the right so that even well meaning people have been suckered into that mindset.
We have to get out of it.
That would require a full reassesment of stipulations for US military policy, and what requires an intervention and under what banner, and indeed, what parts of the military are no longer needed to be bolstered and what can be drawn down, as aghast as some might argue that is.
Obama advocated for a consensus based approach but dropped that and expanded his executive power, essentially abdicating congress's entire position on war time to the executive branch, allowing for this blatant explosion of military power.
I can't help but feel like when someone says "She doesn't get how this works yet", that person is basically telling me "The status quo must be maintained".
How it "works" is that it fucking *doesn't*.
How it "works" is that it fucking *doesn't*.
You come in here claiming Obama and Sanders have the same foreign policy and I'm the one posturing? Gotcha.
Bernie is far from perfect but Obama was a total disaster.
Right, it's like they just want to live in the Obama presidency again. We literally cannot go back to a status quo that doesn't exist.
yeah, lets just keep doing it the same way we've always done things
wtf @ 2002, people are so dumb
Generally speaking this is the logical outcome but considering her age, if more up and coming dems of similar age start winning elections every two years she'll become the leadership in 6 years easy. The older dems are in for a very rude awakening if they don't fully grasp this possibility before they can think of a way of co-opting or countering it.
As for my own personal opinion, Politico is solid with their anonymous sources unless you want to disregard all the things they disclosed about the Trump admin and GOP primaries before they've proven to be true. They aren't going to be 100% right on everything but they are usually right.
Ocasio is well within her right to critique fellow Dems. We have been doing it for years in the bottom ranks and it's about time someone in the upper ranks did the same. Unlike Trump, when she uses twitter her comments are either backed with facts or are glib funny statements that resonate with dems under 40.
I am not. I am saying that allowing the Taliban to return in Afghanistan is unacceptable. I am saying that promising to assist the Kurdish people then attempting to leave them high and dry w/ no notice is unacceptable. These are not situations where we are using force arbitrarily just because we have nothing to do, we are using it because these peoples are under attack by people who wish to do them harm, and there are circumstances in which we owe them assistance in protecting them from those people. Which yes, will involve deadly force, because deadly force is generally the appropriate response is when people are trying to kill your allies.
Actually they're worse because they pretend to be on your side and stop progress from happening when Dems manage to take power
I don't think a lot of people who bought "Yes We Can" t-shirts wanted someone who's just "not a Republican" but sides with Wall Street.
One reason why Trump got elected.
I was about to say the same thing. People are so bought into the idea of politics being about insider wheeling and dealing that comes from experience within the system, that they completely miss the clash of values and interests that can only be resolved through the force of power.
Of course there's no need to make it harder on yourself by needlessly making enemies, but at the end of the day the only thing that's going to get them to give up power to an opposing ideology is fear of losing even more power if they don't.
Indeed, they're cowards who want to keep safely doing things they've always done. Even after getting beaten by a dumbass reality star.
The problem is that your arguing for a unilateral response to a problem that largely has no direct issue with America. Your enabling the faulty premise of the war on terror with a military inherently designed to create and have to perpetually clean up its own messes, thus never needing to re-appropriate itself or reign itself in.That is LITERALLY the military industrial complex. It does not even have to be inherently evil or imperialistic like many of our ventures abroad, but a continuous drive to expand.
Making sure the kurds are not slaughtered is one thing, but you dont need an inherently military force always occupying syria to do that. in the way way, Afganistan because of us will always be at war with itself through many of our interventions over the decades in the country. you will never erase the taliban or the terrorism from these countries, especially with an outside force. To accept that narrative is to accept the US's unilateral right to invade or knock over any country which houses these types of forces.
Again, LITERALLY bush's axis of evil speech.
What is deemed a piece of shit in liberal New York may be the way to get elected in a more rural district. It seems she isn't taking the time to learn that.
Why make them enemies? No need to name the enemy when you can create policy and work towards change that undermines them while having them on your side. Republicans thrive on hatred and divisiveness. That's not what the DNC should be.
The party should avoid painting itself into a corner and being seen as hypocritical. Take for example what you said about taking fossil fuel PAC money as unacceptable to any reasonable person. Should DNC candidates not use means of travel that use fossil fuel? What about red meat? Giving up beef may reduce carbon footprint more than cars, so should the DNC not support farmers and people who eat beed? Are they an enemy? If you eat beef you're the enemy! I AM A PROGRESSIVE AND THIS IS WHAT A PROGRESSIVE IS AND EVERYONE ELSE IS THE ENEMY!!!!
I'm intentionally being overly sensational in order to make a point. There needs to be compromise. The party needs to be open to all. My original point was almost all of the DNC agrees on 95% of the issues so don't go crazy by calling someone an "enemy" over the 5% difference in positions. This divisive approach will not succeed.
i don't want to "make" the rich and powerful my enemy, i want my representatives to acknowledge the fact that they already are my enemy. they work against my best interests and do not share common goals with me, and as long as they have influence in the democratic party they will use it to dilute and destroy necessary progress.
the ACA is an object lesson here. including the health insurance industry in the building of policy was a huge mistake because their interests are completely at odds with the general public, and the results speak for themselves. the next time democrats are able to craft healthcare legislation they need to treat the insurance companies as malicious actors because that's what they are.
I... god, I love her. I hope she keeps at it, at least til the next round of primaries. We just can't afford a milquetoast party that enables high polluting companies to just keep doind what their doing a little less than republicans. She speaks very intersectionally about social and economic issues. If she's pissing off people content with the status quo and working within narrow predetermined margins in this racist novo aristocratic country, she's doing something right in my book.
Rural America voted for Trump unanimously(?). They are too stupid to see a con artist for what he is. There is no point in trying to sell them anything. All we can do is make promises that regardless of how they vote we'll take care of the idiots.
We're going to have ignore how they think and carry them like the burden they are into modernity. They have serious issues with infrastructure and an aging demographic and they need help with that and there are solutions to it but they don't even know how to vote for someone who can promise solutions that take advantage of our assets and inspire the smartest among them to stay and build instead of fleeing to cities.
he's appealing to the status quo when the status quo is bad and a demonstrable failure
It is strange that the "fall in line" folks are quiet. Without Bernie's name invoked they don't know how to react anymore?
If the heat on her gets too hot, the Justice Democrats could always take down people by proxy.
That's not it. For example, I am Black and I despise racists. Who do I hate more than racists? Sellout Uncle Toms. Being against Trump and Republicans goes without saying. In fact, Trump is such low hanging fruit and the focus on him can be corny at times. He is a symptom of a larger problem which hypocritical Democrats have contributed to themselves. Punching centre-right is ok under the circumstances.
She's actually a pragmatist on that. She's far, far better about strategy that front than the JDs.
And dems wonder why they can't get grassroots energy behind them. They don't want to speak to, or for, their constituents. They just want to keep their country club going. They're sworn to protect the status quo when nobody fucking likes the status quo.
Sanders has been made a pure political foil by his enemies as his own personal character, to deter people from the progressive message he has been championing for many years.
That's why its so amusing to see AOC, to be able to come in and actually be a full throated progressive in the same vein with the exact same policy views without the strawmen being able to be hurled at her and being effectively neutralized when tried by either establishment dems or the GOP. That just proves how fake they were from the start.
That is what Justice Dems was attempting from the start, so they should not stop here when it comes to getting people set up running for office, AOC and the other newcomers are just the start
I feel like Token from that episode of South Park, "Politico doesn't speak for all Democrats". This isn't as big of an issue as they are hyping it. The party isn't out to get her or anything and AOC herself is much more pragmatic and "moderate' then she's being portrayed.
