Does The Left Need Jimmy Dore?

[AquaCityBoy]

How is any of this nonsense supposed to get anybody healthcare?

 

[AnonymityX1000]

It's not a dichotomy of vote for M4A right this second or be in perpetual limbo. This is also continuing to bake in an assumption that a floor vote changes the current public outlook on M4A.

You want to raise pressure to pass M4A, you put your support behind groups that are primarying the people who won't sponsor the bill. Use that pressure to get enough cosponsors that the bill will actually pass. The presumption that a floor vote would be some type of magic bullet is wishful thinking at best.

A vote on M4A isn't a bad thing, but we shouldn't exaggerate the results. It's a performative gesture that you hope will raise awareness around the issue and it might not even do much on that front. I'm skeptical there too.

I have said previously multiple times Progressives don't have to do this but they got to do something eventually to oppose Pelosi/Schumer/Biden they can't just get along the entire time. Just saying this is a great opportunity.
Why not both? Support Justice Dems, Our revolution etc. and get more Progressives in Congress that's already happening but if in these next two years they don't vote on M4A and then lose the House in 2022 they might not get another chance to vote on M4A until 2025.
And a vote could be used in the mid terms and future elections to bludgeon those opposed. Votes follow candidates not fukkin' cosponsorships, shyt Biden and Bernie still got to talk about their VOTE on the crime bill. No one is bringing up their past cosponsorships. lol

 

[God Almighty]

Normally, you hear politicians say things like "Never let a good crisis go to waste." Uncle Joe, though?

"My wife is my doctor, she hits my knee with the little rubber hammer thing, you know, the, the, hammer for your knee thing, so call her a doctor, okay Jack?"

 

[Ezra]

I feel like the left doesn’t need Jimmy Dore

fukk Jimmy Dore as a staff, a Youtube channel and a muthafukkin crew

and if you wanna be down w Jimmy Dore then fukk you too

 

[Black Panther]

Caitlin Johnstone is a bad faith actor, not to mention a shytty journalist.

 

[storyteller]

I have said previously multiple times Progressives don't have to do this but they got to do something eventually to oppose Pelosi/Schumer/Biden they can't just get along the entire time. Just saying this is a great opportunity.

This feels disingenuous because
a) Jimmy, who you vehemently defend, has framed this as "if they don't get the M4A vote, they're frauds" to the extent of literally saying that "AOC is standing between you and your M4A." If he were just calling this a great opportunity, the debate wouldn't so constantly focus on trying to cast AOC and others as hypocrites.

b) Even if we cast aside the blatant gatekeeping over this symbolic gesture; multiple alternative strategies for the leverage have been brought up including some that seem likely to be accomplished...none have been treated as acceptable in a trade-off despite the fact that more than one of those options could see light.

Why not both? Support Justice Dems, Our revolution etc. and get more Progressives in Congress that's already happening but if in these next two years they don't vote on M4A and then lose the House in 2022 they might not get another chance to vote on M4A until 2025.

We're not debating whether or not to push for a vote for M4A over the next two years. The implication that this would be the only way to get a vote on M4A before 2022 seems like a reach to me since there are two full years of work before that time. Also, it's weird how we're baking in an assumption that the House will be lost rather than framing M4A as an opportunity to hang on to the House imo...it seems like actually passing M4A would require another election cycle regardless, unless I'm missing something.

As for why not both? Because I still think fighting over a vote that obviously is going to lose is worthless and potentially counterproductive if anything. Please do keep supporting Our Revolution and Justice Democrats...a nice start would be not shytting on the Justice Dems' candidates before they even get into office like Dore did with Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman.

And a vote could be used in the mid terms and future elections to bludgeon those opposed. Votes follow candidates not fukkin' cosponsorships, shyt Biden and Bernie still got to talk about their VOTE on the crime bill. No one is bringing up their past cosponsorships. lol

I think it's important to remind people that the reason the Crime Bill votes actually get brought up is because it fukkin' passed and thus had an actual impact .

