• 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

ImTheCaptain said:
you're the one demanding self identifying liberals in Seattle get real and fall in line with those of Biloxi, Buffalo and Bakersfield.
Click to expand...

That is a gross mischaracterization of what I was trying to say
 
ImTheCaptain said:
how so?
Click to expand...

I mean you're misinterpreting the entire core concept of my post.

The GOP, despite being bigoted, xenophobic, fear-mongering, racist assholes for well over half a century now, has always done one thing extremely well: unifying their voters, many of which have competing interests, around simple, easily digestible messages. I am trying to suggest that Democrats do a similar thing. Rather than continue to try to win narrow victories using "everything needs to go right" strategies based on ideological demographics of individual states (see: McCaskill, Claire; Heitkamp, Heidi; Donnelly, Joe), I think it would be much healthier in the long run for the party to take unabashedly progressive stances across the board. Not litmus tests, just unify the party under an actual platform. This is why I repeated the oft-posted "genuine article" line. Sure, Missouri and Indiana and many similar red states (or redder) may not have that many true liberals, but they still exist in those states. Why are we ignoring them? If I lived 45 minutes east on the Missouri side of Kansas City and had to vote between Hawley and McCaskill for Senator this past November, I would have voted McCaskill, but I wouldn't have been excited to and would have done it only because I view voting as a civic duty. Not all people are like that (as shown by historical voter turnout numbers). If Democrats instead ran a progressive candidate that didn't compromise nearly every position that the Democratic Party traditionally stands for in the name of trying to maintain a Senate seat, I would have been much more excited to vote for that candidate, even though they likely would still have lost the election. But that's not necessarily the point. In almost every situation in life, losing while trying to win the right way is much better than winning playing the wrong way. And when you play the wrong way and still get blown out of the water, the response should not be to keep playing the wrong way, only wronger, but to reflect on how you got to that point and change the game.
 
No offense, but the notion that true progressive politicians are moderating themselves to win elections "the wrong way" is outlandish. The party is run by rich donors, and rich donors aren't progressive. Claire McCaskill was never a progressive, she was just a woman with ambitions and the right political connections. In this post Citizens United era of campaign finance, the only politicians to trust are the grassroots candidates who refuse corporate funding and usurp the party gatekeepers.
 
Last edited:
myDeaconmyhand said:
No offense, but the notion that true progressive politicians are moderating themselves to win elections "the wrong way" is outlandish. The party is run by rich donors, and rich donors aren't progressive. Claire McCaskill was never a progressive, she was just a woman with ambitions and the right political connections. In this post Citizens United era of campaign finance, the only politicians to trust are the grassroots candidates who refuse corporate funding and usurp the party gatekeepers.
Click to expand...

Just like ITC, that is a mischaracterization of what I was posted.
 
Let me do it in bullet points so there is no more confusion:

  • Democrats are shitty at messaging
  • GOP is better at messaging despite competing interests in its party because unabashedly "conservative"
  • Moderate Democrats going further right to win in red states is a bad strategy
  • Nominating progressive candidates in those red states on a unified progressive platform would be a better strategy
  • Claire McCaskill sucks

There is more substance to what I was saying but since we apparently are incapable of comprehending today, hopefully this BuzzFeed style list is more easily digestible.
 
And just one more time because reading your post is incredibly frustrating, I never once stated that Claire McCaskill was progressive in any fashion.
 
Buttermaker said:
Obama loses in 2012 if not for Romney's 44% comment.
Click to expand...

It was 47%, but you may be correct. There was also the huge problem that the GOP was wildly riled up about how awful Obamacare was but the plan was based on one their nominee designed in MA.
 
Newenglanddeac said:
Click to expand...

Conservatives probably have a hard time with this tweet. On the one hand, she’s the antichrist as has to be wrong about everything. On the other hand, she’s talking about politicos not getting money.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Conservatives probably have a hard time with this tweet. On the one hand, she’s the antichrist as has to be wrong about everything. On the other hand, she’s talking about politicos not getting money.
Click to expand...
Beyond political persuasion, AOC's openness is refreshing. The way that she is documenting and reporting her experience as a freshman congresswoman is really unprecedented as far as I know. She is removing the mystique from politics, which is great.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
Beyond political persuasion, AOC's openness is refreshing. The way that she is documenting and reporting her experience as a freshman congresswoman is really unprecedented as far as I know. She is removing the mystique from politics, which is great.
Click to expand...

She’s going to be a great advocate for the American people, joining maybe 10-15 of her colleagues in the process. Congress is broken. AOC is intelligent, young, and charismatic enough to fix it.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Conservatives probably have a hard time with this tweet. On the one hand, she’s the antichrist as has to be wrong about everything. On the other hand, she’s talking about politicos not getting money.
Click to expand...

Simple solution. Make Democrats salaries tied to shutdowns but not Republicans.

Also, when was the last time Conservatives had a hard time with cognitive dissonance?
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
Beyond political persuasion, AOC's openness is refreshing. The way that she is documenting and reporting her experience as a freshman congresswoman is really unprecedented as far as I know. She is removing the mystique from politics, which is great.
Click to expand...

Yeah, she is awesome. I am really glad she is in Congress and that she is getting so much media attention.
 
birdman said:
Simple solution. Make Democrats salaries tied to shutdowns but not Republicans.

Also, when was the last time Conservatives had a hard time with cognitive dissonance?
Click to expand...

They’re probably calling her a dumb poor for not knowing members of Congress get a paycheck. And that only Democrats shut down government because they don’t want what Republicans want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top