Support NeoGAF

[cartographer]

In general I wish the Democrats were further left on economic issues and weren't as slow to support progressive social ones as they are (see the long march toward marriage equality ).

And I think there's a serious issue when Dems are in power and some curtail needed progress (see the ACA we should have had versus the one we got).

But I don't see how viably competing in a district nobody expected Dems to win should incite panic. The outlook for midterms seems good relative to what we have now. There's still work to be done and it ultimately may prove to not be enough. But trends seem more positive than negative.

 

[aeolist]

I'm sorry but you're not really suggesting an alternative here to the status quo. The problem is that we/you cannot continue this diet Republican approach to the economy and redistribution of wealth, especially when faced with literally evil Republicans who'll do anything to get power.

The US is so right-winged that anything remotely smelling of redistribution of wealth gets labeled by even Democrats as "nationalization" or "radical politics". Same when it comes to affirmative action, police and prison reform/abolition, transrights, and those issues should tell us enough how any form of re by the current Democrats will only lead to a continuation of the oppressive and harmful and lethal status quo in the US that target the poor, people of color (especially black, native and Latinx Americans), LGBTQ, non-US citizens, the military imperialism in the Middle East that both parties are in support of.

we need to completely reframe the argument. "redistribution of wealth" happens all the time, it's happening with the AHCA siphoning money from medicaid to pay rich people and it happens with the private insurance industry taking from absolutely everyone to enrich a few wealthy stockholders.

politics is about picking winners and losers. make people understand that you're on their side against the ones trying to hurt them and you'll win their votes. republicans do this by lying and convincing whites that their enemies are minorities, democrats need to do it by telling the truth and convincing the working class that their enemies are the rich.

 

[Ekai]

But who is doing this and how is it a problem specific to centrist Democrats?

"Do you have any knowledge of the Democrats over the past few...well, decades? Like practically 30/40 years? All they've done is compromise with Republicans for years on years now. And it's always to the detriment of minorities and the poor. Even when they have a chance to lead, they just compromise with Republicans more and more. But when it comes time to message to the public, they refuse to compromise with the left on a message. They'd rather chase the center-right vote most of the damn time under the false belief in helps maintain them relevancy. "


I requote myself at this point.

 

[The Technomancer]

Some people who self proclaim themselves as centrist on the Democratic side don't want to compromise with the left. They'd rather bend over backwards for the GOP even when they shit on their constituents time and time again. Do you still need clarification? It's odd that it doesn't make sense to you, but I understand everyone is different.

The country has moved right on economic issues as a whole because it has moved left on racial issues as a whole. Those two things are intrinsically linked. There's a reason Republicans were more economically progressive before the Civil Rights Movement. Actually that is the reason

 

[aeolist]

If you think this is some sort of gotcha moment because you're assuming I'm uncritically devoted to sanders I hate to disappoint you.

Fuck Sanders for this shit, and his views on gun rights, and a lot of his foreign policy.

This is another great example of the party being willing to give up some of its key beliefs and it blows. Thank you for providing additional examples of this shit.



No he's a coward.

i don't think a lot of centrists understand that sanders was always a compromise candidate for the left. he generated a lot of excitement because he's one of the very few people who's been consistent on economic issues for decades but we can do a lot better.

 

[Ryuuroden]

The left will say go left and then the dems do or don't and either way the people saying go left will not vote because the candidate is not pure enough and will continue to argue both sides. I've many liberal "intellectuals mock republicans for voting because voting doesn't matter. The republican walks away smirking cause the intelligent non voting liberal just made his republican vote make more of an impact.

 

[wesleyshark]

He/She nailed it in less than 140 characters

Pixelatedboat is always on point

 

[MrGerbils]

i don't think a lot of centrists understand that sanders was always a compromise candidate for the left. he generated a lot of excitement because he's one of the very few people who's been consistent on economic issues for decades but we can do a lot better.

Yes!

 

[balladofwindfishes]

If you think this is some sort of gotcha moment because you're assuming I'm uncritically devoted to sanders I hate to disappoint you.

Fuck Sanders for this shit, and his views on gun rights, and a lot of his foreign policy.

This is another great example of the party being willing to give up some of its key beliefs and it blows. Thank you for providing additional examples of this shit.

No he's a coward.

So how does any of this validate that dumb Tweet? I asked for evidence that Tweet was accurate.

i don't think a lot of centrists understand that sanders was always a compromise candidate for the left. he generated a lot of excitement because he's one of the very few people who's been consistent on economic issues for decades but we can do a lot better.

This is quite a different story then when he was the liberal savior of liberal liberalism just last year...

 

[BrutishMrFish]

It's so plain as day as well.

That tweet is so succinctly on point it's ridiculous.

For that tweet to be on point, it would have to say something like:

Centrist: Politics is all about compromise
Me: So compromise with the left
Centrist: Oh God no, I mean compromise with racists. What's your plan?
Me: Stop talking about the things that the racists don't like

 

[hammysaurusrex]

I think anyone can understand there being grievances on the left, but no one is putting foward a coherent argument as to why Ossoff losing GA-6 is evidence for their claims, which is allegdly the topic at hand.

 

[plagiarize]

This is insane, how does the Democratic party continue to think that becoming more right will help then when there is already a right wing party people love to vote for?

Here's the dilemma:

Loads of people who didn't like Donald Trump at all, voted for him exclusively because the Democrats are pro choice. So *everything else* went out the window because of that one issue. Even though they probably agreed with the Democrats on far more issues than they agreed with the GOP, those voters voted for the GOP purely because of abortion.

Now I'm staunchly pro choice, and I am not remotely convinced that a pro-choice candidate can't win (because again, there are loads of things specific to the last election that cost Democrats votes which had absolutely nothing to do with their policies and positions), but that is the dilemma. Would I support someone who was flaky on this issue?

Maybe not in the primaries, but if they were running against Donald Trump? Of course I would.

I think anyone can understand there being grievances on the left, but no one is putting foward a coherent argument as to why Ossoff losing GA-6 is evidence for their claims, which is allegdly the topic at hand.

Because it doesn't exist.

We should be trying to support the most electable Democrat at this point. Whether they're near the center or far left shouldn't even come into it right now, and district by district that's going to vary substantially.

 

[MrGerbils]

So how does any of this validate that dumb Tweet? I asked for evidence that Tweet was accurate.

And I provided one example and you provided a second example of very high profile democrats willing to give up core beliefs and move right rather than further left.

 

[Ekai]

The Tweet is absolute utter garbage that has no rational basis in reality, but it sounds cute and it's only a few characters long, so it's easy to digest when you don't really want to think about politics too much

Ahhh, yes, the old: "You leftists are too stupid to understand politics" approach.

The tweet is straight fire and it's basis is solidly in reality. Especially to me as both a minority and leftist. But sure. Go with insulting us because you refuse to get what is as plain as day there.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

And I provided one example and you provided a second example of very high profile democrats willing to give up core beliefs and move right rather than further left.

The Tweet specifically mentioned centrist Democrats. It was not general to Democrats, it was very specific.

Ahhh, yes, the old: "You leftists are too stupid to understand politics" approach.

The tweet is straight fire and it's basis is solidly in reality. Especially to me as both a minority and leftist. But sure. Go with insulting us because you refuse to get what is as plain as day there.

But we've already established in the last 2 pages that the far left is just as willing (maybe even more so) to compromise with racists! So the Tweet obviously doesn't have any basis in reality.

 

[Ogodei]

Never underestimate the capacity of the left to turn on itself.

 

[Netherscourge]

I don't think political ideology is the problem with the Left.

I think it's raw numbers.

The Left is simply outnumbered.

Start having kids and raise them with liberal core values. Maybe in 15 to 20 years the country will turn over again.


But right now, the Right is winning and they planted these seeds about 20 some years ago.

A lot of my Right-wing friends went Republican between Desert Storm and 9/11. They were high school and college age then. Now they're late 30s and early 40s.

A lot of my younger friends and family became politically conscious during the Clinton-Bush-Obama era, when it was more exciting and responsible to be liberal. They're in their late 20s and early 30s. But there are less of them and much more of the slightly older conservative peeps.

Maybe this is just from my perspective, but I think we're simply outnumbered right now due to higher population counts that made up their minds politically between Desert Storm and 9/11. At least, that's how it's playing out in my world of friends and family.

So, go make lots of babies and raise them to be open-minded, even if it means going against your conservative family.

 

[Sianos]

The problem is that people place candidates on the spectrum at positions based on how much they like them or not, because center point is completely arbitrary.

Bingo.

Also, some people value different issues to different priority levels and that too skews the placement. Someone compromising on an issue that isn't personally important to them - women's health is a good example - might not be a huge deal to some people and therefore doesn't move that candidate too far to the right on their scale. But for others' that is an issue that directly impacts them, and so someone who compromises on it with the right is getting shifted quite far over on their own internal scale.

And some people have the same vision for the future but different ideas for implementation. Hillary Clinton's problem was that she campaigned on implementation details, which by virtue include having to account for a lot of small details that don't sound rosy like "yeah tbh coal miners are losing their jobs, but we'll do these nuanced things to help them deal with very real hardships" turns people off.

Campaign on the big picture and just excite people! Listen to the people for direction and leave implementation to the experts.

 

[MrGerbils]

This is quite a different story then when he was the liberal savior of liberal liberalism just last year...

So you don't even understand the difference between a liberal and a progressive? K I'm done here haha

 

[Calm waterfall]

i'm shocked that the three toddlers in a suit candidate didn't win by talking about lowering the deficit and complaining about Trump in a district he won.

Democrats were idiots to spend so much money in the race and they need to stop targeting "sensible" republicans. They don't exist and it only keeps the party to the right.



Bernie's the most popular politican in the country and a growing majority of young people don't have the adverse reaction to socialism that their parents did. Tide's (slowly) changing, my friend.

Bernie Sanders is hardly socialist.

 

[The Technomancer]

Ahhh, yes, the old: "You leftists are too stupid to understand politics" approach.

The tweet is straight fire and it's basis is solidly in reality. Especially to me as both a minority and leftist. But sure. Go with insulting us because you refuse to get what is as plain as day there.

I think a lot of leftists do not understand why the GOP has support or wins elections frankly. I mean we all seem to agree that gerrymandering and voter suppression are bad but beyond that I hear so much about how there's a class solidarity wave that can happen...any day now...if we just go full economic...and get the racist white people to vote in their own interests alongside with us

Except they won't. Because to them keeping black people down is more important than even their own material conditions. Which we have so much evidence of

 

[balladofwindfishes]

So you don't even understand the difference between a liberal and a progressive? K I'm done here haha

Ah yea, I've seen this song and dance before.

 

[Tain]

i don't think a lot of centrists understand that sanders was always a compromise candidate for the left. he generated a lot of excitement because he's one of the very few people who's been consistent on economic issues for decades but we can do a lot better.

yup.

 

[plagiarize]

Ahhh, yes, the old: "You leftists are too stupid to understand politics" approach.

The tweet is straight fire and it's basis is solidly in reality. Especially to me as both a minority and leftist. But sure. Go with insulting us because you refuse to get what is as plain as day there.

I don't like that tweet because it seems to be going 'No YOU compromise', which always sounds like a refusal to compromise.

WE need to compromise. I'm prepared to rally behind a Sanders type if they seem best positioned to win. Are you prepared to rally behind a centrist if they are best positioned to win?

 

[Ekai]

I think a lot of leftists do not understand why the GOP has support or wins elections frankly. I mean we all seem to agree that gerrymandering and voter suppression are bad but beyond that I hear so much about how there's a class solidarity wave that can happen...any day now...if we just go full economic...and get the racist white people to vote in their own interests alongside with us

Except they won't. Because to them keeping black people down is more important than even their own material conditions. Which we have so much evidence of

LEFTISM IS NOT JUST ECONOMICS.

Geezus frick I'm tired of this.

 

[The Technomancer]

LEFTISM IS NOT JUST ECONOMICS.

Geezus frick I'm tired of this.

THAN Y'ALL NEED TO STOP SAYING WE CAN WIN OVER THE RACISTS

we don't get their votes unless we compromise to their interests

 

[aeolist]

I don't like that tweet because it seems to be going 'No YOU compromise', which always sounds like a refusal to compromise.

WE need to compromise. I'm prepared to rally behind a Sanders type if they seem best positioned to win. Are you prepared to rally behind a centrist if they are best positioned to win?

most sanders primary supporters voted for clinton in the general. this is not a problem.

the question is where to get the votes needed to push someone over the top. the democratic party establishment wants to win the occupants of suburban panera breads and the left wants to win people who didn't vote.

 

[Ekai]

I don't like that tweet because it seems to be going 'No YOU compromise', which always sounds like a refusal to compromise.

WE need to compromise. I'm prepared to rally behind a Sanders type if they seem best positioned to win. Are you prepared to rally behind a centrist if they are best positioned to win?

I voted for Hillary. Hell, I voted for Obama too. And Obama was definitely far more centrist and quick to compromise than I like. As a minority who is CONSTANTLY thrown under the bus by the centrists, I still vote for them since I have literally no other choice. Being held hostage is not a way politics should be run. I'll vote for the centrist but I will hate them every damn step of the way until they change as a person and, y'know actually fucking care about minorities/the poor instead of compromising with the enemy at every given opportunity.

 

[aeolist]

THAN Y'ALL NEED TO STOP SAYING WE CAN WIN OVER THE RACISTS

we don't get their votes unless we compromise to their interests

LOTS OF RACISTS ALREADY VOTE FOR DEMOCRATS

getting people to look past their prejudice when they vote isn't some new idea, and everyone has more than one set of interests

 

[water_wendi]

THAN Y'ALL NEED TO STOP SAYING WE CAN WIN OVER THE RACISTS

we don't get their votes unless we compromise to their interests

What percentage of eligible voters dont vote again?

 

[The Technomancer]

LOTS OF RACISTS ALREADY VOTE FOR DEMOCRATS

getting people to look past their prejudice when they vote isn't some new idea, and everyone has more than one set of interests

Yeah a lot of em do. What do you think is keeping the ones who don't out? Cause when you talk to them it sure sounds like its because the Democrats give their hard earned money to the welfare queens in the cities

 

[Slayven]

He/She nailed it in less than 140 characters

Thats been the message since day one after the election.

That and white washing the working class, cause we all know only white people work for a living. LGBTQ, Women, and brown folks are living ti up on welfare and avocado toast

 

[aeolist]

Yeah a lot of em do. What do you think is keeping the ones who don't out? Cause when you talk to them it sure sounds like its because the Democrats give their hard earned money to the welfare queens in the cities

if you think there's a hard line where you can say that people who are X racist all vote democrat and people who are X+1 all vote republican then i don't think there's a discussion to be had. it's more complex than that.

and i'm not saying that we need to get all of these people, i'm saying that if democrats aggressively support popular universal policies they will win some small percentage of racist white voters and probably a much larger percentage of minorities who showed up for obama but not clinton.

 

[civilstrife]

Donald Trump is president of the United States and they're only starting to panic now?

 

[Ekai]

But we've already established in the last 2 pages that the far left is just as willing (maybe even more so) to compromise with racists! So the Tweet obviously doesn't have any basis in reality.

You will do anything to defend the people who want to throw me under, won't you? Geezus you're so incredibly disingenuous. And you still seem to deny decades of Democrat history since you conveniently ignore that post...twice now. You are all about gotchas and not at all about substance. God.

 

[y2dvd]

Bernie Sanders is hardly socialist.

How is he hardly?

 

[plagiarize]

most sanders primary supporters voted for clinton in the general. this is not a problem.

the question is where to get the votes needed to push someone over the top. the democratic party establishment wants to win the occupants of suburban panera breads and the left wants to win people who didn't vote.

What evidence do you have that people would have turned out in more volume if the democratic candidate was further left than Ossoff? THIS election, Jon made the most sense. I don't understand how people are saying 'they should have run someone less centrist'.

Ragin Edwards, Ron Slotin, Rebecca Quigg, and Richard Keatley all also ran in GA-6 as Democrats. I'm not too familiar with them, but I'm going to presume at least one of them was further left than Jon. None of them broke 0.3% of the vote in the runoff.

That's why Jon got all the support. Because the polling showed he was the democratic candidate with a shot at winning the district.

If you aren't prepared to support democrats like him under those circumstances, then you concede the district.

I firmly encourage people who share Sander's values to run as Democrats in the primaries or runoffs. I will absolutely support whoever comes out of that on top, even if their values don't line up well with mine.

The people pointing to Jon and saying 'The results in GA-6 prove that the DNC need to stop picking people like Ossoff if they want to win' *aren't* prepared to compromise. That's why they get called out for it.

Labour in the UK did better than expected in the election this year in no small part because they put their differences aside and rallied together. The people who disagreed about the direction the party should go, put those disagreements aside during the election.

We would do well to do the same.

 

[The Technomancer]

How is he hardly?

I mean he doesn't want to remove control of production from the capitalists so yes he is hardly socialist

 

[Sianos]

no, we should try to win every possible vote. i'd rather have a racist voting democrat than someone who's appalled by bigotry voting republican.

if you run on a platform that includes social justice advancement you're going to lose a lot of racists, but if you want to kick out everyone who has a prejudiced belief you're going to lose a lot of people voting democrat right now.

wait i thought we were supposed to be moving more to the left

See, this is why projecting beliefs onto 2d space doesn't work - categorical clustering as a means to illustrate schema and topological psychology in general are great, but it needs to be recognized that they occur in n dimensions and that we're not just extrapolating all the mathematical rules to psychosocial concepts. Saying a policy is "more right" only works because the right has racism and other bogeymen to rally against and because they've mastered "identity politics" for their own coalition "identity". Essentially, saying something is more right is saying it better matches the very narrow core identity of the Republican party. The left is a far more diverse coalition, so you run into having to weight how much different issues matter and what implementation is actually the most left.

Energize the base with leftist economic AND social policies and give the precise minimum of detail so people can comfortably project onto you. Leftist economic policies while decrying "identity politics" - which I recognize you are not personally doing - is quite the red flag that this time will not be different, even if it can and should be.

 

[Twig and Berries]

The left is always in panic.

Simpsons will never be wrong

 

[TheLaughingStock]

But who is doing this and how is it a problem specific to centrist Democrats?



The Tweet is absolute utter garbage that has no rational basis in reality, but it sounds cute and it's only a few characters long, so it's easy to digest when you don't really want to think about politics too much

Obama and the Democrats are getting stabbed in the back as we speak with the ACA. The GOP showed appreciation for all the symbolic gestures by attempting to repeal what's more or less a conservative solution to health care over 50 times. Moreover, nearly a decade later they pulled together harsh legislation that puts a lot of groups at risk and redistributes back to the rich from the poor.

Also, I never claimed this was exclusive to the Democrats. However, moderate Republicans aren't nearly as dumb because both sides may be bad but they're not the same. Reaching across the aisle to the socialist from Kenya isn't the same as reaching over to a con man like Paul Ryan.

Maybe an anime reference will clear it up. Think of the Democrats like Goku from Dragonball always giving the nutcases a second chance. Extremists like Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan will chew you up and spit you out as soon as you give them the opportunity.

 

[Arkage]

If you think moving Democrats further left in states like Georgia or South Carolina is a working strategy, you really don't know the electorate. They could probably be more vocally anti-Trump, but they really can't be more vocally pro-socialism if the plan is to win the election. That just isn't going to fly for southern red state Democrats or moderates or never-Trumpers.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

You will do anything to defend the people who want to throw me under, won't you? Geezus you're so incredibly disingenuous. And you still seem to deny decades of Democrat history since you conveniently ignore that post...twice now.

I'm not a centrist Democrat. Of course, people have called me a center right Democrat establishment shill or whatever but that doesn't matter to me, because I know I'm extremely liberal and that's all that matters.

My #1 issue when voting is on minority rights. I literally do not vote on anything other than that. I am a single issue voter for that particular issue.

You're also assuming because I think that tweet is dumb, ridiculous, pointless and lazy political thinking that I agree that Democrats should throw minorities under the bus. And yet, that's not at all what I said or even implied in any of my posts. In fact, I posted several times that I felt the Tweet was wrong, not because centrist Democrats compromise too much, but because it's not just centrist democrats that do the compromising, and that the far left does just as much, if not more, throwing of minorities under the bus. The tweet is wrong because it paints the picture that it's the centrists that do the compromising and the left are a bastion of morality in regards to race.

You'll note I didn't post defending what Pelosi said, but rather, posted someone further left than Pelosi saying exactly the same thing

You are all about gotchas and not at all about substance. God.

This is a conversation about the merits of a tweet. I mean, we are literally arguing over something that is the definition of a "gotcha"

 

[wutwutwut]

How is he hardly?

Does he advocate for workers to seize the means of production?

Bernie is a social democrat with a bunch of ideas, some good and some bad.

 

[Valhelm]

leftists who want to win the white working class vote push broad class-based economic policies

centrists who want them just get really quiet about civil rights

Right. Leftists don't want to appeal to white workers because they're white, but because they're workers. The Democrats have since the 1970s abandoned most of their traditional advocacy for working people. While workers of color had other urgent reasons to keep voting against Republicans, workers who didn't suffer from white supremacy switched teams or stayed home on election day.

Leftists prefer a more inclusive (or intersectional!) platform that acknowledges the relevance of class, particularly as it affects people from further marginalized backgrounds. These issues are closely interconnected, especially as right-wing demagogues like Trump and Le Pen regularly exploit economic malaise to propel themselves (and their vitriol) to higher office. A Democratic platform that is critical of capitalism, and identifies its interconnectedness with other forms of social depression, would appeal to a wider swath of people. As young voters run toward the left with no sign of slowing down, a shift toward more progressive policy will also preserve the long-term viability of the Democrats. We shouldn't chase after white workers to the exclusion of black or brown workers. Instead, Democrats need to offer sensitive and comprehensive class-based policies that appeal to all workers, regardless of race.

The worst way to appeal to white workers is somebody like Joe Manchin, a nominal Democrat with a horrible record on civil rights who votes with the GOP on every other bill. No leftist wants this.

 

[plagiarize]

wait i thought we were supposed to be moving more to the left

See, this is why projecting beliefs onto 2d space doesn't work - categorical clustering as a means to illustrate schema and topological psychology in general are great, but it needs to be recognized that they occur in n dimensions and that we're not just extrapolating all the mathematical rules to psychosocial concepts. Saying a policy is "more right" only works because the right has racism and other bogeymen to rally against and because they've mastered "identity politics" for their own coalition "identity".

Energize the base with leftist economic AND social policies and give the precise minimum of detail so people can comfortably project onto you. Leftist economic policies while decrying "identity politics" - which I recognize you are not personally doing - is quite the red flag that this time will not be different, even if it can and should be.

And it leaves a lot of minorities in the exact same boat that centrists put people like Ekai in.

Which is sort of the problem. I've never been 100% okay with any politician I've thrown my support behind. I'm not sure I'd go so far as to call it being held hostage or thrown under the bus, but I've certainly not walked in Ekai's shoes to know how it feels.

But telling black people that their issues have to wait while we focus on economics and just expecting that they'll vote DNC over the GOP isn't something I can support. Every minority has it bad, without question, but I think there's a very clear argument to be made that they're the last minority that we should take for granted and start ignoring.

 

[Amibguous Cad]

What I don't understand is the lack of accountability on establishment democrats' parts. Like, we tried it your way, and we got Trump. Clinton was Walter Mondale in centrist drag, with approval ratings worse than Barry fucking Goldwater, and establishment democrats were so contemptuous of public opinion they refused to acknowledge how toxic she was to the electorate. I'm not sure that tacking hard left is the best plan electorally - and of Bernie's main planks in really only gung ho about single payer - but I do know that the Clinton debacle is indicates a dramatic flaw in the thinking of democratic leadership and base, and the complacency they've shown about the massive and systematic errors in their thinking is not reassuring.

On the other hand, any Bernie supporter that tried to tell you that his attacks didn't effect the election is trying to sell you a bill of goods.

Still, imagine if Bernie had pulled off an upset on the primaries - and lost to Trump by the same margin Hillary did. We would never hear the end of how Bernie supporters put ideological purity over practical results and gave us the racist cheeto. But centrists are held to a different standard, always.

 

[Ekai]

I'm not a centrist Democrat. Of course, people have called me a center right Democrat establishment shill or whatever but that doesn't matter to me, because I know I'm extremely liberal and that's all that matters.

My #1 issue when voting is on minority rights. I literally do not vote on anything other than that. I am a single issue voter for that particular issue.

You're also assuming because I think that tweet is dumb, ridiculous, pointless and lazy political thinking that I agree that Democrats should throw minorities under the bus. And yet, that's not at all what I said or even implied in any of my posts. In fact, I posted several times that I felt the Tweet was wrong, not because centrist Democrats compromise too much, but because it's not just centrist democrats that do the compromising, and that the far left does just as much, if not more, throwing of minorities under the bus.


This is a conversation about the merits of a tweet. I mean, we are literally arguing over the definition of a "gotcha"

Let's see you:
1) Continue to ignore decades of Democrat history of throwing minorities/the poor under until it's convenient to slam a leftist
2) Continue to defend centrists with the ridiculous claim that leftists are worse
3) Continue to try to play gotchas instead of recognizing what's going on....


I give up.

 

[BasicMath]

Corporate Democrats are on damage control looking at anything and everyone but themselves to blame. They're creating alternate universes were establishment loses mean victory, while their constiuency gets screwed more frequently and harder. No amount of dark money their donors is given them can save them.

Democrats on the left are taking an objective look at things and finally realizing that the gangrenous part of the party near the center need to be amputated if the party is to survive.

The party needs to split.

 

[The Technomancer]

Corporate Democrats are on damage control looking at anything and everyone but themselves to blame. They're creating alternate universes were establishment loses mean victory, while their constiuency gets screwed more frequently and harder. No amount of dark money their donors is given them can save them.

Democrats on the left are taking an objective look at things and finally realizing that the gangrenous part of the party near the center need to be amputated if the party is to survive.

The party needs to split.

God I wish I lived in your America. I really do. I used to think that I did