• Shake-up at Democratic National Committee, Longtime Officials Ousted
    91 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Tetracycline;52796749]What are you even on about? You can definitely debate and suggest change all the while being insufferable. [/QUOTE] Uh, no. That's just called being a turd and nobody wants to listen to you. How do you think people actually get things done? By being assholes?
[QUOTE=Tetracycline;52796688]but to me it's embarrassing that being "nice" has anything to do with politics or ideology. Yet again, it is no surprise that conservatives get as much hate as they do.[/QUOTE] I think I understand why you put "nice" in quotes (because you are seeing it as capitulation, not genuine niceness) but why is being nice a bad thing?
I think that most people have given up on people who actually support Trump at this point, but it is definitely possible we can get people to advocate more leftly if we have a very attractive ideology, and you guys are right that this attractive ideology needs friendly voices to spread it. I think my kinda expectation of a conservative is more doomsday ignorant than it might typically be, or maybe we can just abandon those guys...
[QUOTE=zakedodead;52796758]I think I understand why you put "nice" in quotes (because you are seeing it as capitulation, not genuine niceness) but why is being nice a bad thing?[/QUOTE] Because apparently having discussion and discourse is dishonorable and weak, and the left should focus on being giant cunts and not letting other people present their views so the democratic party can just suck off corporate interests more and more. That's what I've gathered. [editline]19th October 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Tetracycline;52796760]or maybe we can just abandon those guys...[/QUOTE] And absolutely guarantee that a huge portion of the US voterbase stays conservative because you were too lazy to try. Grand idea.
[QUOTE=zakedodead;52796758]I think I understand why you put "nice" in quotes (because you are seeing it as capitulation, not genuine niceness) but why is being nice a bad thing?[/QUOTE] Because we should be focusing on the ideas underlying the message, not the tone. People are very much affected by tone, though, you are right. I will say that if I got shown something by someone who was really mean I would STILL evaluate it based on its truth rather than its tone.
You would really think having a common enemy like Trump would unite the party not split it up more.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;52796770]If I don't know the ideologies you perceive as "good", and I ask you about them, and you reply with some smug bullshit of "well we're certainly not the right, after all they're stupid and dumb", then there's a very real chance of me saying "wow what an ass". Congrats, you've turned an interested person away, and now they think less of you, and less of your ideology.[/QUOTE] Evaluate it based on its truth claims, use the socratic method, pin them down. If they're mean then it should feel better to beat them :v:
[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;52796771]You would really think having a common enemy like Trump would unite the party not split it up more.[/QUOTE] Welcome to the democratic party of the United States. It's not even as simple as "Progressives" like Sanders and then "Pseudo-Conservatives" like Perez. It's splintered beyond belief. You have the "Justice Democrats" that want to see outright reform or risk splitting off into a Bull Moose scenario, you have progressive democrats like Sanders, you have the conservative dems like Perez, you have the DINO conservatives that are just corporate puppets, and then you have radicals that only pretend to be democratic because it's not right wing. In comparison to European politics, the American "left" is generally considered to be right.
[QUOTE=Tetracycline;52796769]Because we should be focusing on the ideas underlying the message, not the tone. People are very much affected by tone, though, you are right. I will say that if I got shown something by someone who was really mean I would STILL evaluate it based on its truth rather than its tone.[/QUOTE] You can have the best idea in the world but if you can't get it past your head or past just being an idea that gets talked about among your group of friends/allies it won't matter. I would rather the Democratic party have 1 accomplishment than 100 ideas.
[QUOTE=Tetracycline;52796776]Evaluate it based on its truth claims, use the socratic method, pin them down. If they're mean then it should feel better to beat them :v:[/QUOTE] How euphoric. Too bad that a majority of the US doesn't even know what the socratic method is, let alone have the patience to deal with someone acting like an asswipe.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;52796262]If the dems don't effectively start shunning identity politics and start embracing the "why should the blue collar vote for us", then they're going to stay out of power. If they run another campaign like they did in 2016, they're going to continue losing base and clout. Hell I could have run against hillary and won, that's how piss poor of a performance she had.[/QUOTE] Hillary was terrible, anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot. I mean to suggest that the Democratic Party needs to stop suppressing progressive factions within the party and embrace a liberal agenda as opposed to the bullshit 90s conservative one they've been pushing. A truly progressive administration would act in the interests of the common man rather than large corporations and banks. The movement doesn't have to be extreme, but needs to at least be to a reasonable position to the left.
[QUOTE=Tetracycline;52796776]Evaluate it based on its truth claims, use the socratic method, pin them down.[B] If they're mean then it should feel better to beat them :[/B]v:[/QUOTE] This whole 'winning the argument' thing is is something that could stand to just fuck off and die in the deepest, darkest hole It shouldn't be about [I]winning the argument[/I] by [B]crushing your opponent[/B] with this that or the other thing or whatever the flying goddamn. If you're starting an argument for the sake of [I]wining the argument[/I] then I'm of the opinion you've pretty much already fucked up right out the gate. It should be about accruing knowledge of a subject and then seizing upon the opportunity to [I]share you fucking knowledge[/I] when it presents itself. You should be able to reason things out and at the [I]bare minimum[/I] should be seeking to help somebody understand yours or another position on a subject. It shouldn't be a competition to see who is [B]the most correct[/B], it should be a [I]collaboration[/I] to share the most information possible and build a new understanding about something out of it Wanting to just [I]win the argument[/I] is one of the reasons people wind up entrenched in their viewpoints in the first place [editline]19th October 2017[/editline] Like y'know what, this is actually a really good thread to use him as an example. Let's have a flashback to Bernie and his campaign that, for a Democrat candidate, had [I]incredible[/I] success in rust belt and agricultural states traditionally viewed as impenetrable Republican strongholds He sure as shit didn't get support out there by [I]winning arguments[/I], he got their support by [I]fostering understanding[/I] and showing that he actually gave a shit about them and was [I]willing to fucking listen[/I]. They were Americans in need of representation, not political opponents to be overcome. The whole campaign pulled people together from an incredibly wide political spectrum because one of the most important foundations of it was "Hey, things are broken, and we as Americans need to pull together and start working on those problems"
I agree with attempting to educate rather than divide but here is the crux of the problem: You must convince Tudd. There has been countless debate and argumentation over just about anything Tudd posts. For months. Over hundreds of threads by hundreds of people. That's a lot of Thanksgiving dinners by comparison. He has not changed any of his viewpoints despite constant challenge. He feels that he [I]must[/I] hold the positions he does because he sees [I]you[/I] as the uneducated one. If we can't find a way to convince the Tudds of the world, we would literally just be spinning our wheels when we could rather concentrate on pressing down the congress and our local elected officials that we bring them enough to heel that they'll listen and understand that a bridge has been crossed and their seat [I]is[/I] in peril. I don't think it's a bad idea - I just think that unless we can find a magic bullet our efforts are better spent convincing the not-Tudds of the world why they should care and most importantly ensuring that those in office right now are put to task to do their sworn duties and under a microscope.
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;52796938]I agree with attempting to educate rather than divide but here is the crux of the problem: You must convince Tudd. There has been countless debate and argumentation over just about anything Tudd posts. For months. Over hundreds of threads by hundreds of people. That's a lot of Thanksgiving dinners by comparison. He has not changed any of his viewpoints despite constant challenge. He feels that he [I]must[/I] hold the positions he does because he sees [I]you[/I] as the uneducated one. If we can't find a way to convince the Tudds of the world, we would literally just be spinning our wheels when we could rather concentrate on pressing down the congress and our local elected officials that we bring them enough to heel that they'll listen and understand that a bridge has been crossed and their seat [I]is[/I] in peril. I don't think it's a bad idea - I just think that unless we can find a magic bullet our efforts are better spent convincing the not-Tudds of the world why they should care and most importantly ensuring that those in office right now are put to task to do their sworn duties and under a microscope.[/QUOTE] Be careful you wouldn't want to get banned for talk like that. the mods have ears in the walls
I don't believe that Tudd is Lord Voldemort. You can still write his name and acknowledge his existence on these forums as far as I'm aware. I'm not calling him out or anything either; he just serves as a good example of someone that a lot of people have tried to change the mind of and who all have failed to do so.
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;52796938]I agree with attempting to educate rather than divide but here is the crux of the problem: You must convince Tudd. There has been countless debate and argumentation over just about anything Tudd posts. For months. Over hundreds of threads by hundreds of people. That's a lot of Thanksgiving dinners by comparison. He has not changed any of his viewpoints despite constant challenge. He feels that he [I]must[/I] hold the positions he does because he sees [I]you[/I] as the uneducated one. If we can't find a way to convince the Tudds of the world, we would literally just be spinning our wheels when we could rather concentrate on pressing down the congress and our local elected officials that we bring them enough to heel that they'll listen and understand that a bridge has been crossed and their seat [I]is[/I] in peril. I don't think it's a bad idea - I just think that unless we can find a magic bullet our efforts are better spent convincing the not-Tudds of the world why they should care and most importantly ensuring that those in office right now are put to task to do their sworn duties and under a microscope.[/QUOTE] You've got your targets backwards, friend. You don't try to convince the opposition zealots - you try to convince the less-resolved. The undecided, the uneducated (on political policies across the spectrum), and the apathetic. Those who don't see party lines but individual policies, those who don't even [b]know[/b] what the individual policies are, and those who aren't affected by the policies regardless of how they fall. The zealots are a loud but small minority, whereas the less-resolved are [b]far[/b] more numerous, and far more quiet (because they have no strong opinions to speak about). And you can bet your ass that if you don't convince the less-resolved on why your politics are [b]good[/b], then those opposition zealots will convince the less-resolved of why your politics are [b]bad[/b]. These zealots know that they don't have to win - all they need is for their opposition to lose.
The problem there being that those who are not zealots are often quiet about their beliefs, as you correctly state. Unless you're advocating going about and asking everyone on the street what their political views are (and in that case you'd best prepare to be constantly lied to) I don't think that'll gain much headway. They'll be watching what's going on with their local and federal representation besides - so if you bring those into check then they will also get 'the message'.
Arguing a point further entrenches people's beliefs, there has been research on this. I've heard the idea referred to as the backfire effect. You have to consider that some people are set in their ways and will not be receptive to new ideas. Arguing convinces some that their ideas hold enough merit to warrant further (biased) "research". Some just enjoy being obnoxious and contrarian.
[quote=Biotoxsin]Arguing a point further entrenches people's beliefs, there has been research on this. I've heard the idea referred to as the backfire effect. [/quote] Yes, there is this to a degree as well. Ultimately, I think we're better off uniting against (and for where relevant) our representation than attempting to 'divide and conquer the hearts and minds of America'.
The moderate wing of the DNC needs to fuck off already. They're the reason Trump won and they are going to fucking hand republicans the midterms if they don't stop fucking over the progressive wing of the party.
[QUOTE=TraderRager;52797014]The moderate wing of the DNC needs to fuck off already. Their the reason Trump won and they are going to fucking hand republicans the midterms if they don't stop fucking over the progressive wing of the party.[/QUOTE] I completely disagree. I think the opposite is true, actually. I think people like Pelosi or Feinstein or who make everything a racial issue are scaring off centrists, independents, and moderates.
I think it's going to be a balancing act to bring in those who voted begrudgingly for Trump and are regretting it, those who abstained from voting for a variety cake of reasons, and those who will vote for democrats as they're sick of every republican. You have to bring in those who voted for Sanders and got sick of having to make a compromise. You have to bring in those who voted for Clinton and were given grief for trying to protect the country from our country from our current predicament. Lastly you have everyone else, such as those who did not vote and those who thought believed(emphasis on the past tense) that Trump was better than Clinton. It's a tough net to make, but I think it's possible with hard work and compromise via people who hope for a good future in and beyond their life. We have to learn our pasts while not being stuck on mourning and shame for mistakes. Shame is a inner process of our body mourning past mistakes, and it lead to a deadly ouroboros. We can either bite down and cauterize our wounds, or we can let them get infected and die a long death.
[QUOTE=TraderRager;52797014]The moderate wing of the DNC needs to fuck off already. Their the reason Trump won and they are going to fucking hand republicans the midterms if they don't stop fucking over the progressive wing of the party.[/QUOTE] What moderates? A majority of the democrats are either progressives or conservatives on a sliding scale. Nobody is moderate
[QUOTE=TurtleeyFP;52796620]So, are these things the [I]Democratic Party[/I] has said, or are these things you've read on Tumblr/seen screencapped somewhere comedically/watched in Tudd's videos? Violently pushing identity politics is a talking point for radical liberals. The DNC, as mentioned in OP, is very elderly and corporatist cares much less about this than Fox News believes. Their problem was not focusing on blue-collar states won over in 2008 on the assumption they'd stay blue. If you're going to preach about ivory tower activists, find one and talk to him about it.[/QUOTE] Disappointing that everyone ignored this post to go after Tetracycline's low hanging fruit but I guess thats political discourse on message boards for you. [QUOTE=Zillamaster55;52796238]Seems like they're trying to kick out as many anti-perez/pro-bernie members as possible to wriggle out a more "unified" party. Say hello to Trump 2020 I guess[/QUOTE] My hope is that Democrats run another contentious candidate in 2020 and narrowly lose again because the left splits it's vote or doesn't show up, giving Trump a second term.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52797352] My hope is that Democrats run another contentious candidate in 2020 and narrowly lose again because the left splits it's vote or doesn't show up, giving Trump a second term.[/QUOTE] Why on earth would you hope for that?
