Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 313 of 548 FirstFirst ... 213263303311312313314315323363413 ... LastLast
Results 4,681 to 4,695 of 8218
  1. #4681
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    West Side
    Posts
    13,581
    Quote Originally Posted by WES445 View Post
    And it does matter because these donors and others like them run both parties with their donations. They and their flunkies Pelosi/DNC/Hillary/Obama want AOC and the progressive gone. And the Republican backers are willing to help as well cause they back Michelle Caruso-Cabrera as well.

    It just amazing how Pelosi, the DNC, and RNC backers have been attacking progressives throughout this strange primary race. So let not push this false narrative that where the money is coming from doesn't matter. Pelosi and DNC backers are attacking progressive which helps Pelosi 's agenda.
    Ugh

    They donít want the progressives gone, they want to WIN the election. They want to WIN. Not LOSE. WINNING means you are in power. LOSING means you are not.

    Wes, winning is when your side wins in a competition. In politics youíre competing against the other side for public opinion. AOC and progressives is where the country is moving, but it is definitely not there yet and not going to WIN this election. Progressives, no matter how common they are in other countries politics, are not the majority in the US. They are viewed as the extreme left. If you are going to pit the extreme left vs the extreme right, in the US, the extreme right wins. You need the middle. And rather than have the middle sit out or write in hopeless candidates, you need to move to the middle. Itís a process. Itís politics. The Dems have moved too far to the center for decades. You have to slowly move it back to the left. You donít just do it at once.

  2. #4682
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Flock of Sheep No.97 near BAAA BAA lane
    Posts
    17,135
    Quote Originally Posted by statquo View Post
    Ugh

    They donít want the progressives gone, they want to WIN the election. They want to WIN. Not LOSE. WINNING means you are in power. LOSING means you are not.

    Wes, winning is when your side wins in a competition. In politics youíre competing against the other side for public opinion. AOC and progressives is where the country is moving, but it is definitely not there yet and not going to WIN this election. Progressives, no matter how common they are in other countries politics, are not the majority in the US. They are viewed as the extreme left. If you are going to pit the extreme left vs the extreme right, in the US, the extreme right wins. You need the middle. And rather than have the middle sit out or write in hopeless candidates, you need to move to the middle. Itís a process. Itís politics. The Dems have moved too far to the center for decades. You have to slowly move it back to the left. You donít just do it at once.
    incrementalism. OOOOK. t think there are a lot things starting with the environment that needs more than a "process" or "slowly move it back to the left". It's that idea that we must move slowly that piss off a lot progressive off.

    When that said, those magic words it usually means nothing will be done. See that rodeo.
    Last edited by WES445; 06-25-2020 at 07:39 PM.

  3. #4683
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Flock of Sheep No.97 near BAAA BAA lane
    Posts
    17,135
    Quote Originally Posted by Walter_White View Post
    Yes I know all those folks supported her challenger, but none of them work for the DNC. You said the DNC financed AOC's challenger. You were wrong. Own it.
    Sorry, if I wasn't clear. The DNC works for the donor class.
    Last edited by WES445; 06-25-2020 at 07:46 PM.

  4. #4684
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,671
    Quote Originally Posted by WES445 View Post
    incrementalism. OOOOK. t think there are a lot things starting with the environment that needs more than a "process" or "slowly move it back to the left". It's that idea that we must move slowly that piss off a lot progressive off.

    When that said, those magic words it usually means nothing will be done. See that rodeo.
    Lol, so thats not the first time someone's tried to sell that garbage. I've heard it in every election season of my adult life. I'm too old, no time.

  5. #4685
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Flock of Sheep No.97 near BAAA BAA lane
    Posts
    17,135
    Quote Originally Posted by benny01 View Post
    Lol, so thats not the first time someone's tried to sell that garbage. I've heard it in every election season of my adult life. I'm too old, no time.
    And it is said each time like it is a brand new logical idea.

  6. #4686
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Hell on Earth- Missouri
    Posts
    18,814
    Quote Originally Posted by statquo View Post
    Ugh

    They donít want the progressives gone, they want to WIN the election. They want to WIN. Not LOSE. WINNING means you are in power. LOSING means you are not.

    Wes, winning is when your side wins in a competition. In politics youíre competing against the other side for public opinion. AOC and progressives is where the country is moving, but it is definitely not there yet and not going to WIN this election. Progressives, no matter how common they are in other countries politics, are not the majority in the US. They are viewed as the extreme left. If you are going to pit the extreme left vs the extreme right, in the US, the extreme right wins. You need the middle. And rather than have the middle sit out or write in hopeless candidates, you need to move to the middle. Itís a process. Itís politics. The Dems have moved too far to the center for decades. You have to slowly move it back to the left. You donít just do it at once.
    The term "win at all costs" has taken on a new meaning the last few months from the liberals. If that's what you want, I truly hope you get it. Honestly.

  7. #4687
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    10,178
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo View Post
    The term "win at all costs" has taken on a new meaning the last few months from the liberals.
    Wrong. The term ďwin at all costsĒ still means ďwin at all costsĒ. Nothing new there.

  8. #4688
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    5,143
    Quote Originally Posted by statquo View Post
    Ugh

    They donít want the progressives gone, they want to WIN the election. They want to WIN. Not LOSE. WINNING means you are in power. LOSING means you are not.

    Wes, winning is when your side wins in a competition. In politics youíre competing against the other side for public opinion. AOC and progressives is where the country is moving, but it is definitely not there yet and not going to WIN this election. Progressives, no matter how common they are in other countries politics, are not the majority in the US. They are viewed as the extreme left. If you are going to pit the extreme left vs the extreme right, in the US, the extreme right wins. You need the middle. And rather than have the middle sit out or write in hopeless candidates, you need to move to the middle. Itís a process. Itís politics. The Dems have moved too far to the center for decades. You have to slowly move it back to the left. You donít just do it at once.
    I think for some issues, Dems can get away with a progressive approach. I donít think incrementalism works for stuff like climate change. Thereís no time. Dems need to be careful with stuff like identity politics, and toppling statues of Grant and the like is harmful.
    "The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.Ē

    -JFK


  9. #4689
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    63,016
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo View Post
    The term "win at all costs" has taken on a new meaning the last few months from the liberals. If that's what you want, I truly hope you get it. Honestly.
    How so?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  10. #4690
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    10,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Walter_White View Post
    I think for some issues, Dems can get away with a progressive approach. I donít think incrementalism works for stuff like climate change. Thereís no time. Dems need to be careful with stuff like identity politics, and toppling statues of Grant and the like is harmful.
    Democrats (of the liberal variety) need more to worry about alienating their traditional supporters who have deep pockets. Trump may be a boor, but his policies for the most part have made Wall Street happy enough.

    Social issues will not carry the day.

  11. #4691
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Flock of Sheep No.97 near BAAA BAA lane
    Posts
    17,135
    In a diverse country, everything is identity politics whether it's the donor class or the peons.

  12. #4692
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    10,178
    Quote Originally Posted by WES445 View Post
    In a diverse country, everything is identity politics whether it's the donor class or the peons.
    In my way of seeing the American political landscape, social issues are the motivating distinction between conservatives and liberals. Both bow at the altar of Wall Street. Both advocate for corporate socialism. Both neglect the specter of climate change. Both are happy to throw an occasional bone to the fringes of their group.

    The differences: abortion, civil rights, gun control, and to some degree, health care.

    The Progressives see those differences as well, but illuminated in greater detail through the overriding lens of economic matters.

  13. #4693
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    63,016

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

    Quote Originally Posted by Crovash View Post
    Democrats (of the liberal variety) need more to worry about alienating their traditional supporters who have deep pockets. Trump may be a boor, but his policies for the most part have made Wall Street happy enough.

    Social issues will not carry the day.
    Agreed. They are beholden to the money just like the Rep. I think big picture the difference bt the 2 is that Rep want to give money to the rich and figure the crumbs that fall off there plates are enough help for the poor. The Dem want to do the same to a lesser degree while with a little more welfare for the very poor. Neither side has shown real interest improving life and opportunities and people who arenít rich. The Dems have been all talk when in comes to economic empowerment of regular people since Regan

    That said I really do think the people support a more progressive labor centered ideology


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by ewing; 07-01-2020 at 12:01 PM.
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  14. #4694
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Flock of Sheep No.97 near BAAA BAA lane
    Posts
    17,135
    Yup, and they only talk about incrementalism when it comes to social needs, but if the donor class needs a tax cut or the military-industries sector needs more money, no question ask or delays tolerated.

  15. #4695
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Flock of Sheep No.97 near BAAA BAA lane
    Posts
    17,135
    Yes, the majority wish for more progressive-labor centered ideology but those in Congress don't thus the disconnect and people like Trump being elected over establish politicians of both parties.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •