personally, i would be more angry about sabotaging the future prospects of the state party by siphoning away hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding than over a twitter joke
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
But don't you see its their money. They can do whatever they want with it! Even if it means risking the state so you can later on down the line have a better chance of putting blame on a woman who has been campaigning for democrats for 13+ years.
It's only until September.
The bill addresses the material concerns of impoverished people for 7 months who have been in generational poverty and exploitation for an untold amount of time.
Where is an honest attempt at universal healthcare? Where an actual tax on inheritance, on capital gains, and on income over $250K?
Yes, the bill does the bare minimum for these people to SURVIVE right now, but does it set up for all people to thrive in the distant future? Absolutely not.
This is not table scraps. I have so many people back home in Puerto Rico whose material conditions are going to be changed for the better in a very drastic way by this one bill.
There's a lot of work still to be done, but that's no excuse to be so blase and dismissive about such a consequential piece of legislation.
I am, and the thread shouldn't be nearly as detailed as it has become.
Not sure if people here understand this, but you can literally statistically remove poverty with cash handouts, it's super easy, the problem is that it's expensive and doesn't fix the underlying problems.
The money went to a Senate campaign that is gonna be one of the most competitive in 2022, so it seems that fit with the goal of the State PArty wining elections for the Democrats in Nevada.
My point is just that some of you keep screaming about this bill halving poverty and how the left is just "doomposting" on the subject of the bill without qualifying the statement. If Biden and Congressional Dems make this permanent then I'll withdraw my objection but a temporary reduction in poverty doesn't do enough to address the Democratic Party's longstanding tradition of recognizing unsatisfactory material conditions for workers and then doing little or nothing to actually address those material conditions.
The cool thing is I don't need an excuse, and I actually don't care at all what you think. But thanks for offering your opinion on my tone anyway!
It is their money. And I would imagine NV Dems giving the DSCC half a million dollars is a rather normal occurrence, like it would be with any other state party that has endorsed, or will endorse, a senator.
"Risking the state" lmao. Didn't know the party was down that bad.
It didn't go the Senate campaign. As I've said in a previous post it went to the DSCC who has promised to use it on Catherine's campaign.
No mention of it being limited to the general. No mention of it being possible used on another nevada candidate if she loses her primary.
That doesn't really need to be stated? The DSCC will of course use the money on another Nevada candidate if Masto loses the primary. The DSCC's goal is to elect Senators and NV is one of the states where they will funnel the money regardless of who the Dem candidate is.
We're in agreement that more work remains to be done, but you made the point that Dems needed to start engaging in improving people's material conditions instead of getting caught up in culture wars. This bill, which reduces Black and Latino poverty by ~40% for one year, gives $86b to bailout pension funds, $5b for Black farmers, and lays the foundation for permanent child tax credits and childcare subsidies, is in fact engaging in improving people's material conditions, by any objective measure.
Because anyone posting guillotine memes is basically saying they want to get rid of the bourgeoisie, obviously.
Edit: I just noticed this part, and it twigged in my brain:
You have already acknowledged they were a revolutionary socialist group. You cannot say this about any group that describes itself as socialist, never mind revolutionary. I really don't think you understand what you're talking about.
Last edited:
User Banned (1 Week): Hostility
Can you fuck off? There are reports Catherine asked Judith to step down from the race. And now they've just stolen the coffers out of the NVDems for her supposedly. There's clearly bad blood at play here.
Candidate for state Dem Party chair says Cortez Masto asked her to quit race • Nevada Current
Clark County Democratic Party chair Judith Whitmer says her opponent for state party chair, Clark County Commissioner Tick Segerblom, supported her candidacy before he decided to enter the race himself at the behest of U.S. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, who then asked Whitmer to quit. “Tick had...
www.nevadacurrent.com
I'm pretty sure politicians get money for leaving a lot easier than normal people. Like, I think I heard that senators get 100k pensions (yearly?) after serving just 6 years.
Sure. The overall point has been established, so there is really nothing else for us to discuss on that topic.
That's fair. It's a start, but I'm certain that the party will not take it to the next level. They're following the same strategy they followed in 2009-2010.
People don't want just the start of something, they want actual change. People didn't want the ACA in 2009, they wanted to not have to worry how they will pay for healthcare. People don't want a foundation for the possibility of UBI in the future, they want UBI or some type of stable material relief from the extractive and soul crushing nature of capitalism.
Last edited:
Liberian insisted on no public option for ACA and they needed his vote to pass it.
likewise we have members who threw up walls for faster checks or no means testing, etc.
the democrats are not a monolithic cult like the gop is for most issues. The democrats are a bigger tent party and that unfortunately means internal negotiations to get anything politically risky passed.
that's just politics, really.
culture war is easy to win because you don't actually have to solve a problem and the gop can leverage their gerrymandering states to their advantage. Likewise the senate favors them by its design.
the left really needs to learn how the mechanics work and get out the vote/information and learn to better frame their movement in terms of sound bytes and slogans. The right are masters of propaganda and use their cult to their great advantage.
no. Nevada Dems both moderate and more progressive would rather continue to elect democrats in Nevada rather than lose the majority in both assembly and senate, the governors office, nearly every state elected position and nearly every federal elected as well.
The NV DSA want to see the party burn
You really are bitter about this whole thing. Just let it go dude.
No. The success of democrats has nearly zero to do with the the folks that just took over the party in Nevada. It has everything to do with organizing the culinary union, and some really, really talented and smart people that run the Reid Machine.
I'm not bitter at all. In fact, this has probably helped the state become more balanced should republicans be able to take advantage of this. Which is how I prefer government to run. Especially in Nevada where compromise between republicans and Dems used to be the norm.
