LOL give me a break. I did go look on her page as a sanity check - you guys talk like she ran on some kind of capitalist/fascist corporate dicksucker campaign only focused on complete government takeover by Amazon or something.
Like, I can provide you videos of her talking about this shit and you’ll still come back with “Well that wasn’t a part of her message” or, she didn’t really speak to what most americans want or the typical propaganda you guys have been spewing for nearly 4 years.
Like the fact her policies (which really were progressive) didn’t get through the complete screeching and shitshow going on on FB, fakenews, coordinated russian efforts, media hysteria, and the general noise Trump makes is not a reflection on Hillary. It isn’t really a very strong or pursuasive argument, because you’re coming from a position of:
an imaginary candidate that somehow coulda/woulda/shoulda done better than Hilldawg. Yea spare me the michigan polling numbers in Jan 2016 or whatever.
A completely fluid, goalpost friendly, elusive “message” that she should have been pushing, that has yet to be defined by anyone.
Oh boy this is gonna devolve into the same tired “DNC RIGGED THE ELECTION AGAINST BERNIE” thing like this conversation always heads to. Let’s please just skip that part (although weirdly it is more aligned with the thread topic).
Lol I’d literally never vote for Trump. I’ll vote a straight Democratic ticket for the rest of my life unless the GOP pretty much does a polar flip.
I was mad that we invested effort into making niche groups (and I never included POC in that category that I recall although I do think framing things as beneficial to POC’s in particular is bad politics because white people are the majority of voters and are racist) happy while healthcare was still fucked up (which affects everyone), and the economy was a disaster for ~60% of the population (a group with a disproportionate number of POC’s and LGBTQ people).
I have a real problem with messaging that divides the population into subgroups and makes it possible for the other side to stoke resentments amongst those groups. If you can’t see why I think that’s bad after going on 3 years of Trump idk what to tell you.
If you want to see what good messaging looks like I’ll hold up Warren as an example.
EDIT: To be clear POC aren’t a ‘niche group’. They are 12+% of the population and their problems are incredibly pronounced. Their turnout is also critically important to winning the general election. Thankfully they don’t seem to even appreciate being pandered to (mostly because there’s a long long history of people outright lying to them about stuff).
This is what’s wrong with the party. Warren is great and has been one of my favorite politicians for years. I can go find one or two 2p2 posts from mine suggesting she’d be a presidential candidate (before trump even announced). But she’ll get slaughtered by Trump. She will get completely and totally destroyed.
That’s what weirds me out about this forum. You guys are so focused on pushing a progressive agenda - and don’t get me wrong, I am in full support of 99% of them - but you are alienating “centrists” (which really aren’t that centered in this insane climate) and allowing the right to pick up these policies that democrats used to have, by attempting to shift the party as far left as it can go.
A lot of this fall’s at Pelosi’s dumbass feet because now we don’t really have a fucking choice but to go with the AOC/Bernie wing of the party. But man, giving up the middle was really stupid, IMO.
I tuned into some town hall or debate or something for 30 seconds and they were talking about straws and lightbulbs and I turned it off. Come on man. There are some battles not worth fighting - look at what the fuck is going on right now. We are on the verge of losing EVERYTHING for the rest of our natural lives. Wake up
Elections are about turnout. Warren is running a broadly economic populist campaign that will do very well in the midwest. She’s going to get the centrist vote AND she’s going to turn out the left (which is actually super important… the left not showing up for HRC is a big part of why she lost).
Warren actually called out the moderators about questions about straws and lightbulbs in her part of that climate townhall. She’s absolutely in line with what you’re talking about.
Pandering to specific groups of voters instead of putting forward policies that benefit those same groups (as well as everyone else) and winning on a broad vision is lousy politics.
This part of the conversation really isn’t about what I believe the right thing to do is (obviously I’m super for LGBTQ rights and reparations for POC’s… just look at my posts about history ffs) and more about how you win elections to get those things done.
No. This is actually your problem. You think it’s about “better candidates” when people keep shouting WOAT at Clinton. If she literally was the WOAT Bernie would’ve won.
I think it’s weird Cuse and others are on the “Democrats are worthless” kick and dunking on nunnehi (who I see as overly optimistic atm) when AOC seems to be saying to collect all the names of Republicans who vote against impeachment. For her to even make that statement shows some optimism on her part, and I’d think she would the voice of pessimism as she’s the one trying to change the culture.
I guess I just heard the question and turned it off. That is good to know. I really don’t want to hear POCAHONTAS for 8 months and then have her lose because of obviously that. It’ll work. That’s how fucked things are.
Nah. She’s running a brilliant campaign. Listen to her stump speech. It’s got massively broad appeal. I was totally with you before I scouted her so I totally get where you’re coming from.
Anybody saying “Dems are worthless” is talking about people in leadership positions, not freshman firebrands. nunnehi was getting dunked on for wildly misrepresenting things and putting words in mouths.
Which is a bad take. Dem leadership has to account for a louder constituency now. Nadler seems to have adjusted to it and is slowing putting pressure on other leadership with declaring the process as an impeachment inquiry.
And you miss my point with AOC. In order for her to even have said what she did yesterday or the day before she has to think the probability of impeachment is greater than zero unlike some of you guys. Which she wouldn’t be the one to be optimistic about leadership.
A big difference between Warren and Hilldawg is that Warren actually addresses some of the legitimate concerns that attracted so many folks to Trump. Take trade. Of course Trump’s trade stance is Not Actually Good, but it at least acknowledges the problems that have decimated whole industries and communities. Whereas Hilldawg was all full steam ahead on TPP and presumably other bad managed trade deals. I mean as Tucker Carlson (!) said:
The overlap between Trump’s messaging and Warren’s messaging on the legitimate grievances folks have about this sort of thing is striking. The difference is that Warren actually has pretty good plans as opposed to empty demagoguery. Hopefully voters can see the difference.
edit: just remembered that Hillary was nominally opposed to the TPP during the election but come on no one bought that for a second.
She still doesn’t get it. Her job isn’t to pass the bill and sit back and see what happens. Her job is to find the exploitable weaknesses in McConnell’s strategy and make sure everyone sees them, talks about them, etc.
You don’t call the House back because you need to pass something legislatively, you call the House back because you need to pass something politically to control the media narrative and FORCE the media to go ask him, “What now?” This is why the GOP passed ACA repeals a gazillion times.