• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Ongoing Dem Debacle Thread: Commander will kill us all

There's a whole thread there.

It's a reaction to the reaction to the discussion around "cancel culture."

I just put it here as a reaction to MDMH's reaction to my reaction to Brasky's post about black Americans and the Democratic party.
 
Is this some inception stuff?
 
There's a whole thread there.

It's a reaction to the reaction to the discussion around "cancel culture."

I just put it here as a reaction to MDMH's reaction to my reaction to Brasky's post about black Americans and the Democratic party.

I agree with Brasky's frustration with the Democratic Party, and his analysis of its failing Black Americans, but you absolutely have to follow that up with a deeper cultural examination of the black political experience, otherwise all you have is "black people are voting against their own self interest and need to get off the "Democratic Plantation".". Call it a "material crisis" all day, but you still have to figure out why black people aren't voting for the candidates that promise them the most material benefits.
 
Last edited:
Who are these candidates that Black people aren’t voting for?
 
Who are these candidates that Black people aren’t voting for?

Jenny Marshall in Forsyth county, for starters, and then a list of 50 failed progressive challengers to establishment candidates from dog catcher to President. Don"t give me the run-around man, just tell me how you disagree.
 
I don't know who Jenny Marshall is. Who did Black people vote for instead? Links to back it up would be preferred.

I'll go ahead and make a presumptive argument that name recognition overall and within Black communities plays an important role.

I don't see the difference in what you don't want to say ("black people are voting against their own self interest and need to get off the "Democratic Plantation".") and what you did say ("you still have to figure out why black people aren't voting for the candidates that promise them the most material benefits.").

Both are paternalistic. Who are you to decide what promises the most material benefits? And you seem to avoid doing the risk analysis of what happens if that candidate loses.

Coming from a Republican or a Progressive, both statements merely show anger at Black people for not voting for your candidate. Neither statement address what Black voters want in candidates or why your candidate doesn't appeal to them.
 
I don't know who Jenny Marshall is. Who did Black people vote for instead? Links to back it up would be preferred.

I'll go ahead and make a presumptive argument that name recognition overall and within Black communities plays an important role.

I don't see the difference in what you don't want to say ("black people are voting against their own self interest and need to get off the "Democratic Plantation".") and what you did say ("you still have to figure out why black people aren't voting for the candidates that promise them the most material benefits.").

Both are paternalistic. Who are you to decide what promises the most material benefits? And you seem to avoid doing the risk analysis of what happens if that candidate loses.

Coming from a Republican or a Progressive, both statements merely show anger at Black people for not voting for your candidate. Neither statement address what Black voters want in candidates or why your candidate doesn't appeal to them.

1. The most "material benefits" is hardly a subjective determination, to me. Is your point that some candidates micro target black "material benefits" while others make general promises?
2. I addressed the "risk analysis" in my point about electability and fear of Republicans winning. Losing is the risk. It's a greater risk for some than others.
3. My multi-point analysis was a criticism of the "voting against their own interests argument", so i'm not going to let you spin that back up against me for your own convenience. I was quite clear that I don't think that's the case. Extending from that point - it's obvious that the candidates making the biggest promises aren't generally the most appealing, therefore there is definitely a criterion for electability thats more important than just making promises - the exact premise that I said leftists need to "figure out".

Regarding the "list of candidates" - no, i'm not going to fulfill your bad faith demand, but feel free to list the notoriable leftists and socialists that black voters have elected, beyond Queens NY.
 
Last edited:
Fair points. I googled Jenny Marshall to get some context for your argument. The first thing I found was this article from the W-SJ coverage of the NC primary.
https://www.journalnow.com/news/big...cle_72d83f2f-14e9-5efd-a0e1-8aa9dfc08ca7.html

Seems like there is plenty of support for your argument given that Marshall won every country except Forsyth and still lost 54-46. But I don't understand your issue with Adams or why you think Black voters wouldn't support her. Adams was a W-S City Council member since 2009. As to my presumptive name recognition argument, I got a kick out of this.

“It was crucial,” Adams said of her name recognition in Forsyth County. “It’s my home base. I’ve spent my life here. My work here in the city and the county, people have seen what I can do. I have a body of work.”

So then I looked at their bios. Adams is on page 2 and Marshall is on page 5.
https://www.journalnow.com/fifth-co...ion_51869096-3b72-11e8-8e13-2b2cf94d1e96.html

Adams first ran for office in 1990 and has been serving in W-S in some capacity since 1990 as well. Marshall is a teacher whose only political experience was working for the Democratic Party. So Adams has a huge edge in experience. So name recognition and experience worked in her favor with Black voters.

By looking at their bios and top priorities, I'm wondering why you see Marshall as one with the "material benefits." Adams was an elected member of the Democratic National Committee. But Marshall was also a DNC delegate and was on the platform committee.


Here was Marshall's priority statement:
"Making sure our economy works for all of us with stable jobs that pay a living wage."OK. Seems like a boilerplate liberal priority.

