• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Deleted member 3896

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,815
the constant swapping between "National Dems can't do anything" and "You need to vote for National Dems to do something" is exhausting.
Cool, another lie.

Why are you misrepresenting what's happening here and what people are actually saying? National Dems do not have the numbers do something right now. It's almost as if we're encouraging people to vote in order to get those numbers. If people had taken the apathy bait in GA, we wouldn't have gotten a progressive Black woman on the SC. The willful shortsightedness being pushed here is weird and frustrating to see at any time but especially today.
 

yogurt

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,803
I am not spreading lo information nonsense, I am having a loose conversation on a message board on a day when everyone is angry as fuck. I am saying dems could have avoided all of this if they hadn't gotten consistently outplayed for 30 years, and if they'd been less Charlie Brown with the Football all of these things would have played out more moderately at worst.
Yeah I got you and Toxi mixed up -- my bad. Be well. I apologize.
 

Coyote Starrk

The Fallen
Oct 30, 2017
52,946
EDIT: Whatever. We're paying for the mistakes of the past with our future. Hope the energy I see here translates into more than just voting this year.
So are you going to address the fact that you posted nonsense and were called out over a dozen times for it?

Or are we just pretending that didn't happen?
 

Aaronrules380

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
22,432
Democrats really need to get rid of this stupid ass "big tent" thinking that's causing this stupid rift between moderates and the left. Because Democrats are so ideologically fragmented and Republicans are so ideologically conformative, the right is able to organize and execute successful culture war campaigns whereas Democrats are still humming and hawing over people being mean on Twitter. We aren't focused.
so you want democrats to lose harder? they're a big tent because if they don't act that way they lose automatically. also if you want them to step away from that direction you need to understand this would realistically mean coalescing around the way more popular at this time moderate branch and not the progressive party you most likely want.
 

Chaos Legion

The Wise Ones
Member
Oct 30, 2017
16,911
Didn't the Democrats have majority control of both chambers of the senate at least before 2010? How else did he pass the ACA?
1. He had total control of both chambers for 4 months (9/24/09 - 2/4/10).
2. One of those 60 votes was Lieberman.
3. He did not have 60 votes to codify Roe v Wade even amongst Democrats
4. LBJ (bully pulpit messaging from earlier in this thread) couldn't even wrangle his own super majority to pass the Civil Rights Act (~24 D Senators voted against it), Obama wouldn't have been able to lose a single Senator.
 

Anno

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,951
Columbus, Ohio
He didn't have a 60-vote mandate of pro-choice Democrats. Just controlling both chambers doesn't mean you can force through legislation. You still need a mandate.

Sure, but, again, then why am I voting for these people? If people come together to give a party total control over the electable seats of government, enough that they have literally nothing to oppose them besides themselves, and they still can't do something, then what's it all for? Why am I suppose to re-elect these people next time?
 

Toxi

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
17,547
So are you going to address the fact that you posted nonsense and were called out over a dozen times for it?

Or are we just pretending that didn't happen?
What do you want me to address? Over a dozen people have given their take and there literally was a mod post telling me to knock it off and get off the topic of elections. Read those.
 

Fhtagn

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,615
Not going to sugarcoat it, it's bad, it's real fucking bad. But there's 2 options

Option 1: you just give up and let them win

Or

Option 2: you get pissed off, and do something about it, you organize and fight back via every legal avenue possible, you get people who can do better to run in every race you can, and you go out and vote every damn time and bring as many people to vote with you as you can, and maybe, just maybe, things get better.

Your vote isn't always going to make a difference, but your lack of voting and giving up just lets people who want to ruin everything we have built take over, and guess what...they never fail to vote and fight for what they want.

The system sucks and gives shit people from shit states way more power and representation then they should have, but it's what we have and we need to make the most of it.

I'm fully on board with part 2, I always vote and often volunteer, I just wish the vote! vote! vote! people could figure out a way to be more persuasive and less "you fucking' idiot! vote!!!!" cuz they're making me feel like voting is for chumps, even though rationally I strongly disagree with that.
 

Hu3

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,576
The same people with the " both sides " playbook is the same people in here with the " do not vote it does nothing ", your shit it's old, it's known get a new playbook.
 

Coyote Starrk

The Fallen
Oct 30, 2017
52,946
I absolutely despite MTG taking Every. Single. Talking. Point. used on her and trying to use it exactly back on us.

AOC basically called her out in the most elegant way possible.
That's what AOC does best.

She dismantles them and dunks on them in a completely savage way, but words it so nicely that no jackasses can ever complain about "decorum".
 

GoldenEye 007

Roll Tide, Y'all!
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
13,833
Texas
Sure, but, again, then why am I voting for these people? If people come together to give a party total control over the electable seats of government, enough that they have literally nothing to oppose them besides themselves, and they still can't do something, then what's it all for? Why am I suppose to re-elect these people next time?
So days like today don't happen.
 
Dec 9, 2018
20,975
New Jersey
so you want democrats to lose harder? they're a big tent because if they don't act that way they lose automatically. also if you want them to step away from that direction you need to understand this would realistically mean coalescing around the way more popular at this time moderate branch and not the progressive party you most likely want.
As a voter, I want the party I vote for to best represent my beliefs, so yes, naturally I want the Dems to be center-left rather than a more conservative variant. Diversification in ideology strategically made sense several elections ago, but it is clear that one of the major political parties has become more unified behind a fascistic ideology. As someone who opposes fascism, I want there to be an equally strong party that directly works against the opposition, rather than try to navigate the now-impossible task of bipartisanship.
 

PlanetSmasher

The Abominable Showman
Member
Oct 25, 2017
115,546
Sure, but, again, then why am I voting for these people? If people come together to give a party total control over the electable seats of government, enough that they have literally nothing to oppose them besides themselves, and they still can't do something, then what's it all for? Why am I suppose to re-elect these people next time?

Because doing nothing just gives Republicans more power. The only option we have is curbing their power at every opportunity we possibly have.
 

Ferrio

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,047
The theoretical amount of turnout we'd need to have significant change would have to be record breaking to the point it's purely fantasy. Even if it did happen there'd be systems in place to undermine it. Not that we shouldn't try, but I don't think voting will solve anything on the federal level.
 

xxracerxx

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
31,222
Sure, but, again, then why am I voting for these people? If people come together to give a party total control over the electable seats of government, enough that they have literally nothing to oppose them besides themselves, and they still can't do something, then what's it all for? Why am I suppose to re-elect these people next time?
I mean you are voting for only a few of "these people" and you are hopefully able to influence who is up for election at that time.

The other scenario is to sit on your laurels and just complain on the internet.
 
Dec 9, 2018
20,975
New Jersey
1. He had total control of both chambers for 4 months (9/24/09 - 2/4/10).
2. One of those 60 votes was Lieberman.
3. He did not have 60 votes to codify Roe v Wade even amongst Democrats
4. LBJ (bully pulpit messaging from earlier in this thread) couldn't even wrangle his own super majority to pass the Civil Rights Act (~24 D Senators voted against it), Obama wouldn't have been able to lose a single Senator.
I see so that's probably not the best example then. Thank you for informing me.
 

Chaos Legion

The Wise Ones
Member
Oct 30, 2017
16,911
Sure, but, again, then why am I voting for these people? If people come together to give a party total control over the electable seats of government, enough that they have literally nothing to oppose them besides themselves, and they still can't do something, then what's it all for? Why am I suppose to re-elect these people next time?
You use the primaries to ensure that the D's that get into office will vote for legislation that we want. We do this repeatedly until the D caucus is more reflective of our ideology. We do not threaten to withhold our vote or throw a temper tantrum if the primary does not select our chosen candidate, because it's much better for Democrats to hold the majority than for Republicans to gain it. Rinse and repeat until we get our legislative agenda passed.

The GOP have literally done this repeatedly and it's working out for them despite taking decades!
 

Roytheone

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,140
I vote, and will always vote, but I don't see how any of that matters unless dems can somehow prevent this Supreme Court from banning abortion nationally soon, which they'll clearly do, and also rolling back everything good that's happened since 1900 along the way.

Even if a national ban happens, there will be a big difference I think between states that will see it as their holy goal to put as many woman behind bars as possible, with maximum effort put into the hunt. And states that think this law is total bullshit and will put it as low as possible on the priority list and ignore it as much as possible.
 

Dyle

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
29,914
I think the most likely place the US is headed is into a federalist system with an extremely impotent federal government and large liberal blocs of states (basically all of New England and the West Coast) just ignoring federal laws and doing their own thing.

Like, I don't think the US is going to get into a civil war because California recognizes same sex marriage. I don't think we are going to formally see secessions in our lifetime but we're going to wind up with semi-autonomous blocks of the country that just do whatever the fuck they want.

Honestly, we largely saw that during the pandemic anyway with different states deciding to handle it differently and even cities in Texas and elsewhere ignoring the state government and just doing whatever they wanted with mask mandates.
That seems very optimistic in light of the many attempts by Republicans to control what happens in blue states, they simply won't accept not having total fascist control of everywhere the flag flies. More likely in my view is a pseudo-secessionist movement following the 2024 election where two competing governments, one led by the legitimately elected Democratic president and the other by the falsely elected Republican president, which eventually leads to the country being effectively split in two, with both sides claiming to be the true government of all of it. Shit's going to get real bad real fast.
 

Sirhc

Hasn't made a thread yet. Shame me.
Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,050
I'm fully on board with part 2, I always vote and often volunteer, I just wish the vote! vote! vote! people could figure out a way to be more persuasive and less "you fucking' idiot! vote!!!!" cuz they're making me feel like voting is for chumps, even though rationally I strongly disagree with that.

I mean, the only real power most people have to affect change is their vote, voting is power.

If you want to do more, consider running in a local election, be the change you want to see, those smaller local elections that are often uncontested can often affect big change.
 

Coyote Starrk

The Fallen
Oct 30, 2017
52,946
Context: Dicks Sporting Goods announced it's financial support for any of its female workers who need abortions and need to travel to receive proper treatment.



That's what we are dealing with. Brain worms.
 

yogurt

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,803
The theoretical amount of turnout we'd need to have significant change would have to be record breaking to the point it's purely fantasy. Even if it did happen there'd be systems in place to undermine it. Not that we shouldn't try, but I don't think voting will solve anything on the federal level.
Vote for harm reduction and to minimize catastrophe while we work towards structural changes outside of the electoral process.

Voting takes a few hours per year and is not mutually exclusive with any other action.
 

Thordinson

Member
Aug 1, 2018
17,914
I mean, the only real power most people have to affect change is their vote, voting is power.

If you want to do more, consider running in a local election, be the change you want to see, those smaller local elections that are often uncontested can often affect big change.

I don't agree. I believe there is real power outside of voting.

I do think voting is important though. The problem is that folks keep admonishing those who sat out or voted third party, rightfully or wrongfully, and that doesn't get folks to vote. Folks have to empathize with non-voters/3rd party voters and try to get them to vote if that's what they want. Yelling at them for being an "idiot" doesn't work. Now, I understand if folks don't want to or don't have the time or what have you, but that's the way to get them to vote.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,215
1. He had total control of both chambers for 4 months (9/24/09 - 2/4/10).
2. One of those 60 votes was Lieberman.
3. He did not have 60 votes to codify Roe v Wade even amongst Democrats
4. LBJ (bully pulpit messaging from earlier in this thread) couldn't even wrangle his own super majority to pass the Civil Rights Act (~24 D Senators voted against it), Obama wouldn't have been able to lose a single Senator.

They could have killed the filibuster and done it with 50.
 

Aaronrules380

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
22,432
As a voter, I want the party I vote for the best represent my beliefs, so yes, naturally I want the Dems to be center-left rather than a more conservative variant. Diversification in ideology strategically made sense several elections ago, but it is clear that one of the major political parties has become more unified behind a fascistic ideology. As someone who opposes fascism, I want there to be an equally strong party that directly works against the opposition, rather than try to navigate the now-impossible task of bipartisanship.
cool, so you want to lose. in the first place, as much as guys like Manchin suck, replacing them with a progressive right now is actually straight impossible. and if you want to completely separate from moderates, you'd need to accept a lot of current progressives losing their seats because moderate democrats won't vote for them. the reality is big tent isn't a choice, it's a necessity and the alternative is giving republicans pretty much complete control over literally every branch of government. and i don't just mean majorities, i mean absolute super majorities where they have like 80% of all seats if not more. consider that right now with both progressives and moderates voting for president, Biden beat Trump with just 51% of the vote to Trump's 46%. we split that into a progressive and moderate candidate and what you'd likey find is Trump wins, moderate candidate gets around 30% of the vote and you're candidate gets like 20% of the vote. Trump also likely sweeps almost every state in the electoral college
 

Mr_Antimatter

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,571
This is a travesty, and it highlights how important the vote was in 2016.

It will take decades to fix this mess, if it even can be fixed.
 

Kensation

Enlightened
The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
6,837
Dreaded the conversation my wife and I were going to have when she got home today, because I knew she'd be devastated, and she was. I didn't even really know what to say that could comfort her. I couldn't lie and tell her it would all be ok, because it won't be. I dunno man…..
 

JaseC64

Enlightened
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,008
Strong Island NY
NY is so damn pricey to live in but I am not sure I ever want to move out of state. The way I see it is that living in a blue state is better than living in a red state with shit laws out to get you.
 

Violence Jack

Drive-in Mutant
Member
Oct 25, 2017
41,681
A horrifying thought just crossed my mind. A friend of mine said that they were going to go get a hysterectomy after hearing this news despite living in a blue state. My sister had to get one almost 5 years ago for medical reasons. My fear is that when they come after contraceptives, they're going to come after women who look to have medical procedures to prevent pregnancies, and who knows what they'll try to do those who already have them.

It might just be my mental state feeding into all of this, but even as a man I feel sick to my stomach knowing how many women across the nation are struggling today.