Support NeoGAF

[Mael]

bahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
Oh dear god I thought the stupidity of the left couldn't give me any more entertainment.
From the inept campaign that couldn't see the forest for the trees and the idiot hypocrite who run a youtube channel.
And I thought the Left was finally above stupid grandstanding naming that sound dumb....

 

[Nafai1123]

So you think not talking about this problem will trick progressives and young people into voting for bought Democrats?

How's the democratic party doing currently?
The worst ever basically? Yes. Let's keep doing that.

No, you're misunderstanding me. My argument is that accepting campaign financing does not define a candidate as bought. Base whether they are a corporate shill on their policies and voting record. If it turns out they are shills vote them out in the next cycle. Opposing Citizens United and campaigning on it's repeal while accepting campaign financing does not make you a hypocrite, it makes you a competitor.

@sugarhigh we all know you oppose the Democratic party and I think your political views are delusional.

 

[eBay Huckster]

Or $300,000 in pharmaceutical donations to Cory Booker, and then a subsequent vote against Bernie's bill pushing for cheaper medications. SUSPECT AS FUCK. There's literally no excuse for it.

There's a lot that's suspect as fuck about Booker, but that amendment vote isn't one of them - considering he literally voted for the Wyden amendment that would've had the same damn effect.

 

[royalan]

Cenk continues to be an idiot.

Yep.

 

[Poor GRIMES]

god FUCK Bernie

 

[Coriolanus]

I'm also of the opinion that Democrats will have better electoral success purely on the fact that there is no longer an Obama/Clinton boogeyman to motivate the GOP voters (not even including if Trump is as bad as we all expect). They have all the power but are far more vulnerable than they would be had Clinton won (unfortunately). I'm sure they realize this too which is why worthless fucks like Chaffetz are posting stuff on FB like "We're totally still investigating Clinton guys!" because they need a scapegoat to distract from their terrible policies.

Yarp, and Trump's (probable) continued abuses should be quite the lightning rod to motivate dems to get their asses in gear as time goes by. Is always good to be able to provide your base with a target for their hate.

 

[olag]

For fucks sake Sanders., you literally have the perfect hitler/super villain president to rally democrats and independent against.Why the fuck are you focusing on disembowelling the DM party?!!! Do that shit when you've won.

Edit:Ahhh read that too quickly. Thankfully it seems that sanders isnt involved in this, so my mistake. Still this is beyond idiotic IMO.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

@sugarhigh we all know you oppose the Democratic party and I think your political views are delusional.

I responded to your "understanding" about there being no relationship between corporate funding and policy. I'm curious to hear your response.

 

[boiled goose]

No, you're misunderstanding me. My argument is that accepting campaign financing does not define a candidate as bought. Base whether they are a corporate shill on their policies and voting record. If it turns out they are shills vote them out in the next cycle. Opposing Citizens United and campaigning on it's repeal while accepting campaign financing does not make you a hypocrite, it makes you a competitor.

@sugarhigh we all know you oppose the Democratic party and I think your political views are delusional.

Ok so Booker taking big pharma money and voting against Democrats and probably his constituents with big pharma is good reason to vote him out under Your standards?

Donations plus voting record

(Because that's exactly what justice Democrats is proposing!!!)

 

[eBay Huckster]

For fucks sake Sanders., you literally have the perfect hitler/super villain president to rally democrats and independent against.Why the fuck are you focusing on disembowelling the DM party?!!! Do that shit when you've won.

Blessedly, this isn't Sanders.

 

[guek]

For fucks sake Sanders., you literally have the perfect hitler/super villain president to rally democrats and independent against.Why the fuck are you focusing on disembowelling the DM party?!!! Do that shit when you've won.

Who are you talking to?

 

[Already Torn]

Purity Tests = death of Liberalism

Mmmmmmmmhm.

 

[tbm24]

For fucks sake Sanders., you literally have the perfect hitler/super villain president to rally democrats and independent against.Why the fuck are you focusing on disembowelling the DM party?!!! Do that shit when you've won.

Should note, Sanders is not involved in this, only two people who worked for him + Cenk.

 

[Chococat]

Not interested in this.