[QUOTE=TurtleeyFP;52796620]So, are these things the [I]Democratic Party[/I] has said, or are these things you've read on Tumblr/seen screencapped somewhere comedically/watched in Tudd's videos? Violently pushing identity politics is a talking point for radical liberals. The DNC, as mentioned in OP, is very elderly and corporatist cares much less about this than Fox News believes. Their problem was not focusing on blue-collar states won over in 2008 on the assumption they'd stay blue. If you're going to preach about ivory tower activists, find one and talk to him about it.[/QUOTE] Maybe not the Democratic party itself, but Hillary's campaign and a lot of mainstream media really went deep with identity politics in the primary and the general. "Sexist Bernie bros" was basically a meme it was such a common smear. And the whole "first woman president so HISTORIC" talking point was incredibly common. It was all they had to fall back on because they couldn't win based on the merits of their policies because they were terrible. It wasn't the single issue that lost them the election but it did happen and it did divide the base. And then it devalues legitimate sexism ie: President Grab-them-by-the-pussy.
[QUOTE=Mr. Sarcastic;52797396]Why on earth would you hope for that?[/QUOTE] Though I sympathize with this response, Raidyr was pretty clear about that: [quote]giving Trump a second term.[/quote] Because he wants Trump to have a second term. As for why, well -- I guess he's satisfied with how Trump's run things so far. I don't know how a person could be satisfied with a lame duck president who's causing our international affairs to go haywire and jeapordizing our relationships with the intelligence community at large while cutting essential programs to save the rich some money at the cost of grand human suffering but... I guess there's someone for everything.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52797575]Maybe not the Democratic party itself, but Hillary's campaign and a lot of mainstream media really went deep with identity politics in the primary and the general. "Sexist Bernie bros" was basically a meme it was such a common smear. And the whole "first woman president so HISTORIC" talking point was incredibly common. It was all they had to fall back on because they couldn't win based on the merits of their policies because they were terrible. It wasn't the single issue that lost them the election but it did happen and it did divide the base. And then it devalues legitimate sexism ie: President Grab-them-by-the-pussy.[/QUOTE] I don't think Clintons policies were demonstrably more terrible than Trumps, who also ran a campaign rife with identity politics. The problem with invoking the idea that identity politics helped Clinton [I]lose [/I]is that you must tacitly concede that identity politics helped Trump [I]win[/I]. The fact that Clinton won the popular vote by a fair margin also calls into doubt the idea that specific campaign strategies that weren't related to exploiting the electoral college caused her loss. [editline]19th October 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;52798212]Though I sympathize with this response, Raidyr was pretty clear about that: Because he wants Trump to have a second term. As for why, well -- I guess he's satisfied with how Trump's run things so far. I don't know how a person could be satisfied with a lame duck president who's causing our international affairs to go haywire and jeapordizing our relationships with the intelligence community at large while cutting essential programs to save the rich some money at the cost of grand human suffering but... I guess there's someone for everything.[/QUOTE] It has less to do with Trump's presidency and more with frustration over the left/democrats/moderates who aren't Republicans et al to rally behind a decent candidate. Unless Trump's approval sees a massive increase over the next couple of years I really don't see him actually winning regardless of who the Democrats run, but ideally they will have learned their lesson from 2016. And my point is that if they haven't, then they deserve what happens in 2020.
[quote=Raidyr]And my point is that if they haven't, then they deserve what happens in 2020.[/quote] They very well might but I don't think we, the American people, deserve it. Further, I'm not entirely sure we could survive it.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;52796238]Seems like they're trying to kick out as many anti-perez/pro-bernie members as possible to wriggle out a more "unified" party. Say hello to Trump 2020 I guess[/QUOTE] And here I was thinking this was a shakeup in the opposite sense; that the establishment dregs had been evicted in favor of the new progressives headed by Sanders.. Shame on me for wishful thinking. [quote]The DNC denied any retaliation, saying the changes were an effort to diversify and freshen the party’s leadership and that all the party’s officers had a chance to offer input. They touted new additions like Marisa Richmond, a millennial black transgender activist, and the first DREAMer member, Ellie Perez, to point to the DNC's efforts at diversity.[/quote] Who gives a [B]fuck[/B]?? Don't worry about the fact that we're establishment hacks, we have a 20-something black transgender activist and an illegal immigrant on our committees. Whoop-de-fucking-doo!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.