• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Final Democratic National Committee Chair Debate on CNN tonight at 10 PM

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, you push for all money getting out. If the guys who wanna stop kids from smoking can lobby then that means the people who are trying to torture LBGT+ kids can too.

Stop all of it, period. I'm not saying do it unilaterally, that's why we need an amendment.

Obama put a lobbyist in charge of the FCC and he almost killed net neutrality. You can't trust lobbyist.

For the short and medium term, this isn't realistic. It's not how the system is setup. It's not how changes can be made. Unfortunately.

And really getting to the point where a liberal leaning amendment has a shot at passing is likely multiple generations away. And only if sustained liberal progress can actually be achieved. Which, given the history of the US, does not seem to have a great outlook.
 
I get ya, and I agree. But this would also be the most undeniably, unimaginably dumbest fucking thing Democrats could do until there are laws on the books requiring Republicans to do it too.

Want to know why local Democrats have been getting slaughtered these last eight years? Because just as DNC money dried up, money flowing into the RNC surged.

A broke Democratic Party cannot fight Republicans.
That money isn't coming back. The Democrats can't count on it, heck their agenda runs counter to the Republicans and the interest of those that support them. You are trying to correct for the symptom but not the reason.
 

Kthulhu

Member
I get ya, and I agree. But this would also be the most undeniably, unimaginably dumbest fucking thing Democrats could do until there are laws on the books requiring Republicans to do it too.

Want to know why local Democrats have been getting slaughtered these last eight years? Because just as DNC money dried up, money flowing into the RNC surged.

A broke Democratic Party cannot fight Republicans.

That's why I said we need an amendment. So neither the Democrats noe the Republicans can be twisted like this.

Think about how much of our country has been ruined by lobbying. Think about how much good could be done if corporations and special interests didn't have control over our country.

Edit: over 100 years ago monopolies owned this country. It took people who couldn't be bought to kill them, and it wasn't easy, but they did it. I refuse to believe we can't do it again.
 

wandering

Banned
That's why I said we need an amendment. So neither the Democrats noe the Republicans can be twisted like this.

Think about how much of our country has been ruined by lobbying. Think about how much good could be done if corporations and special interests didn't have control over our country.

A constitutional amendment? That's far far easier said than done
 
"I've been fighting on Fox News for seven years" is not an argument I expected.

Ellison > Pete > SBB > whoever I guess > Perez is my preference order. It's not that big of a deal but it would be nice to get some recognition that the party is interested in serious reform. Oh well.
 
Why aren't we propping up those people using the same logic is my point. That's not a qualification. That's looking at the two options of laughing at trump or taking him seriously and choosing the latter. Congrats. Here's a gold star.

Did you take Trump seriously in July 2015? I didn't. Most didn't. It's relevant to point out those among the DNC chair candidates that did.
 
I can't stomach any more debates for the next 4 years, I shut it off after 10 seconds

Keith predicted Trump 1 year in advance

he has fortune teller vision, so yeah him
 

royalan

Member
That money isn't coming back. The Democrats can't count on it, heck their agenda runs counter to the Republicans and the interest of those that support them. You are trying to correct for the symptom but not the reason.

I am not trying to correct anything other than Democrats constantly creating disadvantages for themselves

You have heard every single candidate on that stage who has been involved in the party talk about how lack of money is a real issue for the DNC right now. You do not make that problem worse if you don't have to. Full fucking stop.

Not every Democrat in every local district will be able to raise money like Bernie Sanders did. This is just reality. But, in the meantime, the DNC needs money.
 

Mutant

Member
God I love Pete Buttigieg. He may not get the chair but this has been nice exposure for him, and I have a feeling he has a bright future.
 

shem935

Banned
Did you take Trump seriously in July 2015? I didn't. Most didn't. It's relevant to point out those among the DNC chair candidates that did.

No it's not really relevant. Assigning Nostradamus qualities to the man to try to differentiate him from his competition is emblematic of the fact that of the two candidates you are likely to get, they are 99% the same.
 

