• 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!

Why can't the left win?

I was coming here to post this, though over the night they changed the title to "7 Reasons the Left is Losing" and I think it's a better title.
 
Last edited:
Bert Gordon may have said it best for the Political Left (and for WF sports fans) in this quote from The Hustler:

"You have the best excuse in the world for losing; no trouble losing when you got a good excuse. Winning... that can be heavy on your back, too, like a monkey. You'll drop that load too when you got an excuse. All you gotta do is learn to feel sorry for yourself. One of the best indoor sports, feeling sorry for yourself. A sport enjoyed by all, especially the born losers."
 
Lol dumb article. The "left", if by the left we mean the Democratic party, consistently gets more votes than the "right." The right wins because they gerrymandered the house districts and because the state-by-state representation in the Senate works in their favor since they have majorities in a lot of low-population states.
 
the left has already won; a large portion of people who vote Republican are dumbass old white evangelical rubes who are fewer and fewer by the day.
 
right, but the objective is to win the war, not LOWF moral victories.

How do you convert the wafflers in a rigged system?
 
You temporarily embrace all the rights policies simply by putting up no resistance. Then after they have been implemented and the rube army is so poor and sick that they have started to die off and their ability to even get out of bed to vote doesn't exist you return to politics. The war has been won by political siege through hibernation.
 
MysteryMen said:
Lol dumb article. The "left", if by the left we mean the Democratic party, consistently gets more votes than the "right." The right wins because they gerrymandered the house districts and because the state-by-state representation in the Senate works in their favor since they have majorities in a lot of low-population states.
Click to expand...

There were some good points. Others made white swing voters seem like delicate snowflakes who need to be coddled.

More energy needs to go toward mobilizing liberals to actually vote than to try to convert hard to convert voters.

It's not about getting more people to vote. It's about getting more people to vote in certain places. That means showing red district voters who lean left that it's worth showing up to the polls. We already saw in Kansas that some counties had higher turnout in April than in November.

One article made a good point not to call AHCA Trumpcare. I'm not sure if it was one of these articles because I read a few this morning. I completely agree. It's lazy for one. Second, more people trust Trump than Congress. It may have the unintended effect of convincing people it would do what Trump promised his health care program would do.
 
HoosierDeac said:
the left has already won; a large portion of people who vote Republican are dumbass old white evangelical rubes who are fewer and fewer by the day.
Click to expand...

what about the dumbass young black people that don't vote because their candidate isn't black?
 
I wonder if Pelosi and Schumer will read the article?

Charles_Schumer.jpg
 
Swing voters is such a dumb term these days. In the past when the two parties were closer together and working together with compromises it was a lot easier to say ok I could go either way on this issue. Now the policies aren't even close, they are pretty much black and white. If you are a "swing voter" in the year 2016/2017 you are just really really fucking dumb, you can't form your own opinions and ideas, are easily confused, and are better off if you don't participate in the political process.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
Swing voters is such a dumb term these days. In the past when the two parties were closer together and working together with compromises it was a lot easier to say ok I could go either way on this issue. Now the policies aren't even close, they are pretty much black and white. If you are a "swing voter" in the year 2016/2017 you are just really really fucking dumb, you can't form your own opinions and ideas, are easily confused, and are better off if you don't participate in the political process.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Because each issue is so black and white on each side, swing votes come in when someone is white on one issue but black on another. So the ultimate vote is a weighing of the issues. It is pretty easy for someone to be for lower taxes and pro-choice. Or anti-immigration and pro-environment. So the priority of the issues determines the swing, not one issue itself.

Part of the reason the left lost is because they focused on prioritizing the wrong issues - like the lightening-strike probability of BLM's focus versus the massive issue of unemployment.
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
There were some good points. Others made white swing voters seem like delicate snowflakes who need to be coddled.

More energy needs to go toward mobilizing liberals to actually vote than to try to convert hard to convert voters.

It's not about getting more people to vote. It's about getting more people to vote in certain places. That means showing red district voters who lean left that it's worth showing up to the polls. We already saw in Kansas that some counties had higher turnout in April than in November.

One article made a good point not to call AHCA Trumpcare. I'm not sure if it was one of these articles because I read a few this morning. I completely agree. It's lazy for one. Second, more people trust Trump than Congress. It may have the unintended effect of convincing people it would do what Trump promised his health care program would do.
Click to expand...

If---and this we've come to learn is the height of insanity---we were to indulge in the fiction that the Left was capable of genuine introspection, this would be the starting point: if the ideas are as sound as you believe, who is the "hard to convert voter"?
 
Yeah but the two sides policies don't change and haven't been changing. So if you come along and weigh anti abortion with climate change one year and vote based on being anti abortion then the next year the candidate that is anti abortion vs the candidate that supports the EPA you decide oh I'll go with climate change this time and abandon anti abortion. It means the year before you based your vote off a conviction you don't really care about so you are therefore a dumbass or have no convictions. I mean they are trotting out undecided swing voters like a day before the election, Hillary and Trump outside of being hated and corrupt, couldn't have more different policies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top