General Politics Discussion (III) [ARCHIVED] • Page 702

Ricky Ray Rector - Wikipedia

 

Ricky Ray Rector - Wikipedia

 

Isn't it common for entertainment to parody or at least mirror the current president?

 

I know what you were trying to do, hence me framing your wins as what they were, a ceding of the ground to the right, which undermines their social base, which is why they get castigated for "trying to lose".

 

Considering the country's rightward bent since the 80's and the far left's lack of a victory for at least 50 years, I'm not sure you have much room to talk about "trying to lose"

FTR, I do think now is a good time to move further left on some issues. There's an opening for it. But it also already happened during the Obama presidency and you just don't want to acknowledge it because it would mean giving Democrats at least some credit...and it goes against your narrative of judging all Democrats ever by what Democrats in the 90's supported/said/did. In other words, your static view of the Democratic party must be fed as much as possible for your own political purposes, so that is what you continue to do--feed it.

 

Yeah, SNL and The Simpsons are good examples

 

The unfortunate reality is the most gains the Dems made in terms of “winning” in the recent past ... was under (dickwad extraordinaire) Rahm Emanuel and due to a strategy of running "Blue Dog” Dems in districts to win seats first and foremost at all costs.

 

Yep...and the next time they do this, they need to let their candidates know, if we pass a major law, you're going to lose your seat. Accept it. A vote against isn't going to save you. So just go along with the furthest left version of the bill and accept that.

 

No one is arguing with you, David. You folks have been winning by throwing minority groups under the bus, punching left and making the environment inhospitable for the left, along with assisting the GOP in eviscerating the various means of redress for working class people. As for the Obama era, his politics is a direct product of the party of the '90's: triangulation and centrism, and the fight for the non-existent center. This is the truth. Like I said, I give you credit for winning on those terms. They're not the terms on which I'd like to win, but given that you have a record in power, and a score of kills under your belt, I suppose we can do more of the same.

 

That is your incorrect assessment and cherry picking, as before.

I know the far left doesn't have a historic score of kills under it's belt, that's for sure

 

God I fucking hate him.

 

To understand how the party can win in the future, I think visiting why the party did what it did to “win” elections in the first place makes some sense. If only to reject those first principles as not needed in the future. It’s undeniable that the party moved to the center to win elections in the 90s after Reagan and Bush 1. And it still got pegged as “radical” with policies I would consider, at best “center-right,” today. (Lesson: If you’re gonna get called radical anyway, be radical.) Politicians, by and large, move to positions where they think they’ll win elections, rarely do they move to positions they hope people will then decide to move to and vote for them after the fact. This creates a stepping ladder in each direction for a move right or left. (Lesson: Stand for something first, and move people to you.)

I think in 2017 it makes less sense than ever to run in this direction at a national level. That instead staking a clear position that is far different to the Republican party and losing in that manner will shape a party that I think will win the future. (To steal a dumb buzzword.) However, everyone is going to have to be on the same page that this means losing a lot of elections at first. It’ll carve out a party of principles and clearly state where we’re not willing to budge. But, it absolutely will lead to a loss of elections in specific parts of the country if the national platform is going to be one everyone runs on and buys into. It makes the “why do you keep losing” thing a little more obvious though. (Lesson: Be principled, and be ready to lose for those principles.)

 

I think we've been down this road before. I am not non-violent. I just support violence on behalf of the oppressed classes. As for your first part, your perception of the Obama era relies upon the notion that anything that isn't republican is left, hence your analysis is useless when it comes to what a left-wing project constitutes. Now if the right-wing of the democrats were purged or sufficiently disempowered - and yes, Obama is on the right - then there might be something worth saving. It might be worth joining to put up radical candidates. But, that's not happening right now. Given the degree to which the right has a hold on power, and refuses to countenance any challenges, there's nothing for serious leftists in the party. They're better off joining the DSA.

 

It would be worth losing elections on a national level, if the left was building power on a local level, which is what I'm seeing a lot of people focusing on right now.

 

There's lots of reasons to dislike Tim Kaine, but his military force authorization act looks pretty good.

Kaine Introduces Two Authorization For Use Of Military Force-Focused Amendments To Defense Bill | Tim Kaine | U.S. Senator for Virginia

 

AND HE PRE-ORDERED

 

where? i don't see that? haha

 

I'm just playing around :D

 

oh lmao. but i admit i've pre-ordered ubi games before so,,, lol

 

Not just you. And not just your willingness to kill the oppressors---you've already admitted that you're okay with the oppressed dying too, even if they don't agree with your ideology. But I was more talking about historical far left track records.

No, I don't assume anything that isn't Republican is left, I just don't hate the Democrats so much that it blinds me from seeing they've moved considerably left on a plethora of issues since the 90's. Luckily, my hatred for them is only run of the mill hatred.

 

I think Jason touched on this earlier---because there's nothing that says a jump to the far left on all fronts, at all levels, will work in an electorate that is far more right wing than those of the countries in question.