Ourobolus

Banned
wikipedia said:
In his senior year at St. Joseph's High School, he was honored by Caroline Kennedy and other members of President Kennedy's family during a May 22, 2000 ceremony at the John F. Kennedy Library for his prize-winning essay for the JFK Profiles in Courage Essay Contest. Buttigieg's winning essay centered on the integrity and political courage demonstrated by U.S. Congressman Bernie Sanders of Vermont, the nation's only Independent member of Congress.
I like Pete, and this is interesting, heh.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
I liked Pete, but this is interesting, heh.

If this got out and he won it'd certainly go a long way towards mending any fences that'd be broken by Ellison losing.

I am not trying to correct anything other than Democrats constantly creating disadvantages for themselves

You have heard every single candidate on that stage who has been involved in the party talk about how lack of money is a real issue for the DNC right now. You do not make that problem worse if you don't have to. Full fucking stop.

Not every Democrat in every local district will be able to raise money like Bernie Sanders did. This is just reality. But, in the meantime, the DNC needs money.

Local candidates generally don't raise money like that because they're local. Bernie pulled it off because he was in a national race. Expecting some guy in the Minnesota-3rd to replicate that is silly.
 
So was ending Jim Crow and having marriage equality.

Progress is never easy, but it's only impossible if you don't try.

Um, actually both of those two things were much easier. A Constitutional Amendment needs 2/3 of the House & Senate and then 38 states passing it as well. That's about as likely to happen within any of our lifetimes as aliens showing up and saying hi.
 

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
Let's be honest: Mayor Pete threw his hat into the ring completely understanding of the fact that he had no chance of winning. It's just a great way to raise his national profile.

And boy did he.

He had far more to risk by entering this race than just staying the popular mayor of his hometown; he took a dangerous risk of being seen as much more politicized (and having a much harder mayoral fight on his hands next time).
 
No it's not really relevant. Assigning Nostradamus qualities to the man to try to differentiate him from his competition is emblematic of the fact that of the two candidates you are likely to get, they are 99% the same.

Why do you describe taking Trump seriously in July 2015 as a "Nostradamus quality"?
 

wandering

Banned
He had far more to risk by entering this race than just staying the popular mayor of his hometown; he took a dangerous risk of being seen as much more politicized (and having a much harder mayoral fight on his hands next time).

Well South Bend is pretty strongly Democrat
 

Kthulhu

Member
Um, actually both of those two things were much easier. A Constitutional Amendment needs 2/3 of the House & Senate and then 38 states passing it as well. That's about as likely to happen within any of our lifetimes as aliens showing up and saying hi.

How about the 14th amendment then? You telling me we'll never ratify another amendment?
 
I'm really uninterested in semantics. Ellison and Perez are basically the same. Either would be good. It doesn't matter. But we all know Pete is the best choice

Alright well I disagree that Perez and Ellison are basically the same and I hope Ellison wins. Good night and see you on Overwatch.
 
I am not trying to correct anything other than Democrats constantly creating disadvantages for themselves

You have heard every single candidate on that stage who has been involved in the party talk about how lack of money is a real issue for the DNC right now. You do not make that problem worse if you don't have to. Full fucking stop.

Not every Democrat in every local district will be able to raise money like Bernie Sanders did. This is just reality. But, in the meantime, the DNC needs money.
That's a good point. So a national let's impeach Trump pool?
 
Local candidates generally don't raise money like that because they're local. Bernie pulled it off because he was in a national race. Expecting some guy in the Minnesota-3rd to replicate that is silly.

Big Republican donors realized they had an advantage and funneled the money into those local races. While big Democratic donors stayed focused on Obama for America and some Senate seats. The money that the DNC would be raising would/should, in theory, be getting funneled into those local races (not dogcatcher or county clerk, but House seats and state legislature seats that have been being ignored by fundraisers). I'm not saying they'd get Bernie money, but the thing about those smaller races is that a few hundred thousand can be the difference between winning and losing.
 
I was making fun of GAF A60-Rim A but people took me seriously.
Thanks for that. I don't see why it's stupid to have concerns about Howard Dean's involvement.

Howard Dean, Now Employed by Health Care Lobby Firm, Opposes Bernie Sanders on Single-Payer

At least Chuck Schumer isn't directly employed by lobbyists.

It's not crazy to assume Dean attempting to draw support away from Ellison is an attempt at lowering the odds of single-payer healthcare entering the DNC platform.

Dean, though he rarely discloses the title during his media appearances, now serves as senior advisor to the law firm Dentons, where he works with the firm's Public Policy and Regulation practice, a euphemism for Dentons' lobbying team.

The Dentons Public Policy and Regulation practice lobbies on behalf of a variety of corporate health care interests, including the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, a powerful trade group for drugmakers like Pfizer and Merck.

Incumbent health care interests, particularly drug companies and insurers, have long viewed single-payer as a threat to their business model. Health insurance lobbyist strategy memos that were leaked from a source to veteran journalist Bill Moyers reveal a sophisticated effort to undermine public support for single-payer policies and to discredit Michael Moore's Sicko, a movie that sharply criticizes the inequities and price-gouging of the American health care system.

And here are the leaked memos (ten years old now) that are rather prophetic about someone like Dean's sudden shift from supporting single-payer to lobbying against it.

FZwjWfP.png


lol:

vBOa7bZ.png



We need to get Pete a better last name. Because my god Buttigieg is brutal.
They said the same about Obama.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Big Republican donors realized they had an advantage and funneled the money into those local races. While big Democratic donors stayed focused on Obama for America and some Senate seats. The money that the DNC would be raising would/should, in theory, be getting funneled into those local races (not dogcatcher or county clerk, but House seats and state legislature seats that have been being ignored by fundraisers). I'm not saying they'd get Bernie money, but the thing about those smaller races is that a few hundred thousand can be the difference between winning and losing.

My point was that you can't expect to run hundreds of local candidates on $27 a piece donations from millions of people. It worked for Bernie because he was the only other person in a national campaign and ran on populism.
 

shem935

Banned
Thanks for that. I don't see why it's stupid to have concerns about Howard Dean's involvement.

Howard Dean, Now Employed by Health Care Lobby Firm, Opposes Bernie Sanders on Single-Payer

At least Chuck Schumer isn't directly employed by lobbyists.

It's not crazy to assume Dean attempting to draw support away from Ellison is an attempt at lowering the odds of single-payer healthcare entering the DNC platform.


They said the same about Obama.
You mean middle name right?
 
You've entered tin foiled hat territory.
Thanks for the ad hominem. You don't deserve being interacted with.

Anyway, Howard Dean used to be all about single-payer. Now he's all about vehement support for... a vague sort of national reform(?) that includes... increasing Medicare for poor, rural areas, or something? Quite the turnaround.
 

Xe4

Banned
Thanks for the ad hominem. You don't deserve being interacted with.

Anyway, Howard Dean used to be all about single-payer. Now he's all about vehement support for... a vague sort of national reform(?) that includes... increasing Medicare for poor, rural areas, or something? Quite the turnaround.

It's almost like people can change their opinion over time, especially when confronted with new information.

At best, it's a stretch to assume Dean is supporting some guy who has a zero percent chance of winning to stop Ellison. If he were to do that, wouldn't it make way more sense to support someone like Perez???
 
It's almost like people can change their opinion over time, especially when confronted with new information.

At best, it's a stretch to assume Dean is supporting some guy who has a zero percent chance of winning to stop Ellison. If he were to do that, wouldn't it make way more sense to support someone like Perez???
Someone said earlier that Pete would probably take away votes from Ellison, not Perez. In which case, supporting Perez would make little difference (or in fact, would probably embolden people to NOT support Perez, if anything).

I was just responding to that sentiment.

To tally it up that's two times you've been wrong in this thread.
Ad hominems are a logical fallacy. Address my argument, or ignore it. Being critical of Dean's influence and of public polling/whipping does not deserve this kind of personal attacking.

You mean middle name right?
They said it about all three of his names. At first, it was his last name. Then Obama rebranded himself rather cutely as "the guy with the funny middle name". I'll be tallying up how many times you've been wrong, now. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom