Benn Roe wrote:friendship wrote:AOC is the Peavey amps of politicans
Solid, reliable, gets the job done, but ultimately unexciting? I'm not sure what you're getting at here. She seems more like Science to me.
Moderator: Ghost Hip
Benn Roe wrote:friendship wrote:AOC is the Peavey amps of politicans
Solid, reliable, gets the job done, but ultimately unexciting? I'm not sure what you're getting at here. She seems more like Science to me.
Bassist_Diver wrote:As I've said before, AOC needs to learn two very important things if she wants to stay around for a while:
1. Demanding Congress adopt every single platform RIGHT FUCKING NOW never works and often breeds resentment and fractures/averts alliances. Especially if you do it in a situation where there's no way in hell the opposition-controlled sister chamber and White House will hop on board.
It didn't work for the tea party
nor did it work with the alt right or Obama's first term, both of which were situations where the same party controlled Congress and the White House!
2. Her district is very left-leaning. My district is not. The blue districts that turned their backs on Hillary in 2016 are not. What she wants may very well work for her constituents, but as we saw in the 2018 election it does not mesh well with other parts of the country, even those that are younger and more left-leaning than their parents.
jirodreamsofdank wrote:Her policies are very popular, even among Republicans. This is standard "you have to be measured and moderate" hand-wringing that has no relationship to reality.
Inconuucl wrote:You can't kill Strymon, it'll just resurrect 3 days later.
BitchPudding wrote:Despite all my rage, I am still just eating tacos in a cage.
Inconuucl wrote:Welcome to ilf, we have three jokes and twelve posters. <3
jrfox92 wrote:jirodreamsofdank wrote:Her policies are very popular, even among Republicans. This is standard "you have to be measured and moderate" hand-wringing that has no relationship to reality.
Okay, seriously.
I need to know what you're smoking.
Inconuucl wrote:You can't kill Strymon, it'll just resurrect 3 days later.
BitchPudding wrote:Despite all my rage, I am still just eating tacos in a cage.
Inconuucl wrote:Welcome to ilf, we have three jokes and twelve posters. <3
Bassist_Diver wrote:The blue districts that turned their backs on Hillary in 2016 are not.
jirodreamsofdank wrote:Bassist_Diver wrote:As I've said before, AOC needs to learn two very important things if she wants to stay around for a while:
1. Demanding Congress adopt every single platform RIGHT FUCKING NOW never works and often breeds resentment and fractures/averts alliances. Especially if you do it in a situation where there's no way in hell the opposition-controlled sister chamber and White House will hop on board.
That's why you pass Medicare for All and Green New Deal bills - to force the opposition to vote down or veto these very popular policies.
It didn't work for the tea party
The forces behind the Tea Party effectively control the country today and rendered 3/4 of Obama's years as moot.nor did it work with the alt right or Obama's first term, both of which were situations where the same party controlled Congress and the White House!
In 2009-10, Obama failed to lead from the front and enforce party discipline, which is why it was historically ineffectual for a single-party government.
He was obsessed with reasonable Republicans and bipartisanship, if he just proved how rational he was eventually the Republicans would come around.
Obviously, this was bullshit. The only bipartisan consensus this country has reached in the last 60 years has revolved around bombing people of color on the other side of the world, overthrowing people of color who get uppity and incarcerating people of color at home.
2. Her district is very left-leaning. My district is not. The blue districts that turned their backs on Hillary in 2016 are not. What she wants may very well work for her constituents, but as we saw in the 2018 election it does not mesh well with other parts of the country, even those that are younger and more left-leaning than their parents.
Her policies are very popular, even among Republicans. This is standard "you have to be measured and moderate" hand-wringing that has no relationship to reality.
Our public discourse is ruled by some vague idea of "socially liberal and fiscally conservative" moderation being the common sense middle ground - thing is, there is no constituency for that. There are far more economically liberal and socially conservative voters than vice versa - and most fall into lib/lib or con/con.
Climate change is a guillotine hanging over all of our heads by a rapidly fraying rope. The political class's plan is, at best on the establishment Democratic side, to ignore it and continue kicking it down the road.
Benn Roe wrote:Bassist_Diver wrote:The blue districts that turned their backs on Hillary in 2016 are not.
Jiro already said virtually everything I wanted to respond with, and then some, but the above quoted phrase needs some attention too. Are you implying that people stayed home in 2016 because Hillary was too far to the left? If anything, many people stayed home because she has historically been such a textbook moderate, she doesn't really stand for anything. Bernie forced her to the left, but nobody seemed to be buying it. But that's really the thing about this myth of the level-headed moderate, swooping in to enact sensible bipartisan compromise: what counts as "the middle" is constantly moving to the left, so moderates just come across as disingenuous and noncomittal to most people. I think you'd be surprised how many leftists "turned their backs on Hillary", by way of just not voting at all.
Bassist_Diver wrote:That will get shot down in the Senate or vetoed by the dipshit in chief. All that does is delay implementing extremely important legislature. If they were separate bills this wouldn't be a problem, but doing everything in one-fell swoop has never worked.
Nice strawman. None of those have anything to do with trying to implement legislation that pushes a majority of a platform in a single bill.
LOL no. See above replies
Refer back to my first point. Make it a separate bill and DON'T include all the other state-funded pieces that still scare the shit out of enough people to make the bill unpassable in the Senate.
Benn Roe wrote:Bassist_Diver wrote:I think you'd be surprised how many leftists "turned their backs on Hillary", by way of just not voting at all.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 13 guests