Page 3 of 91

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 26 Sep 2016, 2:37pm
by eumaas
Also this (the images not the comments):



Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 26 Sep 2016, 2:41pm
by eumaas
Flex wrote:
eumaas wrote:Liberal Twitter has now united on the proposition that George W. Bush is a good guy.

But also, Ralph Nader is still evil even tho Bush was Actually Good.
This little move to veneration for Dubya over the weekend has made me ill.
To be fair, forgiveness is a trait of God.

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 26 Sep 2016, 2:52pm
by Dr. Medulla
That is beyond repulsive. Disgusting Orwellian rewriting of events and their consequences. Choosing Clinton out of fear is the only moral justification for giving her your vote.

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 26 Sep 2016, 3:21pm
by JennyB
Flex wrote:
eumaas wrote:Liberal Twitter has now united on the proposition that George W. Bush is a good guy.

But also, Ralph Nader is still evil even tho Bush was Actually Good.
This little move to veneration for Dubya over the weekend has made me ill.
It's crazy. I don't get it. I mean, he does stuff to kind of make you feel sorry for him (his "art"), but FFS, he's not a good guy.

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 27 Sep 2016, 2:16am
by Silent Majority
If you're going to vote enthusiastically for Clinton, there's probably very little that Bush did which you disappove of. It's only the sports rival approach to the two party system that meant a lot of Dems hated him. They've shown with their Obama adulation how accepting they are of ongoing war.

Likewise, the UK soft left are happier to vote Theresa May than Corbyn. Ideas and principles don't seem to matter to them, any more than wanting Arsenal to beat Chelsea comes down to a philosophical difference.

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 27 Sep 2016, 10:46am
by BostonBeaneater
JennyB wrote:
Flex wrote:
eumaas wrote:Liberal Twitter has now united on the proposition that George W. Bush is a good guy.

But also, Ralph Nader is still evil even tho Bush was Actually Good.
This little move to veneration for Dubya over the weekend has made me ill.
It's crazy. I don't get it. I mean, he does stuff to kind of make you feel sorry for him (his "art"), but FFS, he's not a good guy.

It's a bygones be bygones sort of thing I think. I don't like W. but seeing his mug just doesn't elicit the contempt it did eight years ago. Compared to Trump and his chomo* sidekick GW seems awfully palatable.


*Chomo: prison slang for child molester.

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 27 Sep 2016, 12:23pm
by JennyB
BostonBeaneater wrote:
JennyB wrote:
Flex wrote:
eumaas wrote:Liberal Twitter has now united on the proposition that George W. Bush is a good guy.

But also, Ralph Nader is still evil even tho Bush was Actually Good.
This little move to veneration for Dubya over the weekend has made me ill.
It's crazy. I don't get it. I mean, he does stuff to kind of make you feel sorry for him (his "art"), but FFS, he's not a good guy.

It's a bygones be bygones sort of thing I think. I don't like W. but seeing his mug just doesn't elicit the contempt it did eight years ago. Compared to Trump and his chomo* sidekick GW seems awfully palatable.


*Chomo: prison slang for child molester.
Pence is a chomo? Also, how do you know of such slang? :shifty:

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 27 Sep 2016, 12:45pm
by Inder
Silent Majority wrote:If you're going to vote enthusiastically for Clinton, there's probably very little that Bush did which you disappove of. It's only the sports rival approach to the two party system that meant a lot of Dems hated him. They've shown with their Obama adulation how accepting they are of ongoing war.

Likewise, the UK soft left are happier to vote Theresa May than Corbyn. Ideas and principles don't seem to matter to them, any more than wanting Arsenal to beat Chelsea comes down to a philosophical difference.
Bang on.

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 27 Sep 2016, 1:41pm
by BostonBeaneater
JennyB wrote:
BostonBeaneater wrote:
JennyB wrote:
Flex wrote:
eumaas wrote:Liberal Twitter has now united on the proposition that George W. Bush is a good guy.

But also, Ralph Nader is still evil even tho Bush was Actually Good.
This little move to veneration for Dubya over the weekend has made me ill.
It's crazy. I don't get it. I mean, he does stuff to kind of make you feel sorry for him (his "art"), but FFS, he's not a good guy.

It's a bygones be bygones sort of thing I think. I don't like W. but seeing his mug just doesn't elicit the contempt it did eight years ago. Compared to Trump and his chomo* sidekick GW seems awfully palatable.


*Chomo: prison slang for child molester.
Pence is a chomo? Also, how do you know of such slang? :shifty:
He's a total chomo. I read a lot about prison slang and culture. I'm forward thinking.

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 27 Sep 2016, 9:11pm
by eumaas
Forgot to share the best one.


Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 10 Nov 2016, 1:07am
by Flex
The woke liberal refusal to self-evaluate is coming along quite nicely: http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/09/opinions/ ... index.html

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 10 Nov 2016, 10:43am
by eumaas
Flex wrote:The woke liberal refusal to self-evaluate is coming along quite nicely: http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/09/opinions/ ... index.html
Not sure I want to hate-read this morning. Does she acknowledge abstention and disenfranchisement at any point?

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 10 Nov 2016, 10:54am
by Dr. Medulla
Flex wrote:The woke liberal refusal to self-evaluate is coming along quite nicely: http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/09/opinions/ ... index.html
That makes me think of something I related earlier this summer: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=3762&p=440665#p440665

I've read so many angry pieces by women the last couple days blaming female Trump voters for selling themselves out. What isn't appreciated is that we can be divided and grouped in so many ways—sex/gender, race, nationality/region, class, generation, etc—and circumstances often dictate how we rank these things. Feminism may be strongest amongst middle-class white women because race and class aren't a great concern for them—that is, those categories are already advantages—whereas gender discrimination is a constant problem. So, of course, feminism is high in their self-perception and demands. For economically marginalized women, class may matter more. We can't say for certain that the women who voted for Trump don't care about his misogyny and that they knowingly sold out other women. It might just be that paying the bills mattered more and they took a chance with the guy who said the economy stinks and he'd turn it around. Shitting on those women for being stupid may feel satisfying, but it doesn't get you any closer to understanding the rationale of female Trump voters.

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 10 Nov 2016, 1:09pm
by Flex
eumaas wrote:Not sure I want to hate-read this morning. Does she acknowledge abstention and disenfranchisement at any point?
No. Her conclusion is that too many poor, uneducated women have chosen the safety and security of patriarchy over real freedom. No mention of declining voter rates.

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Posted: 10 Nov 2016, 1:56pm
by JennyB
Flex wrote:
eumaas wrote:Not sure I want to hate-read this morning. Does she acknowledge abstention and disenfranchisement at any point?
No. Her conclusion is that too many poor, uneducated women have chosen the safety and security of patriarchy over real freedom. No mention of declining voter rates.
No mention of voter ID laws, I would imagine.