That’s not what I said. There are better ways to fight.
Fight the turly terrible candidate choices, not the ones who you might actually have a chance of working productively with.
Chuck Schumer is abysmal and needs to step down, and he was wrong about the budget. But the essence of his argument has some truth - politics is a two-way street. In the rare case where there is a possibility of cooperation, that sets a better standard and will likely be more effective than endless partisanship.
Fight the turly terrible candidate choices, not the ones who you might actually have a chance of working productively with.
This makes absolutely no sense, why not fight both?
Is there a fight limit you don’t want them to waste on small fries? Or is their energy limited due to exhaustion from all their paid appearances and campaigning tours.
Name one good reason why they shouldn’t be fighting ever single battle!
Why fight when (a) it’s not going to change anything and (b) winning the fight gets you a worse outcome.
If it isn’t going to change anything but there’s a reason to fight on principle, by all means. But fighting for its own sake makes you look stupid and immature.
Fight the turly terrible candidate choices, not the ones who you might actually have a chance of working productively with.
Things centrists never say about progressives. Because centrists only have intentions of working with their republican buddies to accomplish their mutual goals.
I think you’re being understandably but uncessarily cynical for the purposes of this conversation.
I proudly call myself a far-leftist. Even a “woke” one. But victory for the ideals that drive us will not come from endless othering of those who we disagree with. Perfect is the enemy of the good, so the saying goes. I would say it’s now the enemy of even just a little bit better as opposed to so much worse.
With that being said, we should never compromise on expressing what we actually believe. I want universal basic income, guaranteed minimum income according to a livable wage, weath taxes, and much more aggressive income taxation of the 1% and 0.1%. I want universal healthcare, open borders, and end to private prisons. But fuck me if I won’t vote to make what social security we do have just a little bit better.
As politicians and lawmakers, we need to be the bigger party in the room that doesn’t stoop to their level.
I know right now things demand radical defence of democracy, but that doesn’t happen by politicians giving up what little power and platform they might have. They can go to work when they’re not out on the streets with the protestors.
I think you’re being understandably but uncessarily cynical for the purposes of this conversation.
Every time I think I’m too cynical, democrats prove me wrong. They don’t get to come back from supporting a genocide.
I proudly call myself a far-leftist. Even a “woke” one.
But?
But victory for the ideals that drive us will not come from endless othering of those who we disagree with.
Oh yeah. Wouldn’t want to other those people who carry swastika flags and chant “Jews will not replace us” after all, they’re the only demographic that matters to the democratic party, and they’re willing to throw all of us under the bus for a 1% chance at getting a single nazi vote. You’re bus fodder just like me and don’t you forget it. The femtosecond republicans express the slightest displeasure at your existence, you’ll be under the bus with all the disposables you don’t consider worth defending because it might other some contemptible nazi.
With that being said, we should never compromise on expressing what we actually believe.
With every betrayal, democrats converge on expressing what they actually believe.
I want universal basic income, guaranteed minimum income according to a livable wage, weath taxes, and much more aggressive income taxation of the 1% and 0.1%. I want universal healthcare, open borders, and end to private prisons.
There is no major party that does not fight against everything you claim to stand for here.
As politicians and lawmakers, we need to be the bigger party in the room that doesn’t stoop to their level.
We’re dealing with nazis. You don’t win over nazis by appeasement. You don’t win them over with magnanimity. They do not want to parlay. They want you dead.
I know right now things demand radical defence of democracy, but that doesn’t happen by politicians giving up what little power and platform they might have.
Then maybe they should stop giving up whatever power they have every time they have the opportunity to do so.
How would you deal with these Nazis and other fellow Americans who you disagree with? Let’s say you’re the new president and your party controls both houses of government.
Trump is allowing people to be disappeared to El Salvador. Would you do the same to these people you call Nazis? What about the 45 million or so people who voted for this shit?
I agree the political situation sucks. But solutions aren’t easy, and eventually, at the end of the day, we have to be united or there is only war and violence forever.
You don’t have to be a centrist to be able to work with people whose priorities are not the same as your own. Most modern democracies actually have fairly healthy cooperation between different political parties who are quite far apart on the issues that matter the most to them.
No, they’re not. What happened to Obama’s scotus pick proves you can gum up this process and prevent appointments. And you can do it without losing voters.
Democrats reject this guy, a worse candidate is put forward next. Seems like a stupid hill to die on. They’re going to appoint somebody.
Edit: I didn’t know he’d be confirmed anyway. If true, then I agree a Democratic rejection out of principle would have been a better statement.
Let me get this clearly: because if they fight back, maga will be even nastier, so Dems did the right thing to save us from a worse outcome?
Well fuck me, I’ve been at unfair to them. I owe them an apology.
That’s not what I said. There are better ways to fight.
Fight the turly terrible candidate choices, not the ones who you might actually have a chance of working productively with.
Chuck Schumer is abysmal and needs to step down, and he was wrong about the budget. But the essence of his argument has some truth - politics is a two-way street. In the rare case where there is a possibility of cooperation, that sets a better standard and will likely be more effective than endless partisanship.
This makes absolutely no sense, why not fight both?
Is there a fight limit you don’t want them to waste on small fries? Or is their energy limited due to exhaustion from all their paid appearances and campaigning tours.
Name one good reason why they shouldn’t be fighting ever single battle!
Why fight when (a) it’s not going to change anything and (b) winning the fight gets you a worse outcome.
If it isn’t going to change anything but there’s a reason to fight on principle, by all means. But fighting for its own sake makes you look stupid and immature.
Things centrists never say about progressives. Because centrists only have intentions of working with their republican buddies to accomplish their mutual goals.
I think you’re being understandably but uncessarily cynical for the purposes of this conversation.
I proudly call myself a far-leftist. Even a “woke” one. But victory for the ideals that drive us will not come from endless othering of those who we disagree with. Perfect is the enemy of the good, so the saying goes. I would say it’s now the enemy of even just a little bit better as opposed to so much worse.
With that being said, we should never compromise on expressing what we actually believe. I want universal basic income, guaranteed minimum income according to a livable wage, weath taxes, and much more aggressive income taxation of the 1% and 0.1%. I want universal healthcare, open borders, and end to private prisons. But fuck me if I won’t vote to make what social security we do have just a little bit better.
As politicians and lawmakers, we need to be the bigger party in the room that doesn’t stoop to their level.
I know right now things demand radical defence of democracy, but that doesn’t happen by politicians giving up what little power and platform they might have. They can go to work when they’re not out on the streets with the protestors.
Every time I think I’m too cynical, democrats prove me wrong. They don’t get to come back from supporting a genocide.
But?
Oh yeah. Wouldn’t want to other those people who carry swastika flags and chant “Jews will not replace us” after all, they’re the only demographic that matters to the democratic party, and they’re willing to throw all of us under the bus for a 1% chance at getting a single nazi vote. You’re bus fodder just like me and don’t you forget it. The femtosecond republicans express the slightest displeasure at your existence, you’ll be under the bus with all the disposables you don’t consider worth defending because it might other some contemptible nazi.
With every betrayal, democrats converge on expressing what they actually believe.
There is no major party that does not fight against everything you claim to stand for here.
We’re dealing with nazis. You don’t win over nazis by appeasement. You don’t win them over with magnanimity. They do not want to parlay. They want you dead.
Then maybe they should stop giving up whatever power they have every time they have the opportunity to do so.
How would you deal with these Nazis and other fellow Americans who you disagree with? Let’s say you’re the new president and your party controls both houses of government.
Trump is allowing people to be disappeared to El Salvador. Would you do the same to these people you call Nazis? What about the 45 million or so people who voted for this shit?
I agree the political situation sucks. But solutions aren’t easy, and eventually, at the end of the day, we have to be united or there is only war and violence forever.
centrists only want to unite with republicans. They only want to oppose the left.
You don’t have to be a centrist to be able to work with people whose priorities are not the same as your own. Most modern democracies actually have fairly healthy cooperation between different political parties who are quite far apart on the issues that matter the most to them.
No, they’re not. What happened to Obama’s scotus pick proves you can gum up this process and prevent appointments. And you can do it without losing voters.
Democrats are choosing to aide the trump admin.
Nobody is voting for another year and a half. And hardly anyone for another three and a half years. Democrats need to pick the battles that matter.
And by an astounding coincidence, none do.
Plenty do. There is another budget vote in less than half a year.
Oh cool. Like the continuing resolution they caved on.
Cynicism like this is why humanity is doomed. Or am I misreading you and you actually think things can (if not will) get better?
They didn’t betray you when they sided with trump.
I don’t follow.
Empty optimism like yours which keeps the masses docile is why humanity is doomed.
What are you actually trying to say the solution is?