So how is this different? Whether there is a vote on M4A or not, we won't have the numbers to pass it until we've primaried the people who aren't sponsors on the bill. Whether this vote, that everyone acknowledges will lose, happens or not...losing the House in 2022 means no M4A until after 2025.

We do have some promising signs that candidates supporting M4A were successful this election cycle while those who didn't support it were less so. But that gets to another pretty obvious point...that shyt happened without a losing floor vote because M4A is a very public issue and healthcare reform has been played as a key electoral issue for three voting cycles now.

Here's how you pass a bill...you get the votes...THEN you vote on it. Inserting an arbitrary token gesture where the bill doesn't pass has zero strategic value. When enough legislators feel that their elections depend on M4A, the bill will get its vote. Rushing it out there to be marked a loser is arbitrary at best. If the House is lost in 2022, which you seem to be building the urgency of this vote around, then we won't be sitting there in 2023 like "at least we lost an M4A vote that one time"

 

[AnonymityX1000]

This feels disingenuous because
a) Jimmy, who you vehemently defend, has framed this as "if they don't get the M4A vote, they're frauds" to the extent of literally saying that "AOC is standing between you and your M4A." If he were just calling this a great opportunity, the debate wouldn't so constantly focus on trying to cast AOC and others as hypocrites.

b) Even if we cast aside the blatant gatekeeping over this symbolic gesture; multiple alternative strategies for the leverage have been brought up including some that seem likely to be accomplished...none have been treated as acceptable in a trade-off despite the fact that more than one of those options could see light.




We're not debating whether or not to push for a vote for M4A over the next two years. The implication that this would be the only way to get a vote on M4A before 2022 seems like a reach to me since there are two full years of work before that time. Also, it's weird how we're baking in an assumption that the House will be lost rather than framing M4A as an opportunity to hang on to the House imo...it seems like actually passing M4A would require another election cycle regardless, unless I'm missing something.

As for why not both? Because I still think fighting over a vote that obviously is going to lose is worthless and potentially counterproductive if anything. Please do keep supporting Our Revolution and Justice Democrats...a nice start would be not shytting on the Justice Dems' candidates before they even get into office like Dore did with Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman.



I think it's important to remind people that the reason the Crime Bill votes actually get brought up is because it fukkin' passed and thus had an actual impact .

So how is this different? Whether there is a vote on M4A or not, we won't have the numbers to pass it until we've primaried the people who aren't sponsors on the bill. Whether this vote, that everyone acknowledges will lose, happens or not...losing the House in 2022 means no M4A until after 2025.

We do have some promising signs that candidates supporting M4A were successful this election cycle while those who didn't support it were less so. But that gets to another pretty obvious point...that shyt happened without a losing floor vote because M4A is a very public issue and healthcare reform has been played as a key electoral issue for three voting cycles now.

Here's how you pass a bill...you get the votes...THEN you vote on it. Inserting an arbitrary token gesture where the bill doesn't pass has zero strategic value. When enough legislators feel that their elections depend on M4A, the bill will get its vote. Rushing it out there to be marked a loser is arbitrary at best. If the House is lost in 2022, which you seem to be building the urgency of this vote around, then we won't be sitting there in 2023 like "at least we lost an M4A vote that one time"

Jimmy has called AOC a fraud and said she is standing between you and M4A I haven't. I don't think any less of any Progressive for not following JImmy's strategy, specifically AOC since he has been bombing her for months before this. If she could do something that gets passed or changes the conversation around a critical issue like M4A especially before the midterms she would checkmate Dore and make him look stupid and I said as much in the thread specifically about this topic.
Pelosi isn't bringing up M4A for a vote unless she is forced to do so. Dem House members or Dems generally should do something to change the prediction that the Rs are taking the House in 2022. I didn't make that up I read that was the case regarding 2022 predictions.
Don't see how a vote would be counterproductive. What's the downside? And Dore's criticism of Bush and Bowman revolve around this vote nothing else and really it's not hurting shyt. Who thinks less of them based on this? No one.
Yes, fine votes on stuff that pass > votes on stuff that doesn't > co-sponsorships. Still forcing a vote is more telling than a co-sponsor list and could expose people who cosponsored it and were dumb enough to vote against it in a forced vote situation.
Republicans force meaningless votes all the time and it doesn't hurt their chances going forward. Hell, Dems just tried to impeach Trump knowing the Senate wouldn't remove him. People make symbolic gestures legislatively often, it signals to your base you are fighting for them. The March on Washington, the Million Man March, all the protests seeking justice for Trayvon Martin, Mike Brown, George Floyd all performative gestures that all didn't work or have yet to be determined. Were they a waste of time and have zero strategic value as well?

 

[storyteller]

Jimmy has called AOC a fraud and said she is standing between you and M4A I haven't. I don't think any less of any Progressive for not following JImmy's strategy, specifically AOC since he has been bombing her for months before this. If she could do something that gets passed or changes the conversation around a critical issue like M4A especially before the midterms she would checkmate Dore and make him look stupid and I said as much in the thread specifically about this topic.

Making Jimmy Dore look stupid is in itself, a worthless endeavor for someone in a position like AOC. She can actually do things to help people which this vote won't. She should ignore Jimmy the same way she ignored Candace Owens challenging her to a debate.

Pelosi isn't bringing up M4A for a vote unless she is forced to do so. Dem House members or Dems generally should do something to change the prediction that the Rs are taking the House in 2022. I didn't make that up I read that was the case regarding 2022 predictions.
Don't see how a vote would be counterproductive. What's the downside? And Dore's criticism of Bush and Bowman revolve around this vote nothing else and really it's not hurting shyt. Who thinks less of them based on this? No one.

Everyone gets that the prediction for 2022 is a loss. I'm saying it's defeatist to chase a token symbolic victory built around the idea that we're losing the House. No, the goal should be to actually do things that can change the math.

The downside of losing a vote on the floor would be that Pelosi, whom you fully acknowledge doesn't want a floor vote to begin with, could point to that vote and say "we already tried" whilst blocking a future vote. And yes, this is speculation but no more or less speculation that an imagined scenario where the floor vote suddenly changes the electoral math for a multitude of representatives.

Dore's criticism of Bush and Bowman started almost immediately after they got elected breh. It's not just about this vote.


I don't know who this is convincing. I'm not a Jimmy fan, but he does have a huge following and says a LOT of dumb shyt. I wish less people took him seriously for sure.

Yes, fine votes on stuff that pass > votes on stuff that doesn't > co-sponsorships. Still forcing a vote is more telling than a co-sponsor list and could expose people who cosponsored it and were dumb enough to vote against it in a forced vote situation.

Nah...votes that pass stuff >>> Getting Co-sponsorships >>> Meaningless floor votes

None of the cosponsors are changing up their votes because of the fact that it's meaningless anyway. Since the math isn't even close to passing M4A, they zero risk voting for M4A as a cosponsor. It's gonna lose regardless of their vote. A potential downside would be that people who were cosponsors in bad faith, could point to their M4A vote as proof of their bonafides and wouldn't be pressed to show otherwise until a floor vote happened in which M4A had a legitimate chance to pass based on their choice.

Republicans force meaningless votes all the time and it doesn't hurt their chances going forward. Hell, Dems just tried to impeach Trump knowing the Senate wouldn't remove him. People make symbolic gestures legislatively often, it signals to your base you are fighting for them. The March on Washington, the Million Man March, all the protests seeking justice for Trayvon Martin, Mike Brown, George Floyd all performative gestures that all didn't work or have yet to be determined. Were they a waste of time and have zero strategic value as well?

If you're imagining that a House Vote on M4A would have the impact on broad public awareness that the BLM movement had on prison reform issues and discussions, I highly doubt we'll see eye to eye on any of this.

