HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why Hasn't The American L...

Sun May 5, 2013, 04:46 PM

Why Hasn't The American Left Convinced More Americans To Vote For More Progressive Candidates?

All of our issues would be better served if more Americans voted for progressives across all elective offices, city, county, state, and federal.

For example, income equality would be better addressed if forming unions were made easier, but we need progressive federal and state legislators to make that happen.

Does anyone have an answer?

268 replies, 36533 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 268 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why Hasn't The American Left Convinced More Americans To Vote For More Progressive Candidates? (Original post)
Yavin4 May 2013 OP
villager May 2013 #1
mattclearing May 2013 #69
HughBeaumont May 2013 #100
devilgrrl May 2013 #236
deutsey May 2013 #104
Kurovski Mar 2014 #268
Recursion May 2013 #2
joshcryer May 2013 #25
Number23 May 2013 #55
DCBob May 2013 #64
LeftInTX May 2013 #79
BlueCaliDem May 2013 #66
LostOne4Ever May 2013 #67
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #71
Doctor_J May 2013 #75
bluestate10 May 2013 #164
AgingAmerican May 2013 #233
MotherPetrie May 2013 #251
Historic NY May 2013 #78
rhett o rick May 2013 #84
Marr May 2013 #85
Number23 May 2013 #89
rhett o rick May 2013 #94
Number23 May 2013 #98
rhett o rick May 2013 #99
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #120
rhett o rick May 2013 #134
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #143
rhett o rick May 2013 #147
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #148
rhett o rick May 2013 #149
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #150
Number23 May 2013 #154
AgingAmerican May 2013 #203
Number23 May 2013 #207
AgingAmerican May 2013 #222
Number23 May 2013 #225
Number23 May 2013 #156
woo me with science May 2013 #123
rhett o rick May 2013 #135
Number23 May 2013 #157
Marr May 2013 #234
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #244
Marr May 2013 #245
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #246
Marr May 2013 #248
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #249
Marr May 2013 #250
Tarheel_Dem May 2013 #253
Marr May 2013 #254
Tarheel_Dem May 2013 #255
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #258
Marr May 2013 #259
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #260
Marr May 2013 #261
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #262
Number23 May 2013 #153
LostOne4Ever May 2013 #175
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #177
AgingAmerican May 2013 #181
Number23 May 2013 #183
raouldukelives May 2013 #178
Number23 May 2013 #184
AgingAmerican May 2013 #180
Number23 May 2013 #182
AgingAmerican May 2013 #185
Number23 May 2013 #186
AgingAmerican May 2013 #196
Number23 May 2013 #206
AgingAmerican May 2013 #221
Number23 May 2013 #223
AgingAmerican May 2013 #240
LostOne4Ever May 2013 #187
Number23 May 2013 #189
LostOne4Ever May 2013 #190
AgingAmerican May 2013 #197
LostOne4Ever May 2013 #219
AgingAmerican May 2013 #224
Number23 May 2013 #226
LostOne4Ever May 2013 #227
Tarheel_Dem May 2013 #231
Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #264
freshwest Mar 2014 #267
JDPriestly May 2013 #235
Art_from_Ark May 2013 #166
Number23 May 2013 #168
Art_from_Ark May 2013 #170
Number23 May 2013 #208
Art_from_Ark May 2013 #239
Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #265
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #93
Bobbie Jo May 2013 #92
villager May 2013 #117
rhett o rick May 2013 #136
bluestate10 May 2013 #165
rhett o rick May 2013 #172
Marr May 2013 #201
cprise May 2013 #91
Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #109
cprise May 2013 #241
Fumesucker May 2013 #243
sibelian May 2013 #96
SidDithers May 2013 #102
HappyMe May 2013 #108
HiPointDem May 2013 #125
bluestate10 May 2013 #167
HiPointDem May 2013 #179
Scurrilous May 2013 #131
Warren DeMontague May 2013 #133
CakeGrrl May 2013 #242
