The Dems Don't Get It: How liberalism without a spine gave way to a party without a brain or soul

No.. The left said one half was "deplorable." Really no wink needed.

The very people who were saying that most of us aren't real Americans, no?

You can't just get a pass pretending Trump used identity politics anywhere near what the left did, and has done.

It wasn't close. Clinton ran an extremely wonky campaign, while Trump was 100% identity politics. We're seeing the same thing this year. Look at the campaign ads. Democrats are running on policy, while Republicans are running on crazy culture shit.

Sure, but liking the proposals or not doesn't change the nature of them.

But the point is that they were just symbolic. Meant that way and taken that way. There wasn't any serious policy discussion.
 
Exactly, democrat supporters will say that's not Democratic policy, it's just the voter base. That's true but they can't dissociate. Just like the GOP gets associated with neonazis, the Dems are now associated with:
Demons:
22499875_211740642698469_4098762246342049792_n_640x345_acf_cropped.jpg

Muslims, the most hated religious group in the US, the group that the average person remembers for 9/11, Charlie Hebdo, ISIS:
Shepard-GreaterThanFear-768x1024-225x300.jpg

Obama's sons:
buzzfeedpic13.jpg
Just boys being boys. Weren't you a kid once?
 
So, I’m just getting to this thread 10 pages in. Let me guess: big tent pragmatism has prevailed once again?
 
I think there’s a lot of truth to the OP and Trotsky is hardly the first person to point this out.

Barring some exceptions Democratic political leaders are giant pussies and suck at fighting. I think there is a lot of appetite on the left for real fighters (see the popularity of Warren and Sanders for examples). And given the state of the Republican Party, which is to win at all costs including the abandoning of long held principles and support of unethical demagogues, the left needs to become a party of hard nosed fighters who support the interests of regular folks.

When they go low they go high? Fuck that. Punch them in the face instead.
 
So you agree with me. As in your analogy, it's maxing the credit card that is the problem. Spending cuts are very necessary. We both think Trump and the Republican Congress were irresponsible not to make major spending cuts when they cuts taxes, right?
It’s not a great analogy but if you want to use it you have to realize the inability to pay the credit card is two fold, spending and income. You cannot separate the two of you want to discuss deficits.

Yet, because you’re very partisan you refuse to acknowledge that tax cuts are adding to deficits. It’s not arguable, and denying it just shows partisanship or complete ignorance.
 
You say we need to fight the fascists yet you praise fascists who support your political views and have remarked that one is even a hero in your mind. Further you are one of posters who loves to peg people as "partisan hacks" yet you want to now do away with bipartisanship now.

It is evident lies are fine as long as they are your lies, fascism is fine as long as its your brand of fascism, and hypocrisy is a lovely concept so long as it benefits you.

You just described a prototypical Marxist.

Times change, these vile hacks stay the same.
 
When they go low they go high? Fuck that. Punch them in the face instead.
The war room left doubling down on the violence.

@kpt018 , you're losing your mind man. Think about what you're doing and get a hold of yourself.
 
You created a long winded rant of an op simply to state the republicans are shit and no longer have any qualms about openly being shit which if stating the obvious and then you merely dropped a "metaphor" and then stated its "us against them" you didn't even present a sensible way to grow a spine that is allegedly missing from the party.

All i did was pointed out how biased and hypocritical you are being and you ran away from this entirely. Bringing up your past attitudes is apparently now irreverent and now you are outright resorting to lying about what you stated in regards to maga boy..

So, again, you are crying over my saying that you don't coddle fascists because I said "kick them in the teeth."

Okay, you're a pussy. But you could at least be a pussy with a greater appreciate for brevity.

You say we need to fight the fascists yet you praise fascists who support your political views and have remarked that one is even a hero in your mind. Further you are one of posters who loves to peg people as "partisan hacks" yet you want to do away with bipartisanship now.

LOL, of course you don't know what fascism means. Let me guess: you think it just refers to things that make you tremble?

And, furthermore, not being a "partisan hack" does not require false bipartisanship with an opposing party that lacks any principles, goals, or perspectives that overlap with your own. It merely requires that you hold your or any one party to the same standards as others and that you don't bend your policy preferences or ethical lines on the basis of party. You'll find plenty of posts by me criticizing the Democratic Party's politics and policies.

I'll tell you what. I've asked you multiple times and you avoided it but again, explain to me why I am apparently a conservative. I feel this is yet another highlight of how immediately bias and irrational your thought process tends to be. Do so in a mature logical manner free of your name calling and pretending like the idiocy on this board is so insufferable to you and then we can establish a dialogue in bigger detail in regards to spine growing and my perceived failures of the Democrats. In fact i would prefer if your response addressed nothing but this.

I said that I recalled you to be a conservative. What you've done here to make me suspect that I was right is engage in disingenuous deflections on behalf of a conservative party, spout moronic partisan buzz phrases about Hillary being corrupt and Kavanaugh's allegations being manufactured, and generally shown yourself to be entirely disinterested in the topic of the thread and lacking in intelligence. These are all things that would make someone suspect you're a self-styled conservative or, if you're one of those faux-independents, a reactionary.
 
So, again, you are crying over my saying that you don't coddle fascists because I said "kick them in the teeth."

Okay, you're a pussy. But you could at least be a pussy with a greater appreciate for brevity.



LOL, of course you don't know what fascism means. Let me guess: you think it just refers to things that make you tremble?

And, furthermore, not being a "partisan hack" does not require false bipartisanship with an opposing party that lacks any principles, goals, or perspectives that overlap with your own. It merely requires that you hold your or any one party to the same standards as others and that you don't bend your policy preferences or ethical lines on the basis of party. You'll find plenty of posts by me criticizing the Democratic Party's politics and policies.



I said that I recalled you to be a conservative. What you've done here to make me suspect that I was right is engage in disingenuous deflections on behalf of a conservative party, spout moronic partisan buzz phrases about Hillary being corrupt and Kavanaugh's allegations being manufactured, and generally shown yourself to be entirely disinterested in the topic of the thread and lacking in intelligence. These are all things that would make someone suspect you're a self-styled conservative or, if you're one of those faux-independents, a reactionary.

*Sigh.

Too obvious.
 
ChlZGdOW0AAFhUD.jpg


Hilldawg's slogan was literally identity politics. Which was odd because she was so irrelevant to her campaign. She could have been replaced by any woman and run the same campaign.
That’s not what most people are referring to when they discuss identity politics. Sure, she was taking advantage of being the first female nominee but she wanted a lot of men to vote for her!!! The disgusting but key part of identity politics is exclusion.
 
Back
Top