The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

The 2022 American Midterm Election

1246798

Posts

  • Solomaxwell6Solomaxwell6 Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Kaputa wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Cox won by 16%, Mastriano by like 24%. Democrats didn't choose shit. It was a waste of money because of course the GOP primary electorate is going to pick the fascist and a bad strategy for that reason, but Democrats have very little power over Republican voters.
    I'm saddened and exasperated by your insistence on minimizing this (and by the unspoken decision of this thread to pretend it isn't happening). Knowing your political stances over the past many years, I am doubtful that you actually believe the argument you are making here. If it were any other situation, you and everyone else in this thread would see "entity funding fascist candidates across the country" and immediately and correctly apply the "enemy" label to them. You know as well as I do that this is a deep betrayal of the party's base by its leadership. I can guarantee that if almost any rank and file Democrat who donated small amounts of money learned that their funds were used this way, they would be absolutely disgusted.

    It's meant to reinforce their strategy in 2022, which, since there are no positive accomplishments to run on, is an entirely negative campaign. "Look how scary they are, we are the only alternative to fascism!" Trying to make sure they are as scary and fascist as possible makes a cynical sort of sense in this context. But once the duplicitous tactic is revealed, it actually undermines the overall strategy. To what extent are they actually an alternative if they are part of the apparatus pushing fascism on this country, rather than just part of our collective problem?

    I don't know whether or not this has convinced me to never vote Democrat again, because even though I recognize that they want to put me in this hostage situation, I also recognize that I am in fact a hostage; no one's bluffing here.

    But it has without a doubt convinced me to never, ever donate to the party or its candidates again. I have trouble understanding how anyone could justify financially supporting them after these revelations. The idea that I could be donating to help liberal candidates win and then later learn that my money went to help some QAnon neoconfederate is just disgusting. I'd be tempted to give up on politics entirely if I learned that the Democrats used part of my paycheck that way.

    It's possibly the worst political betrayal, at least in the form of a party betraying its own supporters, that I've witnessed in this country. It's made me hardly give a fuck who wins in November. And this is coming from someone who despite having negative views on the party for well over a decade, has voted party line every time since being of age.

    I'll drop it after this post because I realize that no one wants to talk about or pay attention to this here, and if y'all want a thread to cheer whatever candidates I'm not gonna put that much effort into ruining this last gasp of hope in this failing institution. But it's just so demoralizing. "We are opposed to the fascists" was the one selling point the party had, and now that they've abandoned that last positive, it's hard for me to see any point in the party's continued existence.

    First of all, the accusations of bad faith arguments for no reason are fucking stupid. Stop them. Like holy shit, that kind of attitude is fucking toxic to this forum.

    Secondly, nobody is funding anyone. The way these things run as far as I've ever seen them, including the in the case mentioned above, is they run negative ads against the more nutbar candidate that republican primary voters find appealing to them. (eg- "He wants to ban all abortion in all cases!")

    Thirdly, as ebum was actually pointing out, there's very little evidence this shit even matters. In fact that article linked on it has examples where the candidate they were running ads against won and examples where they didn't. The margins on these races suggest these kind of efforts are mostly just a waste of money.

    And finally, while I'm not a fan of the strategy because I think it's probably a waste of money, the Democrats have picked up plenty of senate seats over the years because the GOP nominated an unappealing goober who said dumb extreme shit.
    No, actually, I stand by the accusation regardless of you whining about it. Because the argument is transparently bullshit and I think eBum is smarter than that based on his posting history over the years.

    And the ads against the nutbar candidates are not negative ads. They are meant to make the nutbars look good. The ads against the moderate GOP candidates are negative ads. We went through this in detail in the Parties thread last time it was discussed.

    Nah dude, it's a shitty baseless accusation that only serves to foster a toxic atmosphere that drives people away from this forum. If your automatic assumption is that anyone who doesn't agree with your view on this must be trolling you, then you need to take a long hard at yourself and how you relate to other people around you and start maybe considering the idea that maybe the people around you who think different things then you just have different opinions on stuff you think is obvious or must be true. There's nothing about ebum's statement above that is out of line with anything he's said before.

    And yes, they are negative ads.
    The Democratic Governors Association boosted Cox, launching an ad campaign in the final weeks before the primaries that linked him to Trump and played up his conservative bona fides. The campaign criticizes him for being “100 percent pro-life” and for “refusing to support any federal restrictions” on guns.

    Similarly, here's the ad for Mastriano:

    https://host2.adimpact.com/admo/viewer/821ff523-0f2f-4b51-83fb-934cad4b92a7
    This is Republican state senator Doug Mastriano. He's the Republican who's ahead in the polls for governor. He wants to outlaw abortion. It's Mastriano who wrote the heartbeat bill in Pennsylvania and he's one of Donald Trump's strongest supporters. He wants to end vote by mail and he led the fight to audit the 2020 election. If Mastriano wins, it's a win for what Donald Trump stands for. Is that what we want in Pennsylvania

    I mean, yeah, this is the sort of thing that might help him in the GOP primary, and that was intentional on Shapiro's team's part. But I could see Shapiro running almost an identical ad in September, too.

  • KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    They are open about the fact that the ads are meant to help the extremist candidate win! No one involved or reporting on it disputes that interpretation. You might see those attributes as negative but that is beside the point. An ad meant to help a candidate's chances is by definition not a real attack ad.

  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    But look at the things they are highlighting in order to “help”

    Wanting a total abortion ban is not a winning position. Airing an add that features that is only helpful in a primary where the voting base is typically more extreme.

  • KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    Marathon wrote: »
    But look at the things they are highlighting in order to “help”

    Wanting a total abortion ban is not a winning position. Airing an add that features that is only helpful in a primary where the voting base is typically more extreme.
    Sure, I wouldn't have an issue if the ads were running in the general. Well I sort of would, because in terms of aesthetics or rhetoric the ads aren’t negative enough. But it would be an issue of ad quality then, not moral offense as it is now (to me anyway). It's the context and intent of the ads, which is about the GOP primaries, that is upsetting me so much here.

  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    I fail to see why it would be ok in the general, but morally offensive in the primary.

  • KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    edited July 2022
    shryke wrote: »
    Kaputa wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Cox won by 16%, Mastriano by like 24%. Democrats didn't choose shit. It was a waste of money because of course the GOP primary electorate is going to pick the fascist and a bad strategy for that reason, but Democrats have very little power over Republican voters.
    I'm saddened and exasperated by your insistence on minimizing this (and by the unspoken decision of this thread to pretend it isn't happening). Knowing your political stances over the past many years, I am doubtful that you actually believe the argument you are making here. If it were any other situation, you and everyone else in this thread would see "entity funding fascist candidates across the country" and immediately and correctly apply the "enemy" label to them. You know as well as I do that this is a deep betrayal of the party's base by its leadership. I can guarantee that if almost any rank and file Democrat who donated small amounts of money learned that their funds were used this way, they would be absolutely disgusted.

    It's meant to reinforce their strategy in 2022, which, since there are no positive accomplishments to run on, is an entirely negative campaign. "Look how scary they are, we are the only alternative to fascism!" Trying to make sure they are as scary and fascist as possible makes a cynical sort of sense in this context. But once the duplicitous tactic is revealed, it actually undermines the overall strategy. To what extent are they actually an alternative if they are part of the apparatus pushing fascism on this country, rather than just part of our collective problem?

    I don't know whether or not this has convinced me to never vote Democrat again, because even though I recognize that they want to put me in this hostage situation, I also recognize that I am in fact a hostage; no one's bluffing here.

    But it has without a doubt convinced me to never, ever donate to the party or its candidates again. I have trouble understanding how anyone could justify financially supporting them after these revelations. The idea that I could be donating to help liberal candidates win and then later learn that my money went to help some QAnon neoconfederate is just disgusting. I'd be tempted to give up on politics entirely if I learned that the Democrats used part of my paycheck that way.

    It's possibly the worst political betrayal, at least in the form of a party betraying its own supporters, that I've witnessed in this country. It's made me hardly give a fuck who wins in November. And this is coming from someone who despite having negative views on the party for well over a decade, has voted party line every time since being of age.

