if the world wasn't currently figuratively and literally on fire, it might be the best course of action to keep going slow and steady and hope the next gaggle of politicians is less morally bankrupt than the current, even though i would argue there's not a whole lot of reason to put much hope in that idea
we just do not have time for that shit anymore. the president is openly talking about just not worrying about doing an election this year, half the west coast is burning down because the slaves they use to fight the wildfires are all sick with a plague the government is refusing to do anything about ...
I agree in principle, but I'm terrified of splitting the left-leaning vote as the right will definitely use divide-and-conquer tactics to their advantage when they lack numerical advantage.
the right does that already though, and we're getting near a point where actual leftists are gonna flat-out refuse to vote for democrats in significant numbers. there's only so much open contempt you can get away with before people whose votes you need tell you to kick rocks when you come calling. if that's not what happens in november than it will be in the '22 midterms
i feel i need to preface this next thing by saying i think things will obviously be worse if trump gets another term than if biden gets in, but that really is only because the democrats will slow down the rate of things getting worse, they stand absolutely no chance at making anything better. biden has gone to great pains making it clear that he's not interested in doing any of the things that need to be done!
And as far as the ACLU is concerned, remember only 2 years ago they phrased their opposition to Devos' changes to Title IX as:
Today Secretary DeVos proposed a rule that would tip the scales against those who raise their voices. We strongly oppose it,” the organization stated on Twitter. “The proposed rule would make schools less safe for survivors of sexual assault and harassment, when there is already alarmingly high rates of campus sexual assaults and harassment that go unreported. It promotes an unfair process, inappropriately favoring the accused and letting schools ignore their responsibility under Title IX to respond promptly and fairly to complaints of sexual violence. We will continue to support survivors.”
That says a lot about the organizations priorities.
When they say "the acccused" they are referring to those who are being accused of committing sexual assault/rape. The new proposed process would have been unfair to those who had suffered said assault/rape.
Which is a completely true and valid criticism of DeVos' proposed rules, which I don't remember if they actually went into effect or not because we live in hell.
Yes! And a second "mainstream" left-ish party will make it so much easier for them.
and we're getting near a point where actual leftists are gonna flat-out refuse to vote for democrats in significant numbers.
I dunno, actual leftists are getting elected under the "D" banner. They get elected in places where they are politically viable, and in doing so help to move the parliamentary D party left.
In places where an out-and-out lefty can't get elected, D's run more moderate candidates. Siphoning of the more left-y vote probably guarantees a R win for those seats.
I don't see how a further-left party changes the fundamental situation for the better; more left-leaning regions already elect more left-leaning candidates, the more moderate regions more moderate candidates.
Everyone else votes Republican, and so two left-ish parties would seem to guarnatee Republicans own the White House (and likely the Senate, and possibly the House) for the forseeable future.
i feel i need to preface this next thing by saying i think things will obviously be worse if trump gets another term than if biden gets in, but that really is only because the democrats will slow down the rate of things getting worse, they stand absolutely no chance at making anything better. biden has gone to great pains making it clear that he's not interested in doing any of the things that need to be done!
I kinda disagree with this, I think the Dems will improve things rather than simply arresting the slide. I also think you're right to question whether they will act quickly enough, though.
Yes! And a second "mainstream" left-ish party will make it so much easier for them.
and we're getting near a point where actual leftists are gonna flat-out refuse to vote for democrats in significant numbers.
I dunno, actual leftists are getting elected under the "D" banner. They get elected in places where they are politically viable, and in doing so help to move the parliamentary D party left.
In places where an out-and-out lefty can't get elected, D's run more moderate candidates. Siphoning of the more left-y vote probably guarantees a R win for those seats.
I don't see how a further-left party changes the fundamental situation for the better; more left-leaning regions already elect more left-leaning candidates, the more moderate regions more moderate candidates.
Everyone else votes Republican, and so two left-ish parties would seem to guarnatee Republicans own the White House (and likely the Senate, and possibly the House) for the forseeable future.
i feel i need to preface this next thing by saying i think things will obviously be worse if trump gets another term than if biden gets in, but that really is only because the democrats will slow down the rate of things getting worse, they stand absolutely no chance at making anything better. biden has gone to great pains making it clear that he's not interested in doing any of the things that need to be done!
I kinda disagree with this, I think the Dems will improve things rather than simply arresting the slide. I also think you're right to question whether they will act quickly enough, though.
the fundamental situation is that we have one party going hellbent for leather destroying the country and also maybe the world, and another party that is institutionally either unwilling or unable (and it doesn't make a whole lot of difference which it is, really) to even effectively resist the destroyers, let alone fixing damage done or making actual improvements. nancy pelosi could be reasonably said to be the leader of the democratic party, and she'll make a big show of #Resisting and getting into twitter slapfights, while not actually doing anything to impede the president or help people. the party actively, unashamedly sabotages the few vaguely left-wing people they fail to prevent getting elected (no one in power in the democratic party is actually a leftist, they are all still capitalists), they give colin fuckin' powell a spot at their convention and AOC can only speak because of a technicality
i don't understand why you think the democrats will improve things when biden has repeatedly told immigration activists and climate activists and police brutality activists and people who believe that he committed sexual assault to not vote for him. he literally accused trump of being the guy that wanted to defund the police!
even if the democrats were willing to actually help people, their donors won't allow them to do the shit that actually needs to be done. shit is incredibly precarious right now, $20k of student debt relief for pell grant recipients who run a business for three years in a disadvantaged community is not gonna fuckin' cut it when we're looking down the barrel of brownshirts showing up in force in various cities and murdering people with the blessing of the police and local governments
e: also if the democrats want leftists to vote for them, they need to give us a reason to do so. getting preemptively blamed for trump winning a second term is not gonna cut it anymore
I believe theres a difference between what issues the Democrats will campaign on and what they are open to doing once in power.
I think there's some realpolitik at work here, or I hope there is because nothing matters without the actual levers of power to change things. I suspect (hope?) they're just playing it as safe as possibly in the run up to the election, but I acknowledge that might just be wishful thinking on my part.
In circumstances such as this, I don't so much care what Democrats say on the election trail, I care what they do once in power - and first they must actually get that power ...
Edit: I guess my hope is that the situation re. public support for many issues is changing quickly enough that D's can actually start to make changes in power and have majority public support at that point - when at the moment we're close but not quite there.
A far left party would be even less effective at combating extremist right wing dominance mainly because they would have very little in the way of control over anything. It's just a constant voter sink that actively prevents anyone from defeating the right wing. Doesn't matter if the pubs only get 40 percent if the other two parties are splitting the remaining 60 percent of the votes even remotely evenly.
And as far as the ACLU is concerned, remember only 2 years ago they phrased their opposition to Devos' changes to Title IX as:
Today Secretary DeVos proposed a rule that would tip the scales against those who raise their voices. We strongly oppose it,” the organization stated on Twitter. “The proposed rule would make schools less safe for survivors of sexual assault and harassment, when there is already alarmingly high rates of campus sexual assaults and harassment that go unreported. It promotes an unfair process, inappropriately favoring the accused and letting schools ignore their responsibility under Title IX to respond promptly and fairly to complaints of sexual violence. We will continue to support survivors.”
That says a lot about the organizations priorities.
When they say "the acccused" they are referring to those who are being accused of committing sexual assault/rape. The new proposed process would have been unfair to those who had suffered said assault/rape.
Which is a completely true and valid criticism of DeVos' proposed rules, which I don't remember if they actually went into effect or not because we live in hell.
Your right, for whatever reason I read that as accuser and got the wrong impression from the tweet. Point withdrawn with egg on my face.
I believe theres a difference between what issues the Democrats will campaign on and what they are open to doing once in power.
I think there's some realpolitik at work here, or I hope there is because nothing matters without the actual levers of power to change things. I suspect (hope?) they're just playing it as safe as possibly in the run up to the election, but I acknowledge that might just be wishful thinking on my part.
In circumstances such as this, I don't so much care what Democrats say on the election trail, I care what they do once in power - and first they must actually get that power ...
i have no reason to not take joe biden at his word when he equates property damage with murder
the "leftists have to stick with the dems or else the gop will take over" hostage situation is precisely why the democrats will never fix anything
and their status as an ineffectual controlled opposition is precisely why the wealthy keep them around
it's a horseshit defense of a horseshit organization, and in my eyes trotting it out immediately makes anything else you have to say on the matter suspect
Stop being a principalist for five seconds and look at the consequences of what you're proposing. Protecting free speech for nazis, by empowering them, is one way to lose free speech for everyone, while protecting pedophiles' right to health care is not going to make other people lose health care.
