Alexandria Ostacio Cortez was on Colbert last night. I could see her running for president in 10 years or so.

12 hours ago, Reddy said:

Personally not a fan of the DSA, and hate that a red rose twitter handle will be in Congress, BUT representation matters and for that reason, I think it's a good thing. I think many of the hot takes are blowing it out of proportion, however. Yes - progressives can win in places like *gasp* New York City. But the "DEMOCRATS NEED TO TAKE NOTE" thing is silly when OR, DSA, and other socialist style candidates have been crushed everywhere that isn't on a coast.

Like, being 3 or 4 out of dozens isn't a great record.

I'd love to know why, you would hate a part of the Democratic party that is helping bring excitement and youth to the party.  I'm sure it's something Bernie-bro or something blah blah.

I also love red scare shit coming from the Democratic party. 

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-explains-shocking-victory-takes-shot-trump-071642309.html

Ocasio-Cortez on Colbert...has a little Eva Mendes vibe, combined with the Boston University education and a lot of street smarts/high EQ.

Friends, honestly, I'm confused. I said it's great that she won, because representation matters. 

3 hours ago, GoSox05 said:

I'd love to know why, you would hate a part of the Democratic party that is helping bring excitement and youth to the party.  I'm sure it's something Bernie-bro or something blah blah.

I also love red scare shit coming from the Democratic party. 

Because they're not working to advance the Democratic Party?

11 minutes ago, Reddy said:

Friends, honestly, I'm confused. I said it's great that she won, because representation matters. 

You just said that you "hated" that a red rose twitter handle was getting in. 

I also don't know how a group that is part of the Democratic Party and is helping bring people into the party and be active in the party isn't helping or advancing the party.

I love how centrists were mad that people like Ralph Nader were running and that people were supporting him.  They said why don't you just join the Democrats and run in the primary.  So that is what DSA is doing and now that is bad as well.  I guess just fall in line with the party that has lost over a 1000 seats in the past few years and don't complain.

 

A DSA candidate also bumped out the house majority whip in Virginia in the Coastal Elite area of *checks notes* Harper's Ferry.

They aren't just winning on the coast, but even if they were, I'm still going to be happy about the best candidate possible in a given area. 

1 hour ago, Reddy said:

Because they're not working to advance the Democratic Party?

They are, though, or at least they're working to advance the cause of progressive politics via the Democratic party. You're letting your extreme distaste for a certain batch of Sanders supporters color your view imo. You've had multiple Sanders supporters in this thread who support electoral politics and getting the best candidate for a given race in try to explain that to you.

If you're saying that they're not advancing the Democratic Party and mean they're not advancing the views and politics of the multimillionaire class, then no they aren't and that's 100% good.

 

 

Edited June 29, 20187 yr by StrangeSox

 

9 hours ago, GoSox05 said:

You just said that you "hated" that a red rose twitter handle was getting in. 

I also don't know how a group that is part of the Democratic Party and is helping bring people into the party and be active in the party isn't helping or advancing the party.

I love how centrists were mad that people like Ralph Nader were running and that people were supporting him.  They said why don't you just join the Democrats and run in the primary.  So that is what DSA is doing and now that is bad as well.  I guess just fall in line with the party that has lost over a 1000 seats in the past few years and don't complain.

 

Am I bitter that groups like the DSA are part of the reason we are where we are today? Absolutely. Do they make life really fucking difficult for people like me trying to get someone elected in Iowa - where you can't go full progressive and win? Yup. So hey. I'm not a big fan, personally. That's allowed.

I still think it's great she won for other reasons, and I'm all for pushing the party left in areas where you aren't making it easier for a Republican to win. I'm Team Blue. That's it. That's my litmus test. I'm also a progressive and would love to see her policies enacted on a national scale. I just realize that's not a viable platform anywhere but the coasts at this moment in time.

 

On 6/29/2018 at 11:31 AM, Reddy said:

Because they're not working to advance the Democratic Party?

IMO, mainstream Dems aren't working to advance the Democratic Party. You know what would? Embracing DSA candidates. This is what the people want. The whole reason to run as a party is to win elections and gain control of the House/Senate/POTUS/SCOTUS. They're not doing that. Reddy, we're on the same side here. I don't think that transitioning from privately owned corporations to co-ops can happen in even one or two generations, it has to be done slowly. Although I am not a card carrying member of the DSA, mostly because I think capitalism can be saved if you heavily regulate it, I agree with a lot of their ideas in principle. Also, they aren't really a political party themselves. They are a branch of of the Democratic Party, that is gravely concerned about the erosion of labor rights and wage stagnation, also, people I know that are involved are huge into the social justice scene and support organizations like BLM. Contrary to popular belief, the ideals stated in the DOI and Constitution are not mutually exclusive with democratic socialist ideology, in fact, I'd argue the opposite. Democratic Socialism is basically what they have in Scandinavia. It seems to work pretty well there. Why not try it here? 

Edited July 1, 20187 yr by Jack Parkman

On 6/29/2018 at 9:41 PM, Reddy said:

Am I bitter that groups like the DSA are part of the reason we are where we are today? Absolutely. Do they make life really fucking difficult for people like me trying to get someone elected in Iowa - where you can't go full progressive and win? Yup. So hey. I'm not a big fan, personally. That's allowed.

I still think it's great she won for other reasons, and I'm all for pushing the party left in areas where you aren't making it easier for a Republican to win. I'm Team Blue. That's it. That's my litmus test. I'm also a progressive and would love to see her policies enacted on a national scale. I just realize that's not a viable platform anywhere but the coasts at this moment in time.

Reddy I think you're wrong. Bernie did way better in places like IA, MI, WI, CO and other states in Middle America. Hillary did better in urban areas with a large minority population. The economic message works better in more rural areas and the social message works better in urban areas. If you can't win a district going "full progressive" so to speak that is a heavily red district anyway and you're not going to change those people's fragile little minds. I'd argue going "full progressive" is the way to win deep purple areas, and the mainstream message is just throwing away purple districts to the GOP. 

Edited July 1, 20187 yr by Jack Parkman

 

 

7 hours ago, Jack Parkman said:

Reddy I think you're wrong. Bernie did way better in places like IA, MI, WI, CO and other states in Middle America. Hillary did better in urban areas with a large minority population. The economic message works better in more rural areas and the social message works better in urban areas. If you can't win a district going "full progressive" so to speak that is a heavily red district anyway and you're not going to change those people's fragile little minds. I'd argue going "full progressive" is the way to win deep purple areas, and the mainstream message is just throwing away purple districts to the GOP. 

None of that is true. He did better in caucus states, because those are less democratic and attract only activists. And it just so happens that a lot of states in the middle have caucuses.

I also wasn't talking about Bernie, but OR, DSA and Bernie-endorsed progressives since 2016. In everywhere except the coasts, those types of candidates have been roundly crushed over and over and over - especially here in Iowa and places like it. 

7 hours ago, Jack Parkman said:

IMO, mainstream Dems aren't working to advance the Democratic Party. You know what would? Embracing DSA candidates. This is what the people want. The whole reason to run as a party is to win elections and gain control of the House/Senate/POTUS/SCOTUS. They're not doing that. Reddy, we're on the same side here. I don't think that transitioning from privately owned corporations to co-ops can happen in even one or two generations, it has to be done slowly. Although I am not a card carrying member of the DSA, mostly because I think capitalism can be saved if you heavily regulate it, I agree with a lot of their ideas in principle. Also, they aren't really a political party themselves. They are a branch of of the Democratic Party, that is gravely concerned about the erosion of labor rights and wage stagnation, also, people I know that are involved are huge into the social justice scene and support organizations like BLM. Contrary to popular belief, the ideals stated in the DOI and Constitution are not mutually exclusive with democratic socialist ideology, in fact, I'd argue the opposite. Democratic Socialism is basically what they have in Scandinavia. It seems to work pretty well there. Why not try it here? 

Bud, the numbers don't support your argument! *The People* do not yet uniformly support progressives. Just the activist class. Those are VERY different things. 

1 hour ago, StrangeSox said:

 

 

If she gets it, why can't the rest of you? C'mon now. 

42 minutes ago, Reddy said:

If she gets it, why can't the rest of you? C'mon now. 

I'm sorry man, now isn't the time for that. Now is the time to rise up and take our democracy back. We're teetering on the edge of fascism, and there needs to be a strong opposition to it. There is no moderation currently, there is only swift and firm opposition to Trump's policies. No being a wimp. Mainstream Dems  are taking flowers to a gunfight, and committing political suicide. Those in Washington that have a (D) by their name need to grow a fucking pair of gonads and fucking stand up. Now isn't the time for civility, now is the time to be ruthless. The GOP has been ruthless for decades, we need to do it now. We have to save our democracy. 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/01/politics/susan-collins-supreme-court/index.html

If Collins and Murkowski opposed Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, they’d still have their seats until 2020 and 2022 respectively. Do you all think this is possible to happen, so that voters could decide what should happen with the Supreme Court nominee? I know that Trump selects the nominee but if the democrats win back the majority, is it possible to successfully block his nominee for some time?

3 hours ago, The Beast said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/01/politics/susan-collins-supreme-court/index.html

If Collins and Murkowski opposed Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, they’d still have their seats until 2020 and 2022 respectively. Do you all think this is possible to happen, so that voters could decide what should happen with the Supreme Court nominee? I know that Trump selects the nominee but if the democrats win back the majority, is it possible to successfully block his nominee for some time?

They'll play the game of "I'm not going to specifically ask about this case" and sign off on almost anyone on Trump's list, and the guys on that list are there because they will overturn Roe. That's the end result of the last election.

4 hours ago, Jack Parkman said:

I'm sorry man, now isn't the time for that. Now is the time to rise up and take our democracy back. We're teetering on the edge of fascism, and there needs to be a strong opposition to it. There is no moderation currently, there is only swift and firm opposition to Trump's policies. No being a wimp. Mainstream Dems  are taking flowers to a gunfight, and committing political suicide. Those in Washington that have a (D) by their name need to grow a fucking pair of gonads and fucking stand up. Now isn't the time for civility, now is the time to be ruthless. The GOP has been ruthless for decades, we need to do it now. We have to save our democracy. 

Mainstream moderate Dems are winning throughout middle America at the moment, and that's the only REAL way to fight Trump - at the ballot box. 

16 minutes ago, Reddy said:

Mainstream moderate Dems are winning throughout middle America at the moment, and that's the only REAL way to fight Trump - at the ballot box. 

I agree in principle, but if they let Trump get away with murder, they're not really on our side. Sorry, just the way I feel. 

7 hours ago, Reddy said:

None of that is true. He did better in caucus states, because those are less democratic and attract only activists. And it just so happens that a lot of states in the middle have caucuses.

I also wasn't talking about Bernie, but OR, DSA and Bernie-endorsed progressives since 2016. In everywhere except the coasts, those types of candidates have been roundly crushed over and over and over - especially here in Iowa and places like it. 

Harper's Ferry, VA is not the coast fyi.

 

But how do good candidates winning in the coasts make it harder for centrist candidates to win in Iowa? How do DSA orgs make it harder?

7 hours ago, Reddy said:

If she gets it, why can't the rest of you? C'mon now. 

This is explicitly been said multiple times in this thread. But you're still mad a Twitter rose won, and denigrated progressive candidates winning "only" in the coasts, and that DSA makes centrist in Iowa harder.

3 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

They'll play the game of "I'm not going to specifically ask about this case" and sign off on almost anyone on Trump's list, and the guys on that list are there because they will overturn Roe. That's the end result of the last election.

You still think they wouldn’t try and screw Trump over?