Bernie Bros forever tainted my view of Sanders.

While I support his legislation and progressive views, I believe any movement that gather around him will merely because of his cult status.

Bernie Bros and Cenk divided progressives. I don't see how they bring anyone together.

Get some new blood to unite people.

 

[SolarPowered]

This might have been a good idea if we had nationwide instant runoff voting, but in the current system it might hurt more than help.

 

[BotoxAgent]

Blessedly, this isn't Sanders.

well hopefully Sanders can tell them, "What the hell are you doing!?"

 

[soul creator]

Hey, Ekai, I hope you are paying attention here because we have YET ANOTHER poster proving my point about the far left wanting to focus less on Civil Rights.

Thanks Crab, for proving my point.

And, NO they are NOT the same. A black guy being wealthier does NOTHING to mitigate the cops' tendency to assume that he's a "thug".

But a black guy being a wealthy and famous professor makes it more likely that he gets to have beer with the president when he's the victim of racial profiling, as opposed to being continually subjected to a police state (which also includes black police officers) that both physically and economically oppresses you in your day to day life.

For a bunch of folks who fetishize intersectionality when it comes to every other type of identity, people seem to have a problem acknowledging that class is also an "identity". But as soon as you mention that, you get a rush of folks yelling about how you no longer care about civil rights, even though it wouldn't surprise me if literally every radical black/gay/trans/etc. activist is far to the left of mainstream Democrats on all issues, economic/civil rights and otherwise. Their disagreements don't matter though, just support the Democratic candidate, no matter what.

 

[sugarhigh4242]

For fucks sake Sanders., you literally have the perfect hitler/super villain president to rally democrats and independent against.Why the fuck are you focusing on disembowelling the DM party?!!! Do that shit when you've won.

A lot of us who were political during the Dubya years thought we got that when Obama got elected. Instead he broke many fundamental promises, protected the Wall St executives who defrauded the world economy, and metastasized Bush's War on Terror into the immutable furniture of American foreign policy.

Just to give a tiny example, here's 2008 Obama on the concept of an individual mandate for health insurance. I still think he holds one of the best arguments against his own ACA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoSnqofelsQ

Just what the dems needed. More purity tests.

They're not purity tests. They're opposed policies. A position of breaking up the banks is not a "pure" variant of de-regulating the banks. A position of anti-drone bombing and withdrawing from the middle east is not a "pure" variant of joining up with Saudi Arabia to obliterate Yemen.

 

[Marvie_3]

Just what the dems needed. More purity tests.

 

[BanGy.nz]

Or $300,000 in pharmaceutical donations to Cory Booker, and then a subsequent vote against Bernie's bill pushing for cheaper medications. SUSPECT AS FUCK. There's literally no excuse for it. And his lame ass defense was incorrect, and even more suspect. As if Canada isn't more strict on medication regulation than we are.

Yet Corey voted for this...

SA 187. Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Sanders) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him to the concurrent resolution
S. Con. Res. 3, setting forth the congressional budget for the United
States Government for fiscal year 2017 and setting forth the
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2018 through 2026; which
was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end of title IV, add the following:

SEC. 4__. POINT OF ORDER AGAINST LEGISLATION THAT DOES NOT
LOWER DRUG PRICES.

(a) Findings.--The Senate finds the following:
(1) Total annual drug spending in the United States is
projected to reach more than $500,000,000,000 by 2018.
(2) One out of five Americans age 19 to 64 cannot afford to
fill their prescriptions.
(3) Spending on prescription drugs in the United States
grew by 12 percent in 2014, faster than in any year since
2002.
(4) Medicare part D drug spending was $90,000,000,000 in
2015, and is expected to increase to $216,000,000,000 by
2025.
(5) Medicare part B drug spending also more than doubled
between 2005 and 2015, increasing from $9,000,000,000 in 2005
to $22,000,000,000 in 2015.
(6) In 2014, prescription drug spending in Medicaid
increased by 24 percent.
(7) During the Presidential campaign, the President-elect
said, ``When it comes time to negotiate the cost of drugs,
we're going to negotiate like crazy, folks'' and his campaign
website said that, ``allowing consumers access to imported,
safe and dependable drugs from overseas will bring more
options to consumers.''.
(8) After being elected, the President-elect said, ``I'm
going to bring down drug prices. I don't like what's happened
with drug prices.''.
(9) On January 11, 2017, the President-elect said, ``We
have to create new bidding procedures for the drug industry,
because they are getting away with murder.''.
(b) Point of Order.--It shall not be in order in the Senate
to consider a bill or joint resolution reported pursuant to
section 2001 or 2002, or an amendment to, motion on,
conference report on, or amendment between the Houses in
relation to such a bill or joint resolution that does not, as
promised by the President-elect, lower drug prices as
certified by the Congressional Budget Office.
(c) Waiver and Appeal.--Subsection (b) may be waived or
suspended in the Senate only by an affirmative vote of three-
fifths of the Members, duly chosen and sworn. An affirmative
vote of three-fifths of the Members of the Senate, duly
chosen and sworn, shall be required to sustain an appeal of
the ruling of the Chair on a point of order raised under
subsection (b).

For someone in the pocket of BIGPHARMA he's doing a pretty shitty job at it tbh.

 

[Nafai1123]

I responded to your "understanding" about there being no relationship between corporate funding and policy. I'm curious to hear your response.

Unlike Republicans, Democrats actually push policies in direct opposition to their contributors. Eg. Increased regulations, environmental protections, etc. If a Democrat shows through their policies and voting record that they support corporations over individuals/environment/etc, they should be replaced, but that is not a black/white issue either and the mere fact that people attempt to try to paint these complicated political conundrums as such is detrimental to the entire process and understanding of governing.

I don't think anyone disagrees that we need to get money out of politics, but as I said earlier, you can't bring a knife to a gun fight even if you oppose guns.

Ok so Booker taking big pharma money and voting against Democrats and probably his constituents with big pharma is good reason to vote him out under Your standards?

Donations plus voting record

(Because that's exactly what justice Democrats is proposing!!!)

Certainly, IF that's actually what took place. I haven't done much research into Bookers voting record so I don't know the complexities of the issue or the accusations.

I'm against this becoming a witch hunt, that's it. I've made that clear in this thread and I believe Cenk being is charge brings up serious concerns that a witch hunt is exactly what we'll get.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Ultimately, i can get behind this if this don't alienate our more moderate Democrats and cede them to the Republicans.

Man, I don't like Tulsi Gabbard....but looking at her facebook page, a lot of Republicans and leftist democrats seem to warm to her. Is she someone the type we need?

Personally, I wish we get more Elizabeth Warren types (not necessarily in left ideology but in terms of intellect), and less like Bernie or Gabbard. But then again, that's just me. I just want to be sure whatever we do leads to Democrat gains and don't cede any more ground to Republicans.

I am very skeptical about Cenk having anything to do with this too.

Tulsi should be exactly the candidate that groups like Cenk's should be going after, given that she's way too conservative for her D+21 district.

But that won't happen and we all know why.

 

[soul creator]

Just what the dems needed. More purity tests.

I agree, we need to get groups like Planned Parenthood and NAACP to stop with the purity tests when supporting candidates.

 

[boiled goose]

A lot of us who were political during the Dubya years thought we got that when Obama got elected. Instead he broke many fundamental promises, protected the Wall St executives who defrauded the world economy, and metastasized Bush's War on Terror into the immutable furniture of American foreign policy.

Just to give a tiny example, here's 2008 Obama on the concept of an individual mandate for health insurance. I still think he holds one of the best arguments against his own ACA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoSnqofelsQ

It was worth it.Obama made those sacrifices so that we could end up with Trump and a conservative Supreme court for generations. Wait wat.

 

[Zoe]

Dem B wins If the primary turns out a lot of super liberal voters and then loses the general to the republicans...

What happened to always vote D at the general? You'd have the super liberals voting again plus all the people who voted for the other guy.

 

[boiled goose]

I agree, we need to get groups like Planned Parenthood and NAACP to stop with the purity tests when supporting candidates.

Another great response. Somehow an organization focusing on the corrupting influence on money in politics is not acceptable.

Didn't someone just say the democratic base doesn't care about this issue? Then it won't matter. Why the fear and backlash?

 

[BotoxAgent]

Tulsi should be exactly the candidate that groups like Cenk's should be going after, given that she's way too conservative for her D+21 district.

But that won't happen and we all know why.

good point

It was worth it.Obama made those sacrifices so that we could end up with Trump and a conservative Supreme court for generations. Wait wat.

Tell us more Cornell We....I mean boiled goose

 

[olag]

A lot of us who were political during the Dubya years thought we got that when Obama got elected. Instead he broke many fundamental promises, protected the Wall St executives who defrauded the world economy, and metastasized Bush's War on Terror into the immutable furniture of American foreign policy.

Just to give a tiny example, here's 2008 Obama on the concept of an individual mandate for health insurance. I still think he holds one of the best arguments against his own ACA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoSnqofelsQ



They're not purity tests. They're opposed policies. A position of breaking up the banks is not a "pure" variant of de-regulating the banks. A position of anti-drone bombing and withdrawing from the middle east is not a "pure" variant of joining up with Saudi Arabia to obliterate Yemen.

True enough. Obamas presidency was not without its broken promises, but the fragmantation of the Democratic Party is the solution especially over the next 4-8 years then you are gonna be in for a rude awakening.

These policies definately have a place within the democratic party, however now is not the time for division.

 

[Rentahamster]

There's a lot that's suspect as fuck about Booker, but that amendment vote isn't one of them - considering he literally voted for the Wyden amendment that would've had the same damn effect.

It would have? Isn't the Wyden text just procedural stuff about the possibility of interrupting legislation that doesn't lower drug costs via points of order?

The Sanders legislation actually gets things done and authorizes money for it, IIRC.

Yet Corey voted for this...
For someone in the pocket of BIGPHARMA he's doing a pretty shitty job at it tbh.

That looks more like someone voting for legislation with little teeth and not voting for the legislation with big sharp teeth because reasons.

 

[Piano]

Purity Tests = death of Liberalism

Yep. This.

 

[boiled goose]

What happened to always vote D at the general? You'd have the super liberals voting again plus all the people who voted for the other guy.

No no no. Republicans will be turned off by progressives so Democrats should try to convince Republicans to vote for Democrats instead of convincing progressives.

That has worked well recently. Yes.

 

[Mael]

What happened to always vote D at the general? You'd have the super liberals voting again plus all the people who voted for the other guy.

Turns out people in general don't like voting for extremists.
Why do you think the far left never made any headway to begin with.
They're a minority for a reason.
unless you're in a super safe election of course

 

[sugarhigh4242]

It was worth it.Obama made those sacrifices so that we could end up with Trump and a conservative Supreme court for generations. Wait wat.

Do you think Clinton would've lost if Obama had successfully passed a true universal healthcare program? The presidential term limits were created in the US to truncate the enduring popularity of FDR and his New Deal programs.

Instead we get the ACA. Look, I know that Republicans lie about the ACA, but that's politics. If Democrats think their opponents are going to play fair, they should find another game to play. The reality is that the ACA is a complicated program, which got off to a rocky start, and is failing to control costs:
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/health-care-premiums-rising-obamacare/story?id=43047190

As a wonky nerd politico, I freely admit it's better than the situation in 2008, but it's not the kind of program that's very easy to understand, let alone support. When Democrats go for these technocratic tweaks, they don't reap the electoral benefits for them. That's a failed strategy, which is a big reason why Donald Trump is now president.

 

[eBay Huckster]

It would have? Isn't the Wyden text just procedural stuff about the possibility of interrupting legislation that doesn't lower drug costs via points of order?

The Sanders legislation actually gets things done and authorizes money for it, IIRC.

Both of those amendments were effectively procedural stuff, considering they were both attached to a non-binding bill.

Like, make no mistake, there's no 2020 scenario where I would even consider voting for Booker (before October, and non-grudgingly), but this amendment fight is... not particularly worthwhile.

 

[Forceatowulf]

The "but this will only hurt the party" opinions are ridiculous. The party is already in shambles - they lost to a man who bathes in cheeto dust and have lost a shit load of seats in the house and Senate. Things need to change. I want REAL allies.

Fuck continuing the same old bullshit as usual. It's not a winning strategy and I'm sick of it.

Plus, I kind of like purity tests now - especially after all these people who claim to be allies to the 'cause didn't even vote. I'm all in on shaking shit up.

 

[fantomena]

Wait, is Sanders getting shit on by some gaffers for supporting Trumps decision of USA leaving the TPP, something Sanders have been against since the beginning?

Confused.

 

[Jeevesmeister]

Cenk stinks but the real takeaway from this election was that mainline Democrats have done such a bad fucking job, and lost time and time again since Obama took office on ever level, that they couldn't get out the vote with one of the least-energizing candidates in history pushing means tested claptrap bullshit in important swing-states that Obama's administration greatly failed, especially when it came to Obamacare as a free check to private health insurance built on the backs of the poor.

Somebody needs to light a new fire in the Democrats, not try to force unity with a failed organization that has suffered devastating losses multiple elections in a row. If this is it, which I doubt greatly, then so be it.

 

[BanGy.nz]

Both of those amendments were effectively procedural stuff, considering they were both attached to a non-binding bill.

Like, make no mistake, there's no 2020 scenario where I would even consider voting for Booker, but this amendment fight is... not particularly worthwhile.

Pretty much, yeah. Booker suuuuuuucks but this isn't why he sucks.

 

[boiled goose]

Wait, is Sanders getting shit on gaf for supporting Trumps decision of USA leaving the TPP, something Sanders have been against since the beginning?

Confused.

A post implied that Bernie oppossing tpp was not the progressive position so yeah, people are very confused.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

What happened to always vote D at the general? You'd have the super liberals voting again plus all the people who voted for the other guy.

The people who vote in primaries aren't all the people who vote in general elections.

So because the political opinions in primaries skew to the left or the right, nominating a super left (or super right) candidate will generally result in that candidate being beaten in the general. People will vote for a candidate that is the closest to them ideologically, typically (obviously things like charisma matter too). So in a red state, you need a centrist Democrat to even have a chance.

See: Todd Akin, Richard Mourdock

 

[sugarhigh4242]

Cenk stinks but the real takeaway from this election was that mainline Democrats have done such a bad fucking job, and lost time and time again since Obama took office on ever level, that they couldn't get out the vote with one of the least-energizing candidates in history pushing means tested claptrap bullshit in important swing-states that Obama's administration greatly failed, especially when it came to Obamacare as a free check to private health insurance built on the backs of the poor.

Somebody needs to light a new fire in the Democrats, not try to force unity with a failed organization that has suffered devastating losses multiple elections in a row. If this is it, which I doubt greatly, then so be it.

This is absolutely right. Honestly, I think attempting to reform the Democratic party is a doomed strategy. But calls for "party unity" are really calls against accountability for the elites who failed to beat Donald Trump. Liberals believe in meritocracy, right? Well if your only job is to prevent a reality TV star from becoming president, and you fail, shouldn't you get fired for that? Why is David Brock receiving millions to create opposition media? Why is Nancy Pelosi minority leader?

 

[Patapwn]

The democrats need a shakeup. Neoliberalism has failed and the party is in disarray. If there was ever a time to purge corporate shills like those 13 democratic senators that recently voted against importing medicine from Canada, it's now.

I don't know why anyone would be against such a movement. Sure, there may be some short term issues but having a party with integrity and an uncompromising progressive platform that helps the 99% would benefit not only the party long term but more importantly the country.

 

[boiled goose]

This is absolutely right. Honestly, I think attempting to reform the Democratic party is a doomed strategy. But calls for "party unity" are really calls against accountability for the elites who failed to beat Donald Trump. Liberals believe in meritocracy, right? Well if your only job is to prevent a reality TV star from becoming president, and you fail, shouldn't you get fired for that? Why is David Brock receiving millions to create opposition media? Why is Nancy Pelosi minority leader?

Hear Fucking hear.

 

[eBay Huckster]

I mean, your first mistake is assuming the people you're arguing against want people like David Brock to continue receiving millions.

 

[Smokey_Run]

This is absolutely right. Honestly, I think attempting to reform the Democratic party is a doomed strategy. But calls for "party unity" are really calls against accountability for the elites who failed to beat Donald Trump. Liberals believe in meritocracy, right? Well if your only job is to prevent a reality TV star from becoming president, and you fail, shouldn't you get fired for that? Why is David Brock receiving millions to create opposition media? Why is Nancy Pelosi minority leader?

Why is Howard Dean hated by those same people when he's the only head of the DNC to get results in the last couple decades?

 

[Jeevesmeister]

This is absolutely right. Honestly, I think attempting to reform the Democratic party is a doomed strategy. But calls for "party unity" are really calls against accountability for the elites who failed to beat Donald Trump. Liberals believe in meritocracy, right? Well if your only job is to prevent a reality TV star from becoming president, and you fail, shouldn't you get fired for that? Why is David Brock receiving millions to create opposition media? Why is Nancy Pelosi minority leader?

This is the core of why the Democrats lost and keep losing. People's lives are being fucked with due to their failures and the people need answers - solutions, even. The Democrats insist everything is "already great." For a reality gameshow host rapist like Trump to get elected, there has to be a critical failure on nearly every level of the ruling class, from corporate to government, for this to be possible. And nobody in charge wants to admit they might have fucked up along the way.

It's absolutely shameful, and will continue an endless cycle of "pragmatic" Democrats who keep losing to brutal, tyrannical Republicans and we're all dragged into oblivion.

 

[Measley]

Party purity worked great for the Republicans. Now the tea party controls congress, and was a big factor in getting Trump in the white house.

The problem with Dems is that they always go half way and work their way towards the right. What needs to happen is that we need Dems who go all the way to the left and then work towards the center. Given the fact that Rs control all three branches of government and the vast majority of state governments, it's clearly time to overhaul the party just like the right did to Republicans in 2009-2010.

 

[olag]

The "but this will only hurt the party" opinions are ridiculous. The party is already in shambles - they lost to a man who bathes in cheeto dust and have lost a shit load of seats in the house and Senate. Things need to change. I want REAL allies.

Fuck continuing the same old bullshit as usual. It's not a winning strategy and I'm sick of it.

Plus, I kind of like purity tests now - especially after all these people who claim to be allies to the 'cause didn't even vote. I'm all in on shaking shit up.

Being right doesn't mean jackshit if you are on the loosing team(See EPA). Why discard a useful tool? Use the banks to win, then once your in start reformation movements from a position of power.Going against them when you have nothing is beyond foolish.

In regards to the "Same old bullshit line" I agree. Bi-partisan politics arent going to work, they havent worked for the past 8 years in America and they sure as hell arent going to work now. So your right its time to switch things up. Indignantion and anger are always going to be better motivators for the general public to vote than the promise of unity so use that shit. Lord knows Trumps going to be churning out reasons to be pissed off over the next 4 years, so use it them to galvanise your base just like the republicans have been doing for the past 8 years.

 

[Lunar15]

Sounds like a perfect way to spoil the democratic votes and ensure Republican success.

Although, this is what some people thought was happening with the Tea Party and, well...

Real talk, you shake shit up in lower levels, you influence voters. This is why Trump did so well in the republican primaries.

 

[TurnipFritters]

No no no. Republicans will be turned off by progressives so Democrats should try to convince Republicans to vote for Democrats instead of convincing progressives.

That has worked well recently. Yes.

Clinton 2016 was one of the most progressive platforms ever, and if we're going to pretend the election was issues based then I'm not sure why anyone would look at it and say "Well gosh, super progressive Sanders lost to slightly less progressive Clinton, who lost to super conservative nutjob Trump, but relatively moderate Obama won 2008 in a landslide, so I guess the problem was we just weren't progressive enough!"

The "but this will only hurt the party" opinions are ridiculous. The party is already in shambles - they lost to a man who bathes in cheeto dust and have lost a shit load of seats in the house and Senate. Things need to change. I want REAL allies.

Perhaps "attacking the seats you already have" is not the best tactic when you have so few seats to begin with. Especially when we saw how Cenk handles primaries.