White bernie-bro purity leftists are attacking hardworking black politicians

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Democrats need to keep the in-fighting to a minimum, and put up Leftist, Populist candidates that know how to work a crowd, and make popular promises.

i.e., lie to people.

Hillary said, "I'm not going to lie to you"

And y'all lost your shyt

Some of y'all really deserve to suffer under Trump with these terrible negotiation skills.

Y'all wanted your dream date and now you have to settle with the trash in the White House.

POPULISM IS BAD. Always was. Always will be. Raise the bar and stop appealing to the stupidity of crowds.

 

[southpawstyle]

Actually, if you've been paying attention, many democrats agree with me on illegal immigration.

Islam itself isn't left wing. Why let it fool me?

Abortion? Pro choice.

Y'all keep asking me the same shyt because I don't speak in these sorts of reckless "KILL THE BANKERS" rhetoric you all do.

Islam isn't fooling you, but fear mongering from the right seems to be.


Dem's are still refusing to take meaningful stances. Instead they created this painful anti-Bernie identity.

At least people who watch sports criticize their favorite teams when they prove to be incompetent. You don't give a shyt about America. You want to see your party in control regardless of how shytty the system is.

 

[FAH1223]

And? Whats that got to do with picking decent candidates?
No. Why should you?


When was this in question?

I like the hegemony.

And you do too.

This is the most fact-devoid statements ever.

distribution of wealth is a red herring.

No amount of "war on Wall Street" will improve the average person's life.

You're just saying dumb shyt that doesn't GO anywhere. Its like the aimless rantings of a teenage girl.

You want the government to just give out that money?

What are you saying?

Is this about regulation or government security?

Where is all this ranting leading you? The fact you're stuck?

I'm not stuck. You are OK with the Reagan era of supply side economics.

I am advocating for demand side economics. Reverse the Reagan tax cuts of the early 1980s. And then we can invest it into the things this country doesn't have. Like high speed rail for instance.

I'm basically advocating for a new New Deal. An ambitious endeavor that will rebuild the country but also give people money at the same time.

I'd rather America GO BACK to an era where capital was regulated and the business community's power was stripped down.

You don't agree?

 

[Stone Cold]

@ADevilYouKhow Hes Jamaican

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Islam isn't fooling you, but fear mongering from the right seems to be.

I have my own thoughts on islam, and theres not much you can say to change it. Islam and islamic communities have brought many of their problems upon themselves.

Dem's are still refusing to take meaningful stances. Instead they created this painful anti-Bernie identity.

Bernie has been doing this shyt for 30 years with nothing to show for it except eroding confidence in a vast Democratic Party struggling to maintain advances in competitive districts.

Bernie hasn't joined the party. He seems to have no problem with letting republicans do what they want. He doesn't appreciate incremental gains and the complexity of actually having to produce results.

All Bernie likes is the fame and rabble rousing. His constituents in Vermont don't give a shyt about anything he says. He's not helping them the way he's trying to get you to talk about doing shyt in your own neighborhoods.

Bernie's idealism doesn't leave Vermont.

At least people who watch sports criticize their favorite teams when they prove to be incompetent. You don't give a shyt about America. You want to see your party in control regardless of how shytty the system is.

I'll take any democrat over any republican, then we can work from there.

Some of you all forget that the other side gets a vote too.

For all this bickering, you all are giving free reign to the other half which doesn't give a flying fukk what you're talking about.

I'm in favor of pragmatic solutions. The reckless and non-specific "kill the bankers" rhetoric belongs in the trash along with those who use those arguments.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I'm not stuck. You are OK with the Reagan era of supply side economics.

SAYS THE ONE WHO THINKS MERE BANKER PROSECUTION WILL TRICKLE DOWN TO THE "AVERAGE PERSON"

YOU SAID THIS.

YOU DID.

YOURE A COMMUNIST.

DEAL WITH IT.

I am advocating for demand side economics. Reverse the Reagan tax cuts of the early 1980s. And then we can invest it into the things this country doesn't have. Like high speed rail for instance.

At no point have you demonstrated that you're not in favor of state-control of companies.

I'm basically advocating for a new New Deal. An ambitious endeavor that will rebuild the country but also give people money at the same time.

You wouldn't know a new deal if you saw one.

I'd rather America GO BACK to an era where capital was regulated and the business community's power was stripped down.

That never existed.

You don't agree?

I agree that you're using ambiguous talking points because you don't know what goals you have in mind.

 

[FAH1223]

SAYS THE ONE WHO THINKS MERE BANKER PROSECUTION WILL TRICKLE DOWN TO THE "AVERAGE PERSON"

YOU SAID THIS.

YOU DID.

YOURE A COMMUNIST.

DEAL WITH IT.

At no point have you demonstrated that you're not in favor of state-control of companies.


You wouldn't know a new deal if you saw one.
That never existed.


I agree that you're using ambiguous talking points because you don't know what goals you have in mind.

So, you are not in favor of

1 - taxing speculative markets

2- breaking up the too big too fail banks

3- reinstating separation of commercial and investment banking

4- a brand new New Deal to rebuild America's infrastructure and develop renewables

5- medicare for all

6- raising minimum wage

7- prosecuting bankers

8- reversing Reagan tax cuts

All of this is communist?

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

So, you are not in favor of

1 - taxing speculative markets

I'm in favor of it

2- breaking up the too big too fail banks

Too ambiguous of a statement.

3- reinstating separation of commercial and investment banking

All for it.

4- a brand new New Deal to rebuild America's infrastructure and develop renewables

Too ambiguous, but generally yes

5- medicare for all

Yes

6- raising minimum wage

Generally, no.

7- prosecuting bankers

All for it.

8- reversing Reagan tax cuts

Not sure

All of this is communist?

Your incessant railing against core democrats who agree with over 50% of these statements but not 100% and then you casting them aside as being impure.

We don't have time to cater to every pet issue you want to trot out.

Some something is better than all of nothing.

And yes, you are an ARDENT communist in your speech, your talking points, and your behavior over these years of constantly going further than a few bullet points.

 

[EndDomination]

i.e., lie to people.

Hillary said, "I'm not going to lie to you"

And y'all lost your shyt

Some of y'all really deserve to suffer under Trump with these terrible negotiation skills.

Y'all wanted your dream date and now you have to settle with the trash in the White House.

POPULISM IS BAD. Always was. Always will be. Raise the bar and stop appealing to the stupidity of crowds.

"The crowds" are what vote here in the US
And I voted for Hillary, don't throw your complaints at me, I'm busy working on local campaigns to strengthen labour power, and student power here in Ohio
And if you don't think Populism is deeply engrained in the United States, I'm going to need you to do basic American political research.

 

[EndDomination]

He's not African-American

I said "Black" not "African-American." I'm aware of his ethnicity.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

"The crowds" are what vote here in the US
And I voted for Hillary, don't throw your complaints at me, I'm busy working on local campaigns to strengthen labour power, and student power here in Ohio
And if you don't think Populism is deeply engrained in the United States, I'm going to need you to do basic American political research.

Well thanks for being pragmatic. Thats all I can say.

I have my criticism of the democrats, but I'm not about to seed any divisions that come down to who these children who know nothing but how to whine

 

[Don Homer]

hmmmm.....


At the end of the day, OP is arguing that we continue to do what has not worked for the democratic party for the last 8 years.

 

[Scholar]

hmmmm.....


At the end of the day, OP is arguing that we continue to do what has not worked for the democratic party for the last 8 years.

Yet he is convinced he is right

 

[Don Homer]

Yet he is convinced he is right

he's literally insane

textbook definition of "insanity"

 

[NoMayo15]

This is a very drawn out way of you saying you'll vote for whoever the party tells you to vote for.

No, it's a specific way of saying Trump is a new kind of incompetence that the world doesn't need.

Much of the rest of the country isn't like you.

Well this is true.

Trump won because he inspired people to vote for him. It might have been all based on lies but people would rather vote for someone than against someone else.

That whole we have to keep X out of office so use your vote to do that is a losing strategy and if you wanna continue to delude yourself into thinking it work maybe you should reflect on the last 4 elections we've had. It's always failed. Voting for Kerry to block Bush failed. People voted for Obama because they believed in him. Romney failed to inspire his party and that whole vote to get rid of Obama movement failed. Clinton was said to be the best option to keep Trump out and guess who is president now.

What you're talking about has a proven track record of not working.

This is only partially right. Trump also happened to pick an optimal time to run. He wouldn't have had a chance winning in '08 or '12, given, one, how unpopular George W. was, and two, how popular Obama was after the first term. ANYONE that the Democrats put up there in '08 would have breezed to victory.... and this is generally a right leaning country. Incumbents tend to get re-elected, unless they really shyt the bed. It also didn't hurt that Trump's opponent in the general election had as much political baggage as she did, whereas he had little to none.

I think fear or hatred of the opponent is a great motivator, and it certainly was a factor for getting former Obama supporters to vote Trump this time. It wasn't even so much that many people really liked his platform specifically, rather, they were tired of the same old rhetoric from traditional politicians, which Clinton is through and through. Add to the fact that the Clintons and Obamas made little sense on terror, especially in the aftermath of events like the Pulse club shooting, safe spaces and transgender bathroom debates, the average American thought it was nonsense. I've seen people, who voted for Obama, say they voted for Trump because they're afraid for free speech. Given his stance on the press, Trump isn't really a first amendment advocate, but the fear was there that if Clinton got into office, no one would be able to say anything they wanted, and swarms of Muslims would be allowed into the country, unvetted.

If Democrats want to win, what they really need to do is abandon the "regressive left"

Personally, I don't know a person who wanted Clinton over Sanders, and if I recall correctly, Sanders was actually polling better than Clinton when compared to Trump towards the end of primaries. So no, it wasn't always said Clinton was the best option. But after the primaries were over, she certainly was. I don't think a candidate other than Clinton got an electoral vote.