Here was Adams' priority statement:
"Health care is a right, not a privilege. Ultimately, we need to move to a single-payer system. This must be a thoughtful process, because our national health care industry (insurance and providers) represents a sixth of the economy. Health care employs almost 500,000 people and comprises $2.5 trillion of the U.S. economy. We have the ability to provide health care for all while protecting current jobs.

The first step is to address the ACA and to make sure all states sign onto the Medicaid expansion. Then we must initiate a transition to Medicare for all. This will take time. The current health care plan reduces coverage, drives up costs and increases profits for the insurance industry."

Now I wasn't intimately familiar with this race, but I'm trying to figure out why you think Marshall's priorities line up better for Black voters than Adams. I'm also trying to figure out how Marshall comes across as more progressive than Adams aside from the fact Marshall founded the Progressive Caucus of the NC Democratic Party.

It just seems weird to claim that Black voters selecting an experienced candidate with 28 years of public service who supports M4A didn't pick the best candidate for them.
 
You've made good points about that specific race - DD Adams did have more name recognition - as much as a regular local politician can have, anyway. I never said that black Forsyth voters chose the wrong candidate - I just gave you an example of black voters supporting an establishment candidate vs a more progressive candidate. I never visited DD Adams website, but during that primary the differences between the candidates was more stark than it appears to you now. Adams was running as the trusted local politician with NC Democratic establishment bonafides, and Marshall as the grassroots newcomer.

- This is an article from a town forum where they both answered platform questions about minimum wage, gun control, etc.
https://www.elkintribune.com/news/19510/democratic-5th-congressional-district-candidates-share-opinions-on-the-issues-facing-voters-the-community
 
Last edited:
 
Not sure I understand that. How does a poll about support for Biden in 2020 disprove the real, non-anecdotal evidence that 12% of Bernie supporters voted for Trump in 2016, and if half of those voters had not voted at all or voted for Clinton it would have changed the outcome in MI, PA, and WI? And that 5% voted for Stein and 3% for Johnson?

Not wanting to get in a back and forth on this because it is in the past and I'm not sure why it is being raised now in the context of a poll taken before an election in 2020 as somehow disproving what happened in 2016, just getting that point out there. Maybe people have learned the obvious lesson now, and that's a good thing?
 
If only 87% of Bernie supporters vote for Biden and 4% vote for Trump, that’s more than enough to provide the winning margin in swing states to give Trump a narrow victory just like 2016.

576,916 people voted for Bernie in the 2020 Michigan primary

87-4 margin is 501,917 votes for Biden and 23,077 votes for Trump with 51,922 voting for someone else.

96-0 margin is 553,839 votes for Biden.

Just based on the primary, the difference between voting like Bernie supporters and Warren supporters is a net 68,999 votes.

Trump beat Hillary in Michigan by 10,704 votes.

That tweet is way off. The tweet links the exact problem and then claims it isn’t the problem at all.
 
Because 87% is a perfectly normal percentage and perfectly in line with or better than previous historical rates of vote capture. The expectation that 100% should be captured is unreasonable, no matter Trump or Hitler.
 
Ongoing Dem Debacle Thread: Performative and Informative !

These aren’t perfectly normal times.

87% puts Trump back in the White House. Fuck that nonsense and your bullshit ideological purity. If you and six of your Bernie bros are hanging out on Zoom and one says he’s just not going to vote, you need to shame the hell out of him. THIS IS NOT A GAME.

Nothing pisses me off like people who claim to give a shit and care so much but only want things done exactly their way with their exact candidate.
 
Because 87% is a perfectly normal percentage and perfectly in line with or better than previous historical rates of vote capture. The expectation that 100% should be captured is unreasonable, no matter Trump or Hitler.

That's not what the tweet says.

Also, it was 74% of Bernie supporters who voted for Clinton. No one expects 100%, but when 12% are voting for Trump, that's a problem and definitely different than just abstaining. If that happens again, well, you know.

Also, what Ph said.
 
These aren’t perfectly normal times.

87% puts Trump back in the White House. Fuck that nonsense and your bullshit ideological purity. If you and six of your Bernie bros are hanging out on Zoom and one says he’s just not going to vote, you need to shame the hell out of him. THIS IS NOT A GAME.

Nothing pisses me off like people who claim to give a shit and care so much but only want things done exactly their way with their exact candidate.

Are you joking with this shot after the conversation we just had? No one owes you their fucking vote. Take your trump fear and you bullshit expectations and shove them both up your condescending ass. You don't know jack shit about "normal times".
 
lol i told my dad's girlfriend to fuck off in a family zoom call cause she wasn't sure who she's voting for yet

my dad was not happy with me, and i was drunk
 
Are you joking with this shot after the conversation we just had? No one owes you their fucking vote. Take your trump fear and you bullshit expectations and shove them both up your condescending ass. You don't know jack shit about "normal times".

Yikes.
 
Back
Top