    I'll drop it after this post because I realize that no one wants to talk about or pay attention to this here, and if y'all want a thread to cheer whatever candidates I'm not gonna put that much effort into ruining this last gasp of hope in this failing institution. But it's just so demoralizing. "We are opposed to the fascists" was the one selling point the party had, and now that they've abandoned that last positive, it's hard for me to see any point in the party's continued existence.

    First of all, the accusations of bad faith arguments for no reason are fucking stupid. Stop them. Like holy shit, that kind of attitude is fucking toxic to this forum.

    Secondly, nobody is funding anyone. The way these things run as far as I've ever seen them, including the in the case mentioned above, is they run negative ads against the more nutbar candidate that republican primary voters find appealing to them. (eg- "He wants to ban all abortion in all cases!")

    Thirdly, as ebum was actually pointing out, there's very little evidence this shit even matters. In fact that article linked on it has examples where the candidate they were running ads against won and examples where they didn't. The margins on these races suggest these kind of efforts are mostly just a waste of money.

    And finally, while I'm not a fan of the strategy because I think it's probably a waste of money, the Democrats have picked up plenty of senate seats over the years because the GOP nominated an unappealing goober who said dumb extreme shit.
    No, actually, I stand by the accusation regardless of you whining about it. Because the argument is transparently bullshit and I think eBum is smarter than that based on his posting history over the years.

    And the ads against the nutbar candidates are not negative ads. They are meant to make the nutbars look good. The ads against the moderate GOP candidates are negative ads. We went through this in detail in the Parties thread last time it was discussed.

    Nah dude, it's a shitty baseless accusation that only serves to foster a toxic atmosphere that drives people away from this forum. If your automatic assumption is that anyone who doesn't agree with your view on this must be trolling you, then you need to take a long hard at yourself and how you relate to other people around you and start maybe considering the idea that maybe the people around you who think different things then you just have different opinions on stuff you think is obvious or must be true. There's nothing about ebum's statement above that is out of line with anything he's said before.
    I don't think I'm being trolled, I think the issue is being minimized because it reflects poorly on the Democrats and an important election is coming up. But fine, maybe I'm wrong and eBum really does think it's no big deal to help fascists win elections. I don't understand how one can reach that position while simultaneously being strongly opposed to fascism.
    Marathon wrote: »
    I fail to see why it would be ok in the general, but morally offensive in the primary.
    Because in one context, the ad would be meant to harm the fascist's chance of winning, while in the other context, the ads are meant to help the fascist win.

    Kaputa on
  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    But overall the intent is to harm the fascist chance at obtaining power.

    Do you honestly think that in a scenario where the moderate would somehow win the primary and then the general that they wouldn’t just go along with whatever extreme policies the rest of the party is striving for anyway?

    Democrats can’t help republicans be more power hungry fascists. They’re already there.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Marathon wrote: »
    But overall the intent is to harm the fascist chance at obtaining power.

    Do you honestly think that in a scenario where the moderate would somehow win the primary and then the general that they wouldn’t just go along with whatever extreme policies the rest of the party is striving for anyway?

    Democrats can’t help republicans be more power hungry fascists. They’re already there.

    If all the candidates are equally bad then the stratrgy doesnt make any sense in the first place.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Points:

    1) My position here is actually more critical of Democrats than it was in the past. I openly admire McCaskill for running ads to try to get Akin as her opponent, because that was a close primary and she only kept that seat because Akin was horrifying.
    2) There is no practical difference between Mastriano and any other Republican in my mind. The only anti-dictatorship candidates they have were immediately tossed or about to be tossed from the party on August 16 when Cheney loses her seat. And that Liz fucking Cheney, torture enthusiast who hates voting rights, is the relatively antifascist candidate in the Republican Party should say a lot.

    So yeah, don't pretend to know my own thought processes and accuse me of being a hypocrite or posting in bad faith, when you clearly don't actually know them.

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    edited July 2022
    Marathon wrote: »
    But overall the intent is to harm the fascist chance at obtaining power.

    Do you honestly think that in a scenario where the moderate would somehow win the primary and then the general that they wouldn’t just go along with whatever extreme policies the rest of the party is striving for anyway?

    Democrats can’t help republicans be more power hungry fascists. They’re already there.

    If all the candidates are equally bad then the stratrgy doesnt make any sense in the first place.

    That would be why I said I consider these kinds of ad buys to be a waste of money more than anything.

    Marathon on
  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Central OhioRegistered User regular
    Kind of wild that “if it’s legitimate rape the body shuts the whole thing down” went from a campaign-killing gaffe to actual passed-legislation-policy in 10 years

    And that “I am not a witch” would be lauded if Walker said it because (one thinks at least) it would be among the very few truthful things he says

    l7ygmd1dd4p1.jpeg
    3b2y43dozpk3.jpeg
  • KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    edited July 2022
    Marathon wrote: »
    But overall the intent is to harm the fascist chance at obtaining power.

    Do you honestly think that in a scenario where the moderate would somehow win the primary and then the general that they wouldn’t just go along with whatever extreme policies the rest of the party is striving for anyway?

    Democrats can’t help republicans be more power hungry fascists. They’re already there.
    I think this is inaccurate! Pence is a traitor for not helping Tump's coup attempt, right? Didn't a GOP governor (Georgia maybe?) refuse to help Trump fuck with ballot boxes too? My impression is that Jan. 6th is actually not something that all or even the majority of GOP officials supported. Isn't that a good thing? Right now several GOP senators - generally not the most extreme ones - are saying they'll vote to protect gay marriage. Is that not also good? Mastriano is described by the OP as an insurrectionist who must be stopped. Was his opponent equally so (and yes I realize the margin was large in that case)?

    Kaputa on
  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    But overall the intent is to harm the fascist chance at obtaining power.

    Do you honestly think that in a scenario where the moderate would somehow win the primary and then the general that they wouldn’t just go along with whatever extreme policies the rest of the party is striving for anyway?

    Democrats can’t help republicans be more power hungry fascists. They’re already there.
    I think this is inaccurate! Pence is a traitor for not helping Tump's coup attempt, right? Didn't a GOP governor (Georgia maybe?) refuse to help Trump fuck with ballot boxes too? My impression is that Jan. 6th is actually not something that all or even the majority of GOP officials supported. Isn't that a good thing? Right now several GOP senators - generally not the most extreme ones - are saying they'll vote to protect gay marriage. Is that not also good? Mastriano is described by the OP as an insurrectionist who must be stopped. Was his opponent equally so (and yes I realize the margin was large in that case)?

    I think your mistake here is equating extreme policy goals with working to overthrow the government.

    It’s the exact same thing we see with people like Liz Cheney right now. She’s on board with the terrible policies of the GOP, but if you ask her to destroy the country, that’s a bridge too far.

  • MegaMan001MegaMan001 CRNA Rochester, MNRegistered User regular
    Honest question, did we just start calling economic downturns Recessions because "Depression" has say too many negative connotations or what?

    I am in the business of saving lives.
  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    But overall the intent is to harm the fascist chance at obtaining power.

    Do you honestly think that in a scenario where the moderate would somehow win the primary and then the general that they wouldn’t just go along with whatever extreme policies the rest of the party is striving for anyway?

    Democrats can’t help republicans be more power hungry fascists. They’re already there.
    I think this is inaccurate! Pence is a traitor for not helping Tump's coup attempt, right? Didn't a GOP governor (Georgia maybe?) refuse to help Trump fuck with ballot boxes too? My impression is that Jan. 6th is actually not something that all or even the majority of GOP officials supported. Isn't that a good thing? Right now several GOP senators - generally not the most extreme ones - are saying they'll vote to protect gay marriage. Is that not also good? Mastriano is described by the OP as an insurrectionist who must be stopped. Was his opponent equally so (and yes I realize the margin was large in that case)?

    Those people you mention are very rare exceptions. Liz Cheney was stripped of everything the House GOP could strip her of. Taylor Greene was not.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    But overall the intent is to harm the fascist chance at obtaining power.

    Do you honestly think that in a scenario where the moderate would somehow win the primary and then the general that they wouldn’t just go along with whatever extreme policies the rest of the party is striving for anyway?

    Democrats can’t help republicans be more power hungry fascists. They’re already there.
    I think this is inaccurate! Pence is a traitor for not helping Tump's coup attempt, right? Didn't a GOP governor (Georgia maybe?) refuse to help Trump fuck with ballot boxes too? My impression is that Jan. 6th is actually not something that all or even the majority of GOP officials supported. Isn't that a good thing? Right now several GOP senators - generally not the most extreme ones - are saying they'll vote to protect gay marriage. Is that not also good? Mastriano is described by the OP as an insurrectionist who must be stopped. Was his opponent equally so (and yes I realize the margin was large in that case)?

    Those people you mention are very rare exceptions. Liz Cheney was stripped of everything the House GOP could strip her of. Taylor Greene was not.

    Greene has lost her committee seats

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    edited July 2022
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    But overall the intent is to harm the fascist chance at obtaining power.

    Do you honestly think that in a scenario where the moderate would somehow win the primary and then the general that they wouldn’t just go along with whatever extreme policies the rest of the party is striving for anyway?

    Democrats can’t help republicans be more power hungry fascists. They’re already there.
    I think this is inaccurate! Pence is a traitor for not helping Tump's coup attempt, right? Didn't a GOP governor (Georgia maybe?) refuse to help Trump fuck with ballot boxes too? My impression is that Jan. 6th is actually not something that all or even the majority of GOP officials supported. Isn't that a good thing? Right now several GOP senators - generally not the most extreme ones - are saying they'll vote to protect gay marriage. Is that not also good? Mastriano is described by the OP as an insurrectionist who must be stopped. Was his opponent equally so (and yes I realize the margin was large in that case)?

    Those people you mention are very rare exceptions. Liz Cheney was stripped of everything the House GOP could strip her of. Taylor Greene was not.

    Greene has lost her committee seats

    She was stripped of her committee assignments by a vote in the House where 11 Republicans voted against her. What’s your point?

    Marathon on
  • ronzoronzo Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    But overall the intent is to harm the fascist chance at obtaining power.

    Do you honestly think that in a scenario where the moderate would somehow win the primary and then the general that they wouldn’t just go along with whatever extreme policies the rest of the party is striving for anyway?

    Democrats can’t help republicans be more power hungry fascists. They’re already there.
    I think this is inaccurate! Pence is a traitor for not helping Tump's coup attempt, right? Didn't a GOP governor (Georgia maybe?) refuse to help Trump fuck with ballot boxes too? My impression is that Jan. 6th is actually not something that all or even the majority of GOP officials supported. Isn't that a good thing? Right now several GOP senators - generally not the most extreme ones - are saying they'll vote to protect gay marriage. Is that not also good? Mastriano is described by the OP as an insurrectionist who must be stopped. Was his opponent equally so (and yes I realize the margin was large in that case)?

    Those people you mention are very rare exceptions. Liz Cheney was stripped of everything the House GOP could strip her of. Taylor Greene was not.

    Greene has lost her committee seats

    This is some disingenuous bullshit.

    Cheney was stripped of her committee seats by the GOP caucus

    Greene was stripped of hers by a house floor vote that only had 11 republicans voting against her.

  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User, Transition Team regular
    yeah come on Styro, that's some bothsidesism you don't want to be doing.

  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    A vote that was initiated by Nancy Pelosi. If you think that Kevin McCarthy would have ever even brought it to the floor I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited July 2022
    I have no doubt that GOP enforcement is politically oriented and opportunistic, but Greene was stripped of her committee seats within a month of taking office. Yes by Dems. She's not a very good example. Party leadership is probably going to be happy to be shot of her when her time comes.
    Marathon wrote: »
    A vote that was initiated by Nancy Pelosi. If you think that Kevin McCarthy would have ever even brought it to the floor I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

    Steve King?

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited July 2022
    MegaMan001 wrote: »
    Honest question, did we just start calling economic downturns Recessions because "Depression" has say too many negative connotations or what?

    Recession = two consecutive quarters of GDP falling
    Depression is less formally defined, but generally understood as a two year long recession or a recession with total decline in GDP of at least 10%. But then there's fights over whether the depression ends when GDP starts growing again or when you're back to pre-depression GDP. It's weird.

    Technically GDP started growing in 1933, but I don't think anyone alive then would say the Depression was over.

    enlightenedbum on
    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    MegaMan001 wrote: »
    Honest question, did we just start calling economic downturns Recessions because "Depression" has say too many negative connotations or what?

    Recession = two consecutive quarters of GDP falling
    Depression is less formally defined, but generally understood as a two year long recession or a recession with total decline in GDP of at least 10%. But then there's fights over whether the depression ends when GDP starts growing again or when you're back to pre-depression GDP. It's weird.

    Technically GDP started growing in 1933, but I don't think anyone alive then would say the Depression was over.

    In more colloquial terms, a recession is a short period of the economy being bad and a depression is a long period of the economy being even worse.

  • ronzoronzo Registered User regular
    I have no doubt that GOP enforcement is politically oriented and opportunistic, but Greene was stripped of her committee seats within a month of taking office. Yes by Dems. She's not a very good example. Party leadership is probably going to be happy to be shot of her when her time comes.
    Marathon wrote: »
    A vote that was initiated by Nancy Pelosi. If you think that Kevin McCarthy would have ever even brought it to the floor I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

    Steve King?

    Again, what’s your point? The Cheney/Greene comparison was about how the internal GOP pushing back against Jan 6th is rare, and nothing you‘be said here has anything to do with that.

    Phoenix’s point was that Cheney was punished BY the GOP for taking a stand, not that Greene has never had anything bad happen to her in congress.

    Did you just reflexively disagree because you saw a chance to “well, actually”?

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited July 2022
    ronzo wrote: »
    I have no doubt that GOP enforcement is politically oriented and opportunistic, but Greene was stripped of her committee seats within a month of taking office. Yes by Dems. She's not a very good example. Party leadership is probably going to be happy to be shot of her when her time comes.
    Marathon wrote: »
    A vote that was initiated by Nancy Pelosi. If you think that Kevin McCarthy would have ever even brought it to the floor I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

    Steve King?

    Again, what’s your point? The Cheney/Greene comparison was about how the internal GOP pushing back against Jan 6th is rare, and nothing you‘be said here has anything to do with that.

    Phoenix’s point was that Cheney was punished BY the GOP for taking a stand, not that Greene has never had anything bad happen to her in congress.

    Did you just reflexively disagree because you saw a chance to “well, actually”?

    My point is that there was an extremely narrow window in which Greene even had any committee seats for the GOP to take from her before Democrats did. There are more compelling instances of the GOP looking the other way on elected officials.

    Your hostility is unwarranted

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Solomaxwell6Solomaxwell6 Registered User regular
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Marathon wrote: »
    But overall the intent is to harm the fascist chance at obtaining power.

    Do you honestly think that in a scenario where the moderate would somehow win the primary and then the general that they wouldn’t just go along with whatever extreme policies the rest of the party is striving for anyway?

    Democrats can’t help republicans be more power hungry fascists. They’re already there.
    I think this is inaccurate! Pence is a traitor for not helping Tump's coup attempt, right? Didn't a GOP governor (Georgia maybe?) refuse to help Trump fuck with ballot boxes too? My impression is that Jan. 6th is actually not something that all or even the majority of GOP officials supported. Isn't that a good thing? Right now several GOP senators - generally not the most extreme ones - are saying they'll vote to protect gay marriage. Is that not also good? Mastriano is described by the OP as an insurrectionist who must be stopped. Was his opponent equally so (and yes I realize the margin was large in that case)?

    I mean right now we know that most GOP officials openly support the insurrection, regardless of how they feel privately. We also know that the 2021 insurrection didn't really have a chance of success. There were multiple pivot states, some with Dem leadership, so just illegally flipping GA wouldn't do much. Pence's ability to overturn the election was legally very questionable, relying on laws that were clear in intent but semi-ambiguous in meaning. If Pence or Raffensperger, the GA Sec of State you mentioned, had been able to single-handedly flip the election without repercussion, would they have? I can't prove anything either way, but I'm less sure about that.

    But since we're talking about specific people, the example of Raffensperger isn't relevant. The runner up in the PA gubernatorial race openly campaigned with insurrectionists and supported Jan 6. He's a batshit fascist, too, he was just better about shutting up.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Just going to go ahead and post this again, since new thread.

    ibawd0r6oym6.jpg

    It probably needs to be updated with more Primaries having been concluded, but this is what I have saved on my phone.

  • asurasur Registered User regular
    edited July 2022
    MegaMan001 wrote: »
    Honest question, did we just start calling economic downturns Recessions because "Depression" has say too many negative connotations or what?

    Recession = two consecutive quarters of GDP falling
    Depression is less formally defined, but generally understood as a two year long recession or a recession with total decline in GDP of at least 10%. But then there's fights over whether the depression ends when GDP starts growing again or when you're back to pre-depression GDP. It's weird.

    Technically GDP started growing in 1933, but I don't think anyone alive then would say the Depression was over.

    That isn't the definition of a recession. A recession in the US is defined by NBER and uses multiple metrics. The two consecutive quarter definition is something a newspaper came up with.

    This generally isn't that important, but potentially will be in the near future as there are conflicting metrics, job market and GDP being two of them.

    asur on
  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Central OhioRegistered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Just going to go ahead and post this again, since new thread.

    ibawd0r6oym6.jpg

    It probably needs to be updated with more Primaries having been concluded, but this is what I have saved on my phone.

    GOP Platform:
    Trump’s Revenge

    GOP Strategy:
    Scare suburban moms

    l7ygmd1dd4p1.jpeg
    3b2y43dozpk3.jpeg
  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User, Transition Team regular
    God damnit Texas.

  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    Marathon wrote: »
    I fail to see why it would be ok in the general, but morally offensive in the primary.

    Because you are playing with fucking fire and thinking you’re not going to burn down the audience

    By placing these ads in the primary, you are exiting the MAGA base to come out and support these assholes, because those are the policies they want, which means then your choices in the general are a democrat and a extreme fascist, on the hopes there’s no possible way anyone would ever vote for the fascist.

    Then whoops it turns out they fucking do, because of where decades of right wing cultivation have brought us

    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    The MAGA base comes out in the primary anyway. That’s the whole point.

  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Central OhioRegistered User regular
    Speaking of, I learned yesterday there’s a Moms Against Guns in America

    l7ygmd1dd4p1.jpeg
    3b2y43dozpk3.jpeg
  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    edited July 2022
    03v12tq35t3u.jpeg

    12d7gfi42lxu.jpeg


    So many rakes…

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    If Republican fascism is a real threat, and it obviously is, spending money to try to get the most extreme candidate through their primary in hopes that they'll be an easier opponent in the general is stupid, reckless, and arrogant.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    What does that even mean? Is Fetterman known for being absent from his job or the campaign trail (stroke not withstanding)? Or is Oz just trying to associate "Fetterman" with the word Lost?

    Or is he saying Fetterman is a meandering story with an unsatisfying ending?

  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Central OhioRegistered User regular
    Fetterman has branded Oz so thoroughly already that everything Oz does in response is automatically filtered through the lens of “unserious candidate”

    l7ygmd1dd4p1.jpeg
    3b2y43dozpk3.jpeg
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited July 2022
    Lanz wrote: »


    So many rakes…

    Buh gawd he's 45 feet tall now
    Tomanta wrote: »
    What does that even mean? Is Fetterman known for being absent from his job or the campaign trail (stroke not withstanding)? Or is Oz just trying to associate "Fetterman" with the word Lost?

    Or is he saying Fetterman is a meandering story with an unsatisfying ending?

    Fetterman has been recovering from a medical emergency. He's slowly getting back on the trail now.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    Tomanta wrote: »
    What does that even mean? Is Fetterman known for being absent from his job or the campaign trail (stroke not withstanding)? Or is Oz just trying to associate "Fetterman" with the word Lost?

    Or is he saying Fetterman is a meandering story with an unsatisfying ending?

    Oz doesn't even live in-state. He's trying to do the "use your weakness to attack your opponent" thing by pretending Fetterman doesn't show up. isn't around the state, etc

  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Central OhioRegistered User regular
    Tomanta wrote: »
    What does that even mean? Is Fetterman known for being absent from his job or the campaign trail (stroke not withstanding)? Or is Oz just trying to associate "Fetterman" with the word Lost?

    Or is he saying Fetterman is a meandering story with an unsatisfying ending?

    It’s about Fetterman being home recovering from his stroke

    l7ygmd1dd4p1.jpeg
    3b2y43dozpk3.jpeg
This discussion has been closed.