What does annoy me is that folks are dancing on ticks grave when he has spent a lifetime furthering the issues that the progressives on this board care so deeply about.
what are you talking about?
like genuinely, do you have even a shred of evidence for any of the things you are saying here? why do you believe that these people invested themselves in the democratic party, to the point that some of them have bios that look like this:
because they want to see the party burn? in what world is this a thing that even remotely resembles something approaching true?
they want to use the democratic party, strengthen the democratic party, and see it shaped in a direction that relies less on (real or perceived) machine power and more on the right of people to freely pick candidates that reflect the positions those voters support. they want to enable primary challengers because they believe this is the best way to enact representative democracy. maybe those primary challengers lose. some do. that's ok.
stop making shit up about how these people are trying to destroy the party. they're not.
Damn you would rather have Republicans run the state than DSA folks? That's crazy dude.
Republicans taking advantage of this will elect more boeberts and greens.
No one is doing that, but also don't pretend that you actually care when you expressed a desire for Republicans to win earlier in the same post.
As a black leftist, I get real tired of liberals (and yes, that includes black liberals) popping into discussions with their uninformed takes about why black radical leftists throughout history were really only leftists on technicality, and effectively revising critical aspects of black history and black liberation for the umpteenth time. It's bad enough that black leftist voices have and continue to be silenced by white folk, but the same thing happens from people in our own community, unfortunately.
The BPP was not nearly as myopic in their defense of black communities as you've made them out to be and certainly didn't view the entities they protected said communities against as merely white men. No, they understood how said white men being on the opposite side of the class divide enabled them to oppress our communities so effectively, and that distinction is what led to those larger aspirations that you referenced.
Anyway, I try to stay away from discussions like this these days but black leftist voices are typically underrepresented, and if the few of us in the position to speak don't say anything, the same old narratives will continue to prevail, unfortunately.
id rather Nevada government function properly and with a modicum of maturity.
take for example, over the summer a Republican Senator said he would vote to raise revenue. He reneged a day later. So what did the progressive side of the party do in response? Try to convince the Senator his first instinct was the correct one? Try and make a deal to get his vote? Nope, they instead bought hundreds of flip flops and piled them up outside his office and placed them all around the legislative building. How is this kind of behavior conducive to actually negotiating and getting this senators vote ever again? Sure it, made a great meme but it nothing to actually get state's business done.
I like tick. He's a good person and someone I admire and hope he continues to see success. We don't align on everything but I appreciate him and think he got done really dirty.
my personal friendship with tick aside, Nevada government has a history of bipartisanship. I would prefer it to stay that way.
wow, who would have guessed that such a derail would be bled dry
Thank You! Im a black leftist too and this has been driving me up the wall.
I would prefer the party dedicated to bigotry and regression not be represented at all, but that's just me.
There's no inherent maturity in wanting to sit down with fascists and slow progress down for the sake of compromise and bipartisanship.
Yeah. That wonderful bi-partisan history blew up my fucking preschool while I was in it.
Had to run out of that shit with it collapsing behind me like I was a toddler Indiana Jones.
You're going to have to excuse my confusion here, because the reason we're even talking about the Black Panthers in this thread is because they were brought up to silence me, also a Black Leftist (hello, there are indeed several of us and we're capable of independent thoughts, perspectives, and even disagreement), for having issues with the effectiveness of guillotines in modern party politics.
So, I take issue with the idea that I'm the one representing a "myopic" view of the BPP for pointing out that, while they did have larger aspirations not entirely centered on Black peoples, yes, they were a Black organization, started by Black people, in Black communities, responding to Black need. If anything, thinking that their organization, methods, priorities and imagery is completely synonymous with anything under the "Leftist" catch-all (which, again, is why we're even talking about them right now) is the myopic take. Leftism is not one thing. Leftism is not one series of priorities. And I don't understand how anything I said is in contention with that or even your view of the Black Panthers. Nor do you even bother to explain it. Your post is just you tut-tutting me.
The BPP was an organization started by a handful of college kids with the initial and primary goal of self-defense for Black people, primarily Black neighborhoods. Yes, they were a socialist organization. And yes, to further address Brainchild's post, they understood that the class and economic divide (and not just "white people") contributed to the harm being done to Black communities. I don't know where I am in contention with any of that.
But if you don't think them being a FUBU movement had anything to do with their priorities, where they operated, and even how they were opposed by the state, then I don't know what to tell you. But I am not on board with the view of them as just another "Leftist" movement. There's more nuance there than that, which ironically, is my entire problem here.
Last edited:
We're talking about them because of a derail around guillotine memes, and your assertion that guillotine memes are worse than previous threats of political violence in recent American history. When the BPP were brought up as an example, you asserted a series of contrivances to try and wave away the actual ideology and rhetoric of the BPP in a manner that is, to be very generous, political and historically dishonest.
I appreciate you're not changing your views, but I think the work has been done to show your position for what it is - opportunistic and misleading. Others can make up their mind based on the exchange.
For the record, I don't even support or advocate for revolutionary overthrow. I think we should be real and honest about someone posting a guillotine meme though - it's not really worthy of discussion, and not even significant compared to the actual political violence that has occurred within the USA within living memory.
We can agree to disagree, and I'll reiterate what I said off-top that guillotine imagery doesn't offend me nor move me. I'll maybe devise a stronger opinion on it when people's heads actually start getting chopped off (which, to be clear, is not something I'm advocating for).
But I will continue to have a problem with BPP imagery and how they purported themselves being loosely borrowed as a defense for anything deemed "Leftist." I don't rock with it. And you're right, my view isn't going to change. And this is a derail.
Thank you.
Last edited:
It is literally just memeing. The only violence that occurs is when people contort themselves trying to spin up fake outrage.
Don't mistake them for someone that actually cares about the US populace.