I do not believe that protecting free speech for everyone necessarily leads to Nazi control. I do not believe it is inevitable that people become Nazis simply because they are exposed to Nazis, because I do not believe that e.g. Nazism has some inescapable logic to it that people are powerless to resist. I do not believe that Nazism is humanity's natural "end state", and so Nazi speech must be suppressed lest nature takes its course.
This already happened! Nazis were allowed free reign on social media, and now the Nazis are back in force with the full-throated support of the police and the political establishment.
You are arguing that leaving the stable door open won't necessarily result in us losing our horse six years after the horse ran away.
the "leftists have to stick with the dems or else the gop will take over" hostage situation is precisely why the democrats will never fix anything
and their status as an ineffectual controlled opposition is precisely why the wealthy keep them around
it's a horseshit defense of a horseshit organization, and in my eyes trotting it out immediately makes anything else you have to say on the matter suspect
No it's just the shit reality of our situation. Right wing doesn't need to have a majority of support so long as they can maintain a plurality of it while getting everyone else to fight each other instead of them. Sorry the system sucks, but that's what the system results in. Mostly by design.
i have no reason to not take joe biden at his word when he equates property damage with murder
Is there a link to his statement that says "property damage is equal to murder"?
I honestly can't remember him saying something like that, but I do remember him saying something akin to "protests with violence and property damage is not an appropriate/American response to this brutality".
Which, well, I'm not entirely sure I agree with, but it's not equating property damage to murder.
I would put forth that this thread is not an appropriate place to carry water for the Democrat establishment, which has at best failed utterly in improving the material realities of marginalized Americans of all stripes and at worst has been gleefully complicit in the worsening of those same material realities
+30
Options
turtleantGunpla Dadis the best.Registered Userregular
Trump is definitely gonna squirt that murder kid a pardon if he gets convicted, huh?
I think it's worth waiting until the election to have this conversation. 2010 had profound impact on the Republican party. They were moved significantly by the number of seats gained up and especially down ballot, and that empowered local parties to become significantly more radical, and to literally redraw the map to protect both that power and that radicalization. If the Dems win enough state- and local seats, and those seats are won by sufficiently left Dems, we could see big changes. Those are huge questions, and deserve time and resources spent researching them, and 2 months before a general election isn't, imo, meaningful enough to be worth diverting mental resources to that right now.
November 4th, 5th, we start assessing the changes in seats and see what we've gained and then we decide if there's enough of a chance to pull the Dems far enough left to buy us enough time to actually solve any of these problems.
Like, this is some bullshit third-derivative politics. Buy us enough time to see if we can fix the organization that is big enough to actually have the ability to fight and buy us enough time to actually fight and fix the issues. But here we are, I guess.
i have no reason to not take joe biden at his word when he equates property damage with murder
Is there a link to his statement that says "property damage is equal to murder"?
I honestly can't remember him saying something like that, but I do remember him saying something akin to "protests with violence and property damage is not an appropriate/American response to this brutality".
Which, well, I'm not entirely sure I agree with, but it's not equating property damage to murder.
i can't find it now, but he said that he condemns looting And Other Types Of Violence, without even bothering to talk about what that violence looks like
it doesn't even matter though if he never said that or i'm taking it Out Of Context. he also has said we should be giving police more money instead of abolishing them, he has said police should be trained to shoot people in the legs (simultaneously trivializing the entire problem and dangerously misunderstanding the purpose of firearms), he has straight up said that he doesn't want to defund police, he picked a god damn attorney general as his running mate who is well known for locking people up because their kids weren't going to school, he Wrote The God Damn '94 Crime Bill, he is directly personally responsible for a large part of this mess
what reason has joe fuckin' biden ever given anyone to not believe that he believes these things?
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
it's so fuckin' cynical to me the idea of hearing the democratic candidate for president is saying all this fascist-adjacent shit and thinking "he doesn't actually believe that shit, he's just saying it to appeal to racist voters"
it's so fuckin' cynical to me the idea of hearing the democratic candidate for president is saying all this fascist-adjacent shit and thinking "he doesn't actually believe that shit, he's just saying it to appeal to racist voters"
it's especially galling because it's the same shit we heard about the current incumbent when he was running
I don't think any of this thread is news for folks in here but the comparison to Hungary isn't one I'd thought of, and might be a helpful touchstone since folks tend to bring up 1940's Germany instead and that isn't quite as applicable.
imagine thinking US elections have been "free and fair" in any quantifiable way over the last two decades
i have no reason to not take joe biden at his word when he equates property damage with murder
Is there a link to his statement that says "property damage is equal to murder"?
I honestly can't remember him saying something like that, but I do remember him saying something akin to "protests with violence and property damage is not an appropriate/American response to this brutality".
Which, well, I'm not entirely sure I agree with, but it's not equating property damage to murder.
i can't find it now, but he said that he condemns looting And Other Types Of Violence, without even bothering to talk about what that violence looks like
Point of order, that doesn't equate property damage and murder. It implies only the looting was worth mentioning.
*finger to ear" what's that? Oh, that's... that's worse? That actually does make him sound worse somehow, you're right.
the "leftists have to stick with the dems or else the gop will take over" hostage situation is precisely why the democrats will never fix anything
and their status as an ineffectual controlled opposition is precisely why the wealthy keep them around
it's a horseshit defense of a horseshit organization, and in my eyes trotting it out immediately makes anything else you have to say on the matter suspect
love that "electability" is still an argument for hypothetical future elections after it got biden the nomination and he's said nothing but stupid and/or harmful shit since
I don't think any of this thread is news for folks in here but the comparison to Hungary isn't one I'd thought of, and might be a helpful touchstone since folks tend to bring up 1940's Germany instead and that isn't quite as applicable.
imagine thinking US elections have been "free and fair" in any quantifiable way over the last two decades
Imagine thinking they've ever been free and fair. Until 1965 an entire ethnicity was denied the right to vote, and politicians across the country have been doing everything in their power to legally bar those same people from voting ever since
i can't find it now, but he said that he condemns looting And Other Types Of Violence, without even bothering to talk about what that violence looks like ... it doesn't even matter though if he never said that or i'm taking it Out Of Context.
I believe that it (i.e., an accurate reflection of what was said) does matter, because the truth matters.
he also has said we should be giving police more money instead of abolishing them, he has said police should be trained to shoot people in the legs (simultaneously trivializing the entire problem and dangerously misunderstanding the purpose of firearms), he has straight up said that he doesn't want to defund police,
That's fair.
he picked a god damn attorney general as his running mate who is well known for locking people up because their kids weren't going to school
... and who has voted pretty solidly liberal since then:
what reason has joe fuckin' biden ever given anyone to not believe that he believes these things?
Apart from his own words explicitly apologizing for e.g. the '94 Crime Bill and calling his actions a mistake?
I understand that you don't like Biden and you don't like the choice of VP. I just think criticism and analysis should be as accurate as possible to be useful in building the future we want.
it's a lot easier to think recent shit is brand new encroachment on civil rights with no precedent when white folks were generally exempt from a lot of the real overt oppression for so long. it's not like we learned the cavalcade of atrocities that is actual american history in school, i can totally see getting blindsided by this shit after having led a sheltered life up till now
If it takes till now for someome to realise certaim white people oppressed other white people and would gladly oppress minorities after *gesticulates wildly at european history*
I don't think any of this thread is news for folks in here but the comparison to Hungary isn't one I'd thought of, and might be a helpful touchstone since folks tend to bring up 1940's Germany instead and that isn't quite as applicable.
imagine thinking US elections have been "free and fair" in any quantifiable way over the last two decades
Sure. That's not the salient point of that thread though, the parallels to the autocratic takeover that just happened in Hungary are what I found useful in there.
i can't find it now, but he said that he condemns looting And Other Types Of Violence, without even bothering to talk about what that violence looks like ... it doesn't even matter though if he never said that or i'm taking it Out Of Context.
I believe that it (i.e., an accurate reflection of what was said) does matter, because the truth matters.
he also has said we should be giving police more money instead of abolishing them, he has said police should be trained to shoot people in the legs (simultaneously trivializing the entire problem and dangerously misunderstanding the purpose of firearms), he has straight up said that he doesn't want to defund police,
That's fair.
he picked a god damn attorney general as his running mate who is well known for locking people up because their kids weren't going to school
... and who has voted pretty solidly liberal since then:
what reason has joe fuckin' biden ever given anyone to not believe that he believes these things?
Apart from his own words explicitly apologizing for e.g. the '94 Crime Bill and calling his actions a mistake?
I understand that you don't like Biden and you don't like the choice of VP. I just think criticism and analysis should be as accurate as possible to be useful in building the future we want.
why is harris being solidly liberal a defense for shit that she did while AG? i understand that this could come off as a shitty snipe, but it's an honest question. ditto biden. okay, he regrets being directly responsible for the crime bill, what has he done to make it right since then?
really though the part of my post you conceded should be enough. there's enough instances of the man saying extremely shitty things that just the fact that you have to go through each claim individually and provide context proves my point to some extent. either he means well and constantly puts his foot in his mouth, in which case he's useless, or he doesn't believe the things he says but says them anyway, in which case he is a cynical prick who wants a mandate from racists, or he believes the things he says and there's no way to believe that he'll help with this issue without burying your head in the sand
why do these people deserve the benefit of the doubt?
Der Waffle MousBlame this on the misfortune of your birth.New Yark, New Yark.Registered Userregular
The thing that always gets me is that as shitty a candidate as Hillary was she at least had something resembling some progressive bona fides from her career.
Honestly to me it seems like the two best things we can hope for in the coming few years:
1.) That Trump does not steal the election in such a way that it means we're now a one party state.
2.) "The white moderate" is no longer the heart and soul of the Democratic party. I don't know if anything meaningful can come of a Biden administration but I'm hoping the movement that finally leads to justice is being built now.
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
+1
Options
Garlic Breadi'm a bitch i'm a bitch i'm a bitch i'm aRegistered User, Disagreeableregular
A far left party would be even less effective at combating extremist right wing dominance mainly because they would have very little in the way of control over anything. It's just a constant voter sink that actively prevents anyone from defeating the right wing. Doesn't matter if the pubs only get 40 percent if the other two parties are splitting the remaining 60 percent of the votes even remotely evenly.
that's the democratic party line of fearmongering to keep out leftist candidates, yes
maybe more people would vote for a leftist candidate if they got the opportunity to? left(er) candidates, especially in recent years, are the ones pulling the massive grassroots campaigns (i guess, oddly enough, it's easier to pull in a community when you show you care about the community?). what if those candidates actually got prominence, national airtime, spots in a debate, etc? more people would organize if there was an organization.
you're discounting people's attitudes towards an opportunity that's both a) never been given a major chance in the US and 2) actively disparaged and fought against by both parties and a majority of prominent political figures for the history of the US. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez came to prominence because of an impressive campaign, but she's a household name because the GOP and DNC fuckin hate her.
everyone laughed at the tea party when it started up and then whoops they took over the republican party and the democrats said "fuck if that's gonna happen to us/our money"
The thing that always gets me is that as shitty a candidate as Hillary was she at least had something resembling some progressive bona fides from her career.
Biden doesn't have any of that.
Yeah its hard to view this whole thing as an actual step backwards.
As to new party vs take over, a new party from the ground up would take more time than we have.
is a takeover possible though? the tea party had the kochs to bankroll it, there's no billionaire aristocrat family that's gonna fund a socialist takeover of the democratic party
is a takeover possible though? the tea party had the kochs to bankroll it, there's no billionaire aristocrat family that's gonna fund a socialist takeover of the democratic party
no, it's not, because the billionaires already bought it
is a takeover possible though? the tea party had the kochs to bankroll it, there's no billionaire aristocrat family that's gonna fund a socialist takeover of the democratic party
I think its been sufficiently shown that small donation activity can reasonably fund a campaign that can also lean on popular support. I think to some degree extremely expensive campaigns are were necessary because a) you had a lot of careerist leaches and b) its expensive to sell shit no one wants.
Posts
the right does that already though, and we're getting near a point where actual leftists are gonna flat-out refuse to vote for democrats in significant numbers. there's only so much open contempt you can get away with before people whose votes you need tell you to kick rocks when you come calling. if that's not what happens in november than it will be in the '22 midterms
i feel i need to preface this next thing by saying i think things will obviously be worse if trump gets another term than if biden gets in, but that really is only because the democrats will slow down the rate of things getting worse, they stand absolutely no chance at making anything better. biden has gone to great pains making it clear that he's not interested in doing any of the things that need to be done!
hitting hot metal with hammers
When they say "the acccused" they are referring to those who are being accused of committing sexual assault/rape. The new proposed process would have been unfair to those who had suffered said assault/rape.
Which is a completely true and valid criticism of DeVos' proposed rules, which I don't remember if they actually went into effect or not because we live in hell.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Yes! And a second "mainstream" left-ish party will make it so much easier for them.
I dunno, actual leftists are getting elected under the "D" banner. They get elected in places where they are politically viable, and in doing so help to move the parliamentary D party left.
In places where an out-and-out lefty can't get elected, D's run more moderate candidates. Siphoning of the more left-y vote probably guarantees a R win for those seats.
I don't see how a further-left party changes the fundamental situation for the better; more left-leaning regions already elect more left-leaning candidates, the more moderate regions more moderate candidates.
Everyone else votes Republican, and so two left-ish parties would seem to guarnatee Republicans own the White House (and likely the Senate, and possibly the House) for the forseeable future.
I kinda disagree with this, I think the Dems will improve things rather than simply arresting the slide. I also think you're right to question whether they will act quickly enough, though.
I don't believe so, but from memory you might instead power up into a new and advanced form.
the fundamental situation is that we have one party going hellbent for leather destroying the country and also maybe the world, and another party that is institutionally either unwilling or unable (and it doesn't make a whole lot of difference which it is, really) to even effectively resist the destroyers, let alone fixing damage done or making actual improvements. nancy pelosi could be reasonably said to be the leader of the democratic party, and she'll make a big show of #Resisting and getting into twitter slapfights, while not actually doing anything to impede the president or help people. the party actively, unashamedly sabotages the few vaguely left-wing people they fail to prevent getting elected (no one in power in the democratic party is actually a leftist, they are all still capitalists), they give colin fuckin' powell a spot at their convention and AOC can only speak because of a technicality
i don't understand why you think the democrats will improve things when biden has repeatedly told immigration activists and climate activists and police brutality activists and people who believe that he committed sexual assault to not vote for him. he literally accused trump of being the guy that wanted to defund the police!
even if the democrats were willing to actually help people, their donors won't allow them to do the shit that actually needs to be done. shit is incredibly precarious right now, $20k of student debt relief for pell grant recipients who run a business for three years in a disadvantaged community is not gonna fuckin' cut it when we're looking down the barrel of brownshirts showing up in force in various cities and murdering people with the blessing of the police and local governments
e: also if the democrats want leftists to vote for them, they need to give us a reason to do so. getting preemptively blamed for trump winning a second term is not gonna cut it anymore
hitting hot metal with hammers
I think there's some realpolitik at work here, or I hope there is because nothing matters without the actual levers of power to change things. I suspect (hope?) they're just playing it as safe as possibly in the run up to the election, but I acknowledge that might just be wishful thinking on my part.
In circumstances such as this, I don't so much care what Democrats say on the election trail, I care what they do once in power - and first they must actually get that power ...
Edit: I guess my hope is that the situation re. public support for many issues is changing quickly enough that D's can actually start to make changes in power and have majority public support at that point - when at the moment we're close but not quite there.
Your right, for whatever reason I read that as accuser and got the wrong impression from the tweet. Point withdrawn with egg on my face.
i have no reason to not take joe biden at his word when he equates property damage with murder
hitting hot metal with hammers
and their status as an ineffectual controlled opposition is precisely why the wealthy keep them around
it's a horseshit defense of a horseshit organization, and in my eyes trotting it out immediately makes anything else you have to say on the matter suspect
You are arguing that leaving the stable door open won't necessarily result in us losing our horse six years after the horse ran away.
No it's just the shit reality of our situation. Right wing doesn't need to have a majority of support so long as they can maintain a plurality of it while getting everyone else to fight each other instead of them. Sorry the system sucks, but that's what the system results in. Mostly by design.
Is there a link to his statement that says "property damage is equal to murder"?
I honestly can't remember him saying something like that, but I do remember him saying something akin to "protests with violence and property damage is not an appropriate/American response to this brutality".
Which, well, I'm not entirely sure I agree with, but it's not equating property damage to murder.
November 4th, 5th, we start assessing the changes in seats and see what we've gained and then we decide if there's enough of a chance to pull the Dems far enough left to buy us enough time to actually solve any of these problems.
Like, this is some bullshit third-derivative politics. Buy us enough time to see if we can fix the organization that is big enough to actually have the ability to fight and buy us enough time to actually fight and fix the issues. But here we are, I guess.
i can't find it now, but he said that he condemns looting And Other Types Of Violence, without even bothering to talk about what that violence looks like
it doesn't even matter though if he never said that or i'm taking it Out Of Context. he also has said we should be giving police more money instead of abolishing them, he has said police should be trained to shoot people in the legs (simultaneously trivializing the entire problem and dangerously misunderstanding the purpose of firearms), he has straight up said that he doesn't want to defund police, he picked a god damn attorney general as his running mate who is well known for locking people up because their kids weren't going to school, he Wrote The God Damn '94 Crime Bill, he is directly personally responsible for a large part of this mess
what reason has joe fuckin' biden ever given anyone to not believe that he believes these things?
hitting hot metal with hammers
No? He can't pardon someone for state level stuff.
hitting hot metal with hammers
it's especially galling because it's the same shit we heard about the current incumbent when he was running
imagine thinking US elections have been "free and fair" in any quantifiable way over the last two decades
Point of order, that doesn't equate property damage and murder. It implies only the looting was worth mentioning.
*finger to ear" what's that? Oh, that's... that's worse? That actually does make him sound worse somehow, you're right.
love that "electability" is still an argument for hypothetical future elections after it got biden the nomination and he's said nothing but stupid and/or harmful shit since
Imagine thinking they've ever been free and fair. Until 1965 an entire ethnicity was denied the right to vote, and politicians across the country have been doing everything in their power to legally bar those same people from voting ever since
For every 10 nazis punched, you get to punch one more nazi for free.
I believe that it (i.e., an accurate reflection of what was said) does matter, because the truth matters.
That's fair.
... and who has voted pretty solidly liberal since then:
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article244908657.html
In fact, she's the most liberal senator according to at least one group (for whatever that opinion is worth):
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/kamala_harris/412678/report-card/2019
https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2019/01/21/biden-says-he-regrets-1990-s-crime-bill-calls-big-mistake-mlk-day-event/2639190002/
Apart from his own words explicitly apologizing for e.g. the '94 Crime Bill and calling his actions a mistake?
I understand that you don't like Biden and you don't like the choice of VP. I just think criticism and analysis should be as accurate as possible to be useful in building the future we want.
hitting hot metal with hammers
You havent been listening.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
Sure. That's not the salient point of that thread though, the parallels to the autocratic takeover that just happened in Hungary are what I found useful in there.
why is harris being solidly liberal a defense for shit that she did while AG? i understand that this could come off as a shitty snipe, but it's an honest question. ditto biden. okay, he regrets being directly responsible for the crime bill, what has he done to make it right since then?
really though the part of my post you conceded should be enough. there's enough instances of the man saying extremely shitty things that just the fact that you have to go through each claim individually and provide context proves my point to some extent. either he means well and constantly puts his foot in his mouth, in which case he's useless, or he doesn't believe the things he says but says them anyway, in which case he is a cynical prick who wants a mandate from racists, or he believes the things he says and there's no way to believe that he'll help with this issue without burying your head in the sand
why do these people deserve the benefit of the doubt?
hitting hot metal with hammers
Biden doesn't have any of that.
1.) That Trump does not steal the election in such a way that it means we're now a one party state.
2.) "The white moderate" is no longer the heart and soul of the Democratic party. I don't know if anything meaningful can come of a Biden administration but I'm hoping the movement that finally leads to justice is being built now.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
that's the democratic party line of fearmongering to keep out leftist candidates, yes
maybe more people would vote for a leftist candidate if they got the opportunity to? left(er) candidates, especially in recent years, are the ones pulling the massive grassroots campaigns (i guess, oddly enough, it's easier to pull in a community when you show you care about the community?). what if those candidates actually got prominence, national airtime, spots in a debate, etc? more people would organize if there was an organization.
you're discounting people's attitudes towards an opportunity that's both a) never been given a major chance in the US and 2) actively disparaged and fought against by both parties and a majority of prominent political figures for the history of the US. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez came to prominence because of an impressive campaign, but she's a household name because the GOP and DNC fuckin hate her.
everyone laughed at the tea party when it started up and then whoops they took over the republican party and the democrats said "fuck if that's gonna happen to us/our money"
Yeah its hard to view this whole thing as an actual step backwards.
As to new party vs take over, a new party from the ground up would take more time than we have.
hitting hot metal with hammers
no, it's not, because the billionaires already bought it
I think its been sufficiently shown that small donation activity can reasonably fund a campaign that can also lean on popular support. I think to some degree extremely expensive campaigns are were necessary because a) you had a lot of careerist leaches and b) its expensive to sell shit no one wants.