 

[storyteller]

So the thread title asks "Does the left need Jimmy Dore" and I think that's a resounding no...









It keeps going too...

 

[AnonymityX1000]

So the thread title asks "Does the left need Jimmy Dore" and I think that's a resounding no...









It keeps going too...

The TYT audience voted, over 85% of their audience back the #ForcetheVote initiative and they trash dude all the time. Talking about Jimmy Dore publicly in a negative manner isn't working. lol

 

[AnonymityX1000]

Making Jimmy Dore look stupid is in itself, a worthless endeavor for someone in a position like AOC. She can actually do things to help people which this vote won't. She should ignore Jimmy the same way she ignored Candace Owens challenging her to a debate.



Everyone gets that the prediction for 2022 is a loss. I'm saying it's defeatist to chase a token symbolic victory built around the idea that we're losing the House. No, the goal should be to actually do things that can change the math.

The downside of losing a vote on the floor would be that Pelosi, whom you fully acknowledge doesn't want a floor vote to begin with, could point to that vote and say "we already tried" whilst blocking a future vote. And yes, this is speculation but no more or less speculation that an imagined scenario where the floor vote suddenly changes the electoral math for a multitude of representatives.

Dore's criticism of Bush and Bowman started almost immediately after they got elected breh. It's not just about this vote.


I don't know who this is convincing. I'm not a Jimmy fan, but he does have a huge following and says a LOT of dumb shyt. I wish less people took him seriously for sure.



Nah...votes that pass stuff >>> Getting Co-sponsorships >>> Meaningless floor votes

None of the cosponsors are changing up their votes because of the fact that it's meaningless anyway. Since the math isn't even close to passing M4A, they zero risk voting for M4A as a cosponsor. It's gonna lose regardless of their vote. A potential downside would be that people who were cosponsors in bad faith, could point to their M4A vote as proof of their bonafides and wouldn't be pressed to show otherwise until a floor vote happened in which M4A had a legitimate chance to pass based on their choice.



If you're imagining that a House Vote on M4A would have the impact on broad public awareness that the BLM movement had on prison reform issues and discussions, I highly doubt we'll see eye to eye on any of this.

I agree she should have ignored all this and she was and still is ignoring Jimmy but she messed up engaging Justin Jackson the RB from the LA Chargers and he is on Jimmy's #ForcetheVote team. He got into a back and forth with her on twitter and then immediately ran to the Jimmy Dore show afterward. Oops.
This is Pelosi's last two years as Speaker she isn't going to bring it up more than once anyway so the downside you pointed out isn't even a thing that's possible. lol
Jimmy's position is you don't change the Dem party it changes you. Have the Progressives opposed Pelosi on anything important the last two years? Not really, he's betting that will continue with Bush and Bowman. He's basically daring them to be bolder hopefully they prove him wrong.
You can't claim none of the co-sponsors would change their position if their was a vote until you know there is an actual vote. And AOC doesn't even believe Pelosi would risk such a thing, she thinks Pelosi would rather risk the Speakership. Why if the vote is just a formality? Her words someone actually in Congress aren't adding up to your suppositions, sorry.
Predicting the outcome of a protest is impossible you don't know the change it will bring until you actually do the defiant act. So I'm not saying it will bring the necessary changes but it is definitely worth a try. Meanwhile, you're like let's not try that because it won't work. You're the one that's so positive of the outcomes not me.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

 

[FAH1223]

 

[wtfyomom]

Did AOC vote for cares act or not? and what evidence is there other than her word? the people that say she voted against it only point to her saying she voted against it. where as theres video of her saying we passed the bill, in positive manner, and she was not one of the people who said no in the voice vote. people claim dore is lying but i havent see any concrete proof n either side. and seeing how everyone of the squad and bernie voted for it, why would i think AOC voted against it with no proof? yall gotta stop making heros out of these politicians.

 

[barese]

Did AOC vote for cares act or not? and what evidence is there other than her word?

Her exact word, just for the record: