The only thing I argued today was that fellow progressives shouldn’t seek to purge anyone that doesn’t pledge fealty to their preferred policy platform. Each district is unique.
Why not? Is that not how a democracy works? The people advocate and apply pressure to get the policies they want enacted. If that means sending a primary opponent that better supports the will of the people then so be it. If Lamb for example beats his primary opponent then he remains and if he doesn't then the people have spoken. No one's asking for their imprisonment. Acting like that's harmful or dangerous is asinine to me. If we were to follow your strategy AOC would never have been elected because the person she replaced Joe Crowley was in office for 20 years and was the dem caucus chair. I guess she shouldn't have rocked the boat to purge someone who won 10 straight elections because he didn't support her policy platform.
Then why did he run on his centrist platform and not an AOC platform? (Medicare for all/ assault weapon ban, etc)
Never said it was permanent position to give moderates leeway; there will come a time they’ll have to move more left. However, the paramount goal should be evicting Trump. And I don’t think it’s helpful to see a huge public schism break out between those factions righ now going into ‘20. The progressive platform’s popularity is growing, but it’s not undefeated. As bwi2 said, look at Florida w/ that shitstain DeSantis, or GA, Ben Jealous lost too, right?
Because his platform is what he is. I don’t understand why you don’t get that. He wasn’t going to run on AOC’s platform because he doesn’t have the same beliefs. He ran as a centrist because he is a centrist.
Ok. Moving on, how do Lions fans feel about Stafford? I’m genuinely curious cuz his situation is unique. Been there a long time w little success.
Well then we disagree because I think that is precisely how you beat Trump. No one said it's undefeated and if you want to point to a loss here or there then I'll counter with the centrist strategy that lost democrats virtually every single branch of the federal government as well as most governorships and most state legislatures. Bottom line is there is a very clear trend going on in this country supported by mountains of data points that progressive policies are what the american people(both dems and republicans) want. We can either move towards that collectively as a party or shy away from it and repeat previous mistakes. Trump himself was elected on the back of quasi-populist message (anti establishment/improve infrastructure/anti corruption/drain the swamp/won't cut entitlements etc) He was completely full of shit obviously but that type of message resonates across the board.
Yeah, but “a loss here or there” could tip an election. Think of the damage that happens when someone like DeSantis wins, or Trump appointing now 25% of our federal judiciary. We agree progressivism is the future, I just want to minimize the damage the right wingers can do before they are in permanent minority status. Can you imagine what happens if Trump were to get to appoint RBGs replacement and another young one for Thomas’ retirement. That could set the progressive movement back 20 years right there.
To be honest I listen to Rogan's podcast occasionally because sometimes he has decent guests. Like he had Tulsi Gabbard on a few months back. For the most part though his fanbase is full of people who use the terms beta male and cuck as legitimate insults. They also freak out if he has any left leaning person on so that's always funny. Rogan himself also gets a very big hard on to point out "reverse sexism"
What’s the controversy with the financing? Looked on her wiki for a scandal, but didn’t see anything. Read a critical article about her choice in language and meeting with trump/Assad, nothing about $$
If everyone agrees candidates should be authentic and that primaries can often be beneficial, idk why people are still discussing this.
Purity tests, whether progressive or conservative are the worst. I grew up in the old PA-12. I interned on the Hill for my rep. Just because Conor Lamb isn't your favorite congressman talking about social issues I want you to know that he's a whole lot better than your alternatives that could come out of that district. Progressive politics might take hold in that district about 25 years after it fades from style.
When I say "loss here or there" I don't mean it as those losses don't matter I mean it as those are exceptions to the trend rather than the trend. You point to gillum but he has performed better than every democratic governor nominee in the past 25+ years as did Stacey Abrams. Not to mention race/voter suppression was definitely a factor. On the flip side Claire Mccaskill. Joe Donnelly Heidi Heitkamp. All centrists. All lost.(In fairness Manchin won) So its fine to point out progressive losses but put them in context. So again I'm not gonna point to the exceptions and say that's what we should build the strategy for beating Trump when the ballot initiatives and slew of progressive wins show otherwise.
That’s nice, but look here, guy. Us message board posters follow the news and a lot of social media content posted by some of our most ideal candidates. Copy/paste. What don’t you get?
Thats the insinuation. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...fb9411d332c_story.html?utm_term=.7f1fb949c181
Who cares if you love him or hate him, Abramson has been a lot better at following Mueller news and predicting the direction of the investigation than anyone in the mainstream.
With respect, could I press you on that little? Is there a breakdown of the seats that flipped from R to D that shows the majority adopted Bernie/AOC/Gillum-like platforms? I’d enjoy familiarizing myself with that data and if the evidence supports that trend I’d be happy to concede the point. I suppose I remain skeptical that those Senate races you mentioned would’ve turned out differently had the Ds went hard left. We lost 5–barely survived in MT. And like you said it seemed everyone acknowledged Manchin’s vote for Kav saved him. I can see a scenario where by going hard left the GOP might have had 56 senate seats. Just so you know that would mean any Dem prez in ‘20 would be dealing w a GOP controlled Senate for the entirety of their first term. That means no progressive legislation passed by the House would even be brought to a floor vote.
It’s weird how many people are just gritting the shit out of trump supporters. Mainly brcause his base is consumed with mouth breathing dumb fucks
Republicans are openly hostile to the federal government and Trump and his base don't give a single fuck about the federal workers, so how the fuck does this shit end?
There's like 5-10% truth in the message that Assad wants people to hear. There aren't any "moderate rebels" anymore and they haven't existed in any meaningful capacity in years. The issues arise when people take that 5-10% and wonder if the entire narrative they're being told is false. Assad and Russia have worked hard to advance that narrative (gas attacks were false flags, we don't torture/murder people who dissent, etc) and sadly it's worked to an extent.