jazzimov May 2013 #3
nenagh May 2013 #106
Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #111
burnodo May 2013 #4
truebluegreen May 2013 #14
winter is coming May 2013 #77
bluestate10 May 2013 #169
burnodo May 2013 #176
geckosfeet May 2013 #5
blkmusclmachine May 2013 #6
Yavin4 May 2013 #10
Brigid May 2013 #21
villager May 2013 #30
Egalitarian Thug May 2013 #247
Starry Messenger May 2013 #7
Yavin4 May 2013 #8
Starry Messenger May 2013 #11
Yavin4 May 2013 #13
Starry Messenger May 2013 #17
Rex May 2013 #28
Starry Messenger May 2013 #40
Rex May 2013 #44
treestar May 2013 #50
Starry Messenger May 2013 #52
treestar May 2013 #57
Starry Messenger May 2013 #60
Yavin4 May 2013 #140
Starry Messenger May 2013 #144
Yavin4 May 2013 #145
Eleanors38 May 2013 #110
Yavin4 May 2013 #139
Bluenorthwest May 2013 #29
Yavin4 May 2013 #32
alarimer May 2013 #9
truebluegreen May 2013 #15
socialist_n_TN May 2013 #65
leveymg May 2013 #12
Yavin4 May 2013 #16
Rex May 2013 #24
KoKo May 2013 #80
KoKo May 2013 #82
tabbycat31 May 2013 #19
joshcryer May 2013 #26
tabbycat31 May 2013 #38
Bluenorthwest May 2013 #45
tabbycat31 May 2013 #49
Occulus May 2013 #63
Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #112
Bluenorthwest May 2013 #41
LineLineLineLineReply 2
tabbycat31 May 2013 #48
Enrique May 2013 #18
matt819 May 2013 #20
Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #113
cali May 2013 #22
Rex May 2013 #23
Yavin4 May 2013 #27
Rex May 2013 #31
Yavin4 May 2013 #34
Rex May 2013 #37
Bluenorthwest May 2013 #43
treestar May 2013 #47
Octafish May 2013 #33
Yavin4 May 2013 #36
Rex May 2013 #39
treestar May 2013 #46
Rex May 2013 #51
treestar May 2013 #53
Rex May 2013 #56
rhett o rick May 2013 #161
Marr May 2013 #86
Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #114
Jamaal510 May 2013 #217
Octafish May 2013 #42
Hippo_Tron May 2013 #61
LWolf May 2013 #35
Eleanors38 May 2013 #116
NewJeffCT May 2013 #132
Douglas Carpenter May 2013 #54
Rise Rebel Resist May 2013 #58
Hippo_Tron May 2013 #59
limpyhobbler May 2013 #62
slipslidingaway May 2013 #68
nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #70
steve2470 May 2013 #72
Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #115
Eleanors38 May 2013 #118
Tierra_y_Libertad May 2013 #73
Doctor_J May 2013 #74
Skittles May 2013 #76
Dyedinthewoolliberal May 2013 #81
MannyGoldstein May 2013 #83
HooptieWagon May 2013 #87
hughee99 May 2013 #88
Zorra May 2013 #90
dogknob May 2013 #95
Marr May 2013 #97
woo me with science May 2013 #122
Marr May 2013 #126
Yavin4 May 2013 #142
Marr May 2013 #202
HughBeaumont May 2013 #101
djean111 May 2013 #103
YoungDemCA May 2013 #257
Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #105
Number23 May 2013 #162
Marr May 2013 #204
Number23 May 2013 #209
Marr May 2013 #212
Number23 May 2013 #215
Tarheel_Dem May 2013 #263
Puzzledtraveller May 2013 #107
AgingAmerican May 2013 #200
Skraxx May 2013 #119
AgingAmerican May 2013 #199
woo me with science May 2013 #121
djean111 May 2013 #124
Yavin4 May 2013 #127
limpyhobbler May 2013 #129
Zorra May 2013 #130
Yavin4 May 2013 #138
Zorra May 2013 #174
Number23 May 2013 #160
Zorra May 2013 #128
scarletwoman May 2013 #159
Lydia Leftcoast May 2013 #137
Yavin4 May 2013 #141
Lydia Leftcoast May 2013 #173
morningfog May 2013 #146
dem in texas May 2013 #151
graham4anything May 2013 #152
kentuck May 2013 #155
derby378 May 2013 #158
Hotler May 2013 #163
Zoeisright May 2013 #171
brooklynite May 2013 #192
Zorra May 2013 #198
Jamaal510 May 2013 #218
Zorra May 2013 #220
Nevernose May 2013 #228
HiPointDem May 2013 #188
brooklynite May 2013 #191
stevenleser May 2013 #193
Yavin4 May 2013 #194
stevenleser May 2013 #195
Number23 May 2013 #211
Atman May 2013 #205
Prism May 2013 #210
librechik May 2013 #213
Spike89 May 2013 #214
Number23 May 2013 #216
Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #266
Warpy May 2013 #229
LeftInTX May 2013 #230
aaaaaa5a May 2013 #232
fujiyama May 2013 #237
grahamhgreen May 2013 #238
Agnosticsherbet May 2013 #252
YoungDemCA May 2013 #256

Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 04:51 PM

1. Well, between the "lone nuts" and the private plane "accidents," it seems progressives aren't

...allowed to get too damn far on the national stage, whether they're voted for or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #1)

Sun May 5, 2013, 07:56 PM

69. dingdingdingdingding! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #1)

Mon May 6, 2013, 08:55 AM

100. THIS.

It's all by design.

If any one of us were president, we'd have to be in a bulletproof popemobile and witness our planes getting fueled. The wealthy and their "persons" tend to get itchy trigger fingers when you tax them and take away their gravy trains.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HughBeaumont (Reply #100)


Response to villager (Reply #1)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:19 AM

104. I think the assassinations of the '60s broke the left's back

COINTELPRO also played a huge role in fracturing and undermining the left, but the factionalism and extremism of the left during that time eventually helped to make it loopy and irrelevant to mainstream America as well.

Reaganism came along in the '80s and through its reactionary revisionism and propaganda (and growing rightwing domination of media) turned "liberal" into a dirty word, building on the success of the Red Scares of the early 1900s and 1950s that turned "socialist" and "communist" into dirty words.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to deutsey (Reply #104)

Mon Mar 24, 2014, 03:46 AM

268. So, um, this "COINTELPRO" thing...

think it'll ever catch on on the internet?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 04:52 PM

2. Because progressives have been too busy attacking insufficiently-progressive fellow-travelers

Apparently that's more fun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:36 PM

25. Pretty much.

And that helps to hurt actual progressives like Grayson and Feingold (in 2010).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:13 PM

55. Nailed it in post #2

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Sun May 5, 2013, 07:06 PM

64. Sure seems that way.

If they turned turned their focus to the Republicans there is no telling what we could do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DCBob (Reply #64)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:26 PM

79. Absolutely!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Sun May 5, 2013, 07:26 PM

66. Bingo!

This is the sad, sad truth, but your post gets two enthusiastic !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Sun May 5, 2013, 07:47 PM

67. This (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Sun May 5, 2013, 08:38 PM

71. There it is.

We have a winner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:02 PM

75. Actually it's because so many "Dems" have embraced

torture, indefinite detention, SS cuts, HeritageCare, top-heavy tax cuts, union-busting, school privatization, Medicare cuts, and liberal bashing, following the lead of our "Dem" president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #75)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:33 PM

164. It is the very type of disingenuous bullshit that you just posted that pushes so called progressives

to the crying/whining fringes. Seek first to properly define that which you disagree with, no paint it with untrue fantasy. I don't care for conservatives, but some of the conservatives that I meet are hard working and dedicated people that have fucked up viewpoints on others in the society that we share.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestate10 (Reply #164)

Wed May 8, 2013, 01:17 AM

233. If we abuse traditional Democrats, liberals and progressives enough...

maybe they will eventually leave! Then we will have TWO right wing parties! Utiopia!

Creeping Fascism: From Nazi Germany to Post 9/11 America


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #75)

Wed May 8, 2013, 04:02 PM

251. Bingo.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:16 PM

78. Exactly....

its like a progressive litmus test

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:45 PM

84. That doesnt even make any sense. What have the centrists done but compromise with Republicans? nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #84)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:49 PM

85. No, it doesn't make sense.

But I love the way the pep squad just mindlessly machine-guns their anxious support anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #85)

Sun May 5, 2013, 11:25 PM

89. What doesn't make sense about what he said?

The reason there are so few left wing candidates is because many of the "left" would rather tear down center-left or not "as progressive as thou" candidates rather than focus their (extremely limited) resources on the Republicans. As a result, progressive candidates (even alot of GREAT progressive candidates) don't even bother putting their hats in the ring, knowing that the Repubs will give no quarter and the "left" will castigate and criticize everything they do damn near as much as conservatives instead of supporting them. What doesn't make sense or is difficult to understand about that?

As for the second bit of your post, did the numerous posts of support for post #2 hurt your feelings or something? Your knee-jerk and totally unnecessary hostility is the only thing "mindless" so far. There was nothing "mindless" or "anxious" about my support for the post. I wholeheartedly agree with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #89)

Mon May 6, 2013, 01:14 AM

94. Hurt my feelings? Your giving yourselves way too much credit. Disparaging the left is a game to you.

Instead of fighting the corporatists, centrists want to compromise with them and fight the left.

The reason there are so many corporatist candidates is that the corporations have the money. It's not rocket science. And the reason so many Democrats bow to the corporatists is............ I dont know why. Maybe you can tell me.

The 99% are in a horrible position. Some are calling it a depression. It sure isnt because we are upholding too many leftist principles. Centrists want to merge with their allies the Republicans AND CUT SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE, and strengthen the Patriot Act.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #94)

Mon May 6, 2013, 01:55 AM

98. I wasn't even talking you. My response was to Mar

And your response is typical of the "if we just criticize EVERYTHING, everyone will want to listen to us!1!!one" mindset alot of people on this site unfortunately possess.

You whine (incessantly, I might add) about how liberals are not listened to. The entire point of this OP was to try to find reasons why that is. Instead of turning a critical eye to how liberals present themselves and their ideals, you AS USUAL want to whine about corporations and "corporatists."

That doesn't explain why Americans a) gravitate almost naturally towards liberal ideals but yet b) really dislike most liberals. Hell, for all we know this inability to connect with average Americans may be one of the primary reasons for the rise of corporatism and conservatism in the first place. Perhaps if people had something better to cling to, an actual liberal party that gets out there and does the work, that raises their voices loud for reasons other than tearing down the Dem party and doesn't talk down to average Americans as if everyone is stupid (while at the same time displaying some ASTOUNDING levels of misinformation and downright stupidity themselves). That is practical and effective, and far more interested in things than being ever so "disappointed" in everything and everyone. If there was a liberal party that did this, there would be a HELL of alot more people in this country happy to hang their hats on the liberal mantle in this country.

Because for alot (no where near all but enough) of you, displaying your liberal cred means doing nothing more than explaining ad nauseum, how xyz Democrat doesn't come NEARLY close enough to your lofty and mostly laughable ideals of what a liberal should be. Calling everyone a "corporatist" and the ever so clever and mature "Turd Way" does not a political movement make. That may be enough for the "more liberal than thou crowd", but the rest of us are looking for a hell of a lot more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #98)

Mon May 6, 2013, 08:41 AM

99. " your lofty and mostly laughable ideals". Explain which ideals you think are "lofty and laughable."

Maybe it's ending homelessness, or SS and Medicare for our seniors, or health care for all children, etc.

Which ideals are laughable?

As far as corporatism goes, I say a majority of politicians in Wash DC are beholden to major corporations. Dont you agree? Is the idea of reducing corporate control a laughable ideal to some? If so, isnt it fair to call them "corporatists"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #99)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:29 AM

120. Um, looks like you need

To reread the post instead of plucking a phrase mid sentence to twist into.....whatever that is.

You continue to demonstrate the point with each post.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #120)

Mon May 6, 2013, 03:56 PM

134. Your post is very clearly stated.

"And your response is typical of the "if we just criticize EVERYTHING, everyone will want to listen to us!1!!one" mindset alot of people on this site unfortunately possess." Pretty sweeping statement. Can you elaborate on what is criticized without justification?

" Instead of turning a critical eye to how liberals present themselves and their ideals, you AS USUAL want to whine about corporations and "corporatists." I am curious how liberals present themselves and their ideals as wrong or inappropriate. Can you elaborate on that statement. Also, is whining about corporate control of Congress a bad thing?

As far as this statement, "your lofty and mostly laughable ideals of what a liberal should be." is part of a long sentence but is a statement and stands on it's own. But it's you in the post that explains how liberals arent meeting your standards. But of course you wont elaborate on what those standards are.

"That may be enough for the "more liberal than thou crowd", but the rest of us are looking for a hell of a lot more. " Really, you are looking "for a hell of a lot more?" Can you give an example?

And your attempts at controlling the discussion thru ridicule is unlike a "politically liberal person", which I assume you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #134)

Mon May 6, 2013, 04:38 PM

143. You seem confused

You're referring to Number 23's post, and quoting her.

I was the one who suggested you reread her post because your response didn't seem to match up with what she actually posted. Perhaps you should read it a third time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #143)

Mon May 6, 2013, 05:09 PM

147. LoL. Whatever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #147)

Mon May 6, 2013, 05:17 PM

148. Seriously?

You obviously posted in the wrong place and mis attributed a page full of quotes.

LOL whatever, indeed. Accuracy doesn't seem to matter much in your world. Can't say I'm surprised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #148)

Mon May 6, 2013, 05:19 PM

149. When you run out of decent discussion, just start ridiculing. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #149)

Mon May 6, 2013, 05:54 PM

150. When you can't admit

you are wrong, just laugh it off and make no effort to correct it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #150)

Mon May 6, 2013, 07:00 PM

154. Not just wrong. Clueless and wrong. And he knows it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #154)

Tue May 7, 2013, 01:05 PM

203. He asked you to elaborate.

Now's your big chance!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #203)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:07 PM

207. That poster is doing bad enough without having you as his spokesman

Worry about your own lack of contribution to this thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #207)

Tue May 7, 2013, 11:33 PM

222. No elaboration forthcoming

Because no elaboration exists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #222)


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #134)

Mon May 6, 2013, 07:04 PM

156. I don't think it's possible for you to have misread/misunderstood more than you have

You haven't gotten anything right in my post, which may explain why you responded to someone else thinking it was me.

I am curious how liberals present themselves and their ideals as wrong or inappropriate. I asked you to turn a critical eye to how liberals present themselves. You didn't even understand that point. I see no need to continue.

Your entire response is actually quite sad. But it certainly does explain a lot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #99)

Mon May 6, 2013, 11:00 AM

123. You will get no answer to this.


First rule of Third Way on messaging: The conversation stops when you are asked to explain what your true political values really are.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #123)

Mon May 6, 2013, 04:03 PM

135. I have done this dance dozens of times* and yet to get one response to the question,

"how do your values differ from those on the "left"." (that you disparage so passionately) They usually resort to ridicule.

Rationalization is their comfort.

What I find interesting is that they will bash the left mercilessly and then when they lose an election they whine that the left didnt support their guy/gal.


*and yes I know what it means when I try to get different results using the same method.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #135)

Mon May 6, 2013, 07:19 PM

157. You and the poster you're responding to are symptomatic of exactly the kind of crap

that got about 15 people to high five post #2.

You guys tear everybody down, particularly this president, and yet when asked what can be done differently to make the "left" more effective, you have nothing. But you are real quick to reach for the most absurdly stupid insults. I noticed the poster you responded to was quick to pull out the Third Way stupidity, and I'd already mentioned that this is exactly the kind of response and tactics that makes most people ignore "liberals."

There was no ridicule (or not all that much) in my posts to you. I asked you very straightforward questions and stated my case I think, very clearly. The fact that you appear to be unable to understand very simple statements and respond intelligently to my post is your problem, not mine. And as another poster said, instead of admitting you got nothing or are wrong, you dig in and start with your insults.

Oh, and FYI Calling someone a Third Wayer doesn't mean a goddamned thing to 99% of the people on this web site. It is certainly not an insult to me as I don't know what it is even is, and don't give enough of a damn to take the four seconds it would take to do a Google search on it. So if you're going to ignore people's legitimate questions to you and start tossing around insults, at least throw out a few that mean something to the masses, and not just the paranoid lunatics who use it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #157)

Wed May 8, 2013, 01:43 AM

234. It's the same fifteen sycophants every time.

Excitedly jumping up and down like Jack Russell Terriers for one another whenever one of them makes some asinine attack on "the left".

It's just kind of pathetic. You don't offer anything but the above mentioned high-fiving of empty commentaries, and of course, long-winded, nonsensical, rambling insults like the one I'm responding to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #234)

Wed May 8, 2013, 08:06 AM

244. As you know

the poster you're responding to was locked out of this thread. I suppose it's safe to come back and have the last word now.

If you can't shut her down with your words, use the alert system.

Talk about pathetic.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #244)

Wed May 8, 2013, 12:05 PM

245. Yes, it's a big conspiracy against you and all your friends.

For god's sake, how would I even know that person had been locked out of the thread, alerted on, etc.? Catch a breath.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #245)

Wed May 8, 2013, 12:26 PM

246. lol

Please. How would you know, indeed.

Pathetic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #246)

Wed May 8, 2013, 01:55 PM

248. Now *this* is what we call projection.

I am not out to get you, I promise. I'm not a part of any sub-forum where like-minded people gather and point out posts they disagree with, so they can descend upon them en masse and abuse the alert system to have them removed.

I do not alert on posts as a general rule, as a matter of fact, and on the rare occasions when I do vote to hide something, it is not simply because I disagree with the sentiment being expressed.

But why don't you enlighten me on how I might've known who had been kicked from the thread, and exactly what one has to do in order to be so removed. You're clearly very familiar with the process.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #248)

Wed May 8, 2013, 03:26 PM

249. Sorry

I don't speak passive-aggressivese, and your tactics have been exposed repeatedly throughout this thread for all to see.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #249)

Wed May 8, 2013, 03:50 PM

250. Alright then-- I hope your alternate universe is having nice weather today.

Have fun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #234)

Wed May 8, 2013, 05:02 PM

253. How brave of you. You didn't address her until 10 minutes after she was locked out...

of the thread. And speaking of "nonsensical, rambling insults" I think your "fifteen sycophants" who "jump up and down like Jack Russell Terriers" remark, is commonly referred to as broadbrush namecalling, but I'm sure you don't see the irony. Ruff. Ruff. We may be fewer in number at Democratic Underground than you & your cohorts, but we comprise the majority of the actual Democratic Party, where unlike DU, shit talking actually matters.

"About a year ago, 74% of liberals approved of Obama's job. Now it's 80%. (92% for liberal Democrats)"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2761625


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #253)

Wed May 8, 2013, 05:50 PM

254. Oh, god-- you, too now?

Help me out here, because, as I explained to the other one a while ago-- I don't even know how one can tell if another poster has been locked out of a thread.

I suppose I'm just not as familiar with the mechanics of the whole thing, since I don't make a hobby of alerting on people and trying to get them locked out of discussions. If you're not available for explaining, perhaps one of the other members of the BOG dog pile... or the BOGpile... is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #254)

Wed May 8, 2013, 06:36 PM

255. The "trees" are full of you guys. Ask one of them.

When will you get it? Nobody, outside of DU, gives a shit about your pissing & moaning. You never responded to any of her queries, directly; you waited until she was locked out. Any DU'er, with as many posts as you have, knows that a deleted post locks the poster out, but nice try. Like I said, "how brave". Is there any wonder why new age progressives are so ineffective?

As for the "BOGpile", again I say...."Ruff! Ruff!" You just keep proving your own point, unintentionally, with every subsequent post. Talk about your "nonsensical insults". You've conquered DU, now go out and conquer the world!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #254)

Wed May 8, 2013, 07:23 PM

258. LMAO

Seriously? You need someone to tell you how to read DU?

How long have you suffered from this inability?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #258)

Wed May 8, 2013, 07:36 PM

259. I've noticed you BOG-sorts behave like a highschool clique.

You all anxiously high-five each other over some seriously lame arguments, and dog pile onto anyone who argues with you, attempting to "win" the thread with sheer volume and repetition.

Is it just because you've got nothing left to say, since all of your predictions and excuses turned out to be garbage ('rope-a-dope' remains my favorite, by the way)?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #259)

Wed May 8, 2013, 08:51 PM

260. Not that accuracy seems to matter

much to your cohort, I challenge you to find one of my posts in the BOG on DU3.

Not that I don't read there occasionally. and share an affinity with the DU'ers who post there, you toss around labels willy nilly as if they're gospel.

You're getting called on it, and it's about damn time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Marr (Reply #261)

Wed May 8, 2013, 09:53 PM

262. ...

Ok, didn't recall since it was 2 years ago at the beginning of DU3 and I haven't posted since.

That's fine, this is what a correction looks like.

I guess I could have said "Lol whatever."

Funny that someone so adept at using the search function needs assistance reading a thread, or understanding how alerts and hidden posts work.

I still think that's funny as hell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #99)

Mon May 6, 2013, 06:58 PM

153. HOW CAN LIBERALS REACH AMERICANS??

HOW CAN LIBERALS GET MORE PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATES IN OFFICE?

Since the small caps in the OP apparently whizzed by your head as you seem absolutely INVESTED in blaming everything on corporations.

HOW CAN LIBERALS GET MORE PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATES IN OFFICE?

This is the question asked over and over and over again by those us beyond disgusted/exasperated and absolutely repulsed by the shrillness of some of the "liberal" posters here. Besides "holding the president's feet to the fire!1" aka "incessantly criticizing Democrats" no one has anything resembling answer. Which I would dare to say, is the VERY CRUX OF THE FUCKING PROBLEM that alot of Americans have with liberals.

HOW CAN LIBERALS GET MORE PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATES IN OFFICE?

And as for your absolutely astounding comment about "ending homelessness, or SS and Medicare for our seniors, or health care for all children, etc." which is so vague to be almost meaningless, I'll just point out that FDR, the patron saint of GD that so many here seem to spend so much time pleasuring themselves to his memory, got EVERY BIT of the same criticisms that Obama has received, except the left was much more vitriolic and angry with FDR at the time.

FDR got "the New Deal doesn't go far enough" from liberals. Sound familiar?
FDR got "you're too comfy-cozy with bankers" from liberals. Sound familiar?
FDR was accused of "not doing enough for the poor" by liberals. Sound familiar?

He could do no right by the liberal wing during his time and now, hilariously, the man is absolutely lionized by some on the left for the same policies that he was savaged for by the left during his time. It just goes to show that there are people that learn NOTHING from history. Absolutely NOTHING.

And this is to everyone's detriment, in my opinion. It is a crying shame that people who are interested and committed in the greater good and taking care of the less fortunate are also so caught up in being nay-sayers, finger-waggers and constant complainers that they are far more successful in alienating and ostracizing than they have ever, EVER been at affecting lasting change in this country. It is TRULY a damned shame.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #153)

Mon May 6, 2013, 11:37 PM

175. Sorry im new here

Is there anyway to rec individual posters like the one im replying to.

Every single thing he/she said was brilliantly stated and reasoned out and needs to be highlighted in some way!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostOne4Ever (Reply #175)

Mon May 6, 2013, 11:43 PM

177. Right?

Kick ass post, no?

Welcome to DU

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostOne4Ever (Reply #175)

Tue May 7, 2013, 01:20 AM

181. Cept no citations

or links. That's because it's made up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #181)

Tue May 7, 2013, 01:48 AM

183. The truth will set you free. Or maybe not...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #153)

Tue May 7, 2013, 12:45 AM

178. And to those who backed & pushed FDR I say thank you.

Just as I would thank those who never backed down on calling out for ending slavery or demanding equal rights or speaking out against wars. It's how things get done. You don't back down, even if the messenger is someone you like, maybe even especially if.
This is something people on the right get. They just apply it to tax cuts, weapons & profits instead of promoting the general welfare.
Luckily we understand the correct thing to do is to try and meet in the middle, or as FDR liberals would have called it, the far right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raouldukelives (Reply #178)

Tue May 7, 2013, 01:51 AM

184. "Backing" is the operative word here in your "backing and pushing" phrase

Because one without the other is carping and being counter-productive. Which is what I think is happening right now from alot of people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #153)

Tue May 7, 2013, 01:11 AM

180. Absolute made up nonsense.

"He could do no right by the liberal wing during his time" This is pure bullshit.

"the New Deal doesn't go far enough" from liberals. Sound familiar? No, because you made it up.
FDR got "you're too comfy-cozy with bankers" from liberals. Sound familiar? No, because you made it up.
FDR was accused of "not doing enough for the poor" by liberals. Sound familiar? No, because you made it up.

Please post sources to back up your claims. Thanks in advance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #180)

Tue May 7, 2013, 01:47 AM

182. Why the hell would I make something up that is easily verified by a five second search

on the Internet?

Just because it is something that you wish was not the truth, doesn't mean that it is untrue.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/08/11/891631/-UPDATED-Liberal-Criticism-of-Franklin-Roosevelt-and-The-New-Deal
http://www.ushistory.org/us/49f.asp
Look up the names Father Charles Coughlin, Francis Townsend and Huey Long and their criticisms of FDR.

"Indeed, during FDR’s first three years in office, his version of the New Deal faced more serious challenges from populists and insurgents on the left than from Republicans." http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ten-miles-square/2011/08/mischaracterizing_fdr_to_indic031397.php DAMN that sounds familiar.

Read and learn. Seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #182)

Tue May 7, 2013, 02:47 AM

185. Revisionist puff pieces

...at best.

Try again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #185)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:25 AM

186. Denial is a deep, DEEP thing to come out of...

http://www.ssa.gov/history/cough.html

Unlike yourself, these "revisionist puff pieces" have a hell of alot of material evidence (aka FACTS) to back them up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #186)

Tue May 7, 2013, 12:27 PM

196. You have offered nothing to back your claims

"He could do no right by the liberal wing during his time"

Father Coughlin was the Rush Limbaugh of the PRE WWII era, not a liberal. Why do you even mention him? Some Rush Limbaugh style idiot is your proof that liberals didn't like FDR?

List the Democratic congressmen and movement within the DEMOCRATIC PARTY that felt "he could do no right".

Please don't post op/ed pieces as 'proof'. They are OPINION puff pieces.

Thanks in advance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #196)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:06 PM

206. Father Coughin was a LIBERAL

That is acknowledged by every source that matters. Even the briefest of perusals of the SS link I gave you should have made that abundantly clear to you. He was furious that FDR didn't turn out to be the radical leftist in office that he'd been on the campaign.

And I already gave you a name to a Democratic politician that was furious with FDR for being too cozy with bankers. But you are too busy being argumentative and ignorant to notice.

Edit: By the way, love the shift away from "liberals" to now specifically "Democratic politicians" that criticized FDR. Too bad for you, I have already supplied evidence of both so your shape-shifting is just sort of baffling as well as embarrassing.

I also just want to take a second and thank you for being exactly the type of person that keeps the liberal party from being the force that it could be. You and a few others in this thread have proven the OPs point precisely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #206)

Tue May 7, 2013, 11:31 PM

221. Father Coughlin was pro Hitler

and a Fascist. Naziism and fascism are the extremes of the RIGHT WING. He openly called for Jews to be abused and expelled. He was as right wing as you can get.

You are repeating a GOP talking point AKA "Hitler was a liberal"

Hmmmm.......



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #221)

Tue May 7, 2013, 11:46 PM

223. Oh God. You have lost it. You don't think that there liberals that are anti-Semitic?

He was a radical leftist. He was a populist. He was a LIBERAL. Every account says that. What the hell right wing person passionately supports FDR but then abandons that support because he felt FDR was "too comfortable with bankers" and didn't do enough for the poor? What right winger does that?

He may have been a raging anti-Semite and that was his downfall. And his anti-Semitism became more pronounced after he began declaring the New Deal a failure and calling FDR a con man. But he was a radical leftist who supported FDR because he thought he was too but abandoned that support when FDR took office because he thought FDR was too much of a middle man.

You bring new meaning to confirmation bias. The numerous times you have attempted to change the subject, deflect, back track etc. during this conversation is nothing short of astonishing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #223)

Wed May 8, 2013, 02:46 AM

240. Naziism/Fascism are the extremes of the right

Communism is the extreme of the left. It's basic political science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #185)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:50 AM

187. You ask for links

Then dismisses the links without giving any real reasons. I think you are committing an act of confirmation bias.

As for the term "puff pieces":

IDTIMWYTIM

an article or story of exaggerating praise that often ignores or downplays opposing viewpoints or evidence to the contrary.


Neither article seems to be a "story of exaggerating praise" and both seem to be well documented.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostOne4Ever (Reply #187)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:10 AM

189. Inigo Montoya!



I'm probably spelling that wrong but you know who I'm talking about!

Thanks for your great posts in this thread! "Confirmation bias" is an excellent description of that person's post. I used "head up ass denialism" before I self-edited.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #189)

Tue May 7, 2013, 04:24 AM

190. Honestly

This thread reminds me of this cracked article.

Especially numbers 1,3, and 5.

Edit: I like your original term better myself, but I get why you edited it out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostOne4Ever (Reply #187)

Tue May 7, 2013, 12:33 PM

197. You pounce on a figure of speech, but offer no evidence

Please list the names of the liberal congressmen and Democrats from that era that felt, "He could do no right"

Op/eds are opinion pieces. Please do not post them as 'evidence'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #197)

Tue May 7, 2013, 10:39 PM

219. More Confirmation Bias

AgingAmerican
Op/eds are opinion pieces. Please do not post them as 'evidence'.


Except when they provide actual FACTS to back up their arguments and even provide citations.

If I post an opinion piece and state that evolution is a fact, and has been observed in real time in the populations of a variety of different organism, does the fact that its an op-ed make that any less of a fact? Especially if I give citations to numerous biological studies? Your premise does not support your conclusion and numerous counter-examples exist to prove it baseless.

From the links People who criticized FDR from the left:
Huey Long
Charles Coughlin
William Lemke
John Flynn
Earl Browder
Burton Wheeler

But if you want an non-op source here is one, Spark Notes!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostOne4Ever (Reply #219)

Tue May 7, 2013, 11:47 PM

224. Nice list of 'liberals' you have there lol

2 senators (1 isolationist and one left wing Democrat)
1 Communist
1 Journalist - not affiliated with either party
1 Republican
1 Nazi/Fascist Right wing talk show host

Out of your list ONE person could be called liberal or progressive.

Your logical fallacy is known as the "Hasty generalization"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostOne4Ever (Reply #219)

Wed May 8, 2013, 12:11 AM

226. Hey, when someone says that a journalist can't be a liberal

It's better to just walk away. And the news that Communists can't be liberals must be a HELL of a shock to the numerous people around the world that embrace both philosophies.

Let that one stew in his ignorance alone. He asks for something and then when it is handed to him on a silver platter, is incapable of reading and understanding it. Let him stew by himself. There are far more interesting and intelligent people to converse with here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #226)

Wed May 8, 2013, 12:23 AM

227. Agreed

The moment he said that i realized it was time to take my sigs advise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #182)

Wed May 8, 2013, 12:51 AM

231. I think that's what they call, in the real world, a hella smackdown!!!!




I love you dear heart.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #182)

Thu May 9, 2013, 07:37 PM

264. I'm really surprised at how many people don't know this part of FDR history. I thought it was

pretty well known that during his last term, the Republicans forced him to take austerity measures, cutting various programs, and he obliged them. Liberals in the party were furious! The country fell back into a recession.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #153)

Fri Mar 14, 2014, 10:17 AM

267. +1,000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #98)

Wed May 8, 2013, 02:14 AM

235. There are probably lots of reasons.

1) We aren't focusing on the problems of ordinary people -- like divorce, divided families, trying to keep a family going without having enough money, trying to stay hopeful when everything goes wrong, being sick and not being able to afford to get well or not having a way to get well, having to take care of sick or poor parents, having to put your kids in lousy day care while you work for pay too low to cover your costs, working in a restaurant, working in a hotel, driving a truck, feeling angry at people who have good jobs when you work really hard plus overtime for not nearly enough to take care of your family. Having to pay for taxes on top of all that.

2) We think in the abstract and talk in the abstract and don't get real enough.

3) We try to be too nice about topics that people have been taught to focus their anger on -- like immigration and race and guns and private property, gay rights and paying debts. We don't come out and say what we really want on these issues. We beat around the bush when we need to make our beliefs clear. We try not to offend the stupid Republicans. We try not to step on toes. We cower when we should attack. Instead, let's just say what we think. Coming out in favor of gay and lesbian marriage did not hurt Obama one bit. Supporting immigrants won't hurt either. Let's be true to what we believe in. We don't have to attack or cower. We just have to say what we think. Our fear of being who we are goes back to the McCarthy era. We don't need to feel that way. We have nothing to fear but fear.

4) We don't have enough of our own media. That is because we don't have a lot of money. But we can make up for this by creating our own outreach person to person. We need a lot more volunteers who talk plain talk with people and know how to listen.

Most people have progressive thoughts and ideas. More Americans lean to the left and support progressive ideas than support conservative ones. But they don't support or like intellectual language. And we haven't figured out how to talk about our ideas without intellectual language. I'll be the first to admit that I'm not good at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #89)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:50 PM

166. Well, at least one "left-wing" candidate that I know of,

that is, "left-wing" for Arkansas, was campaigned against in a Senate primary by both a sitting Democratic president and a former Democratic president, in favor of the center-right DLC "Democrat". The center-right candidate won the primary but then suffered an ignominious defeat at the hands of her Republican opponent in the general election.

http://www.salon.com/2010/06/10/lincoln_6/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Art_from_Ark (Reply #166)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:58 PM

168. That sucks. Do you think that the "left wing" candidate would have won?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #168)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:05 PM

170. The "left-wing" candidate, Bill Halter, forced a run-off in the primary

If Obama hadn't stuck his nose where it didn't belong, then Halter probably would have done better, maybe even won. And Halter reminded me of the young Bill Clinton, who ran for political office 3 times in the '70s as a liberal (and won twice). It was almost like the "old" Bill Clinton was campaigning against the "young" Bill Clinton

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Art_from_Ark (Reply #170)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:08 PM

208. Sorry I'm just seeing this!

Well, I for one am extraordinarily dubious that out of all the states in the US, that Arkansas would be one of the ones to put a "left wing" candidate in office.

But if you feel that this is what happened, I am really sorry for you and for the state of Arkansas that Halter was kept out of office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #208)

Wed May 8, 2013, 02:37 AM

239. Note I put "left-wing" in quotes

I also further qualified it by saying "left-wing for Arkansas".

Nevertheless, excluding presidential elections, Arkansas has been one of the most Democratic of all states at both the state and national levels. No other state can top Arkansas's record of having Democrats in the Senate (only 8 years total for Republicans in the Senate (both seats combined) since Reconstruction. We also used to nearly always have 3 Democrats and 1 Republican in Congress until this past election. Also, most state positions had been held by Democrats until the recent election, when we got a Republican legislature for the first time since Reconstruction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Art_from_Ark (Reply #170)

Thu May 9, 2013, 07:40 PM

265. Bill Clinton supported Blanche Lincoln, too, and campaigned vigorously for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #85)

Sun May 5, 2013, 11:50 PM

93. Exhibit "B"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #84)

Sun May 5, 2013, 11:49 PM

92. Exhibit "A"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #84)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:23 AM

117. And since "centrism" is really just another name for a current version of Republincanism

...we essentially just have factions of the Republican party -- regardless of what they call themselves -- trying to reach a "compromise" on the right side -- which is to say the wrong side -- of the spectrum. Or the aisle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #117)

Mon May 6, 2013, 04:09 PM

136. When the Repub Party started to go off the rails, many started to slither under our tent.

Some among us think that is swell. Yeah more Democrats. Not caring that those "new Democrats" BROUGHT THEIR NASTY REPUBLICAN VALUES WITH THEM.

For these lost souls, rationalization is the key to their happiness. They rationalize that the D behind a politician's name is more important than that politician's ideals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #84)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:46 PM

165. Centrists and moderate-liberals have been responsible for 100% of the progress that has taken

place in the last 21 years. The extreme left had progressive ideas banned to the sidelines, Reagan was ruining the country, with no voice to challenge him. I have had my fill of the extreme left, they hated on Jimmy Carter and gave us Reagan. They voted the conscious and helped to produce President George W Bush, which, given their bent toward fantasy, they blame all of a right-wing US Supreme Court. The fact is save their efforts, there WOULDN'T have been a US Supreme Court ruling, or a need for a ruling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestate10 (Reply #165)

Mon May 6, 2013, 11:08 PM

172. Ok, so tell me what issues the left espouses that you dont agree with.

What progressive ideas have been "banned to the sidelines"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #172)

Tue May 7, 2013, 01:02 PM

201. You know, the "lofty and laughable ideals".

Like the ones they'll immediately spin around and assure you that Obama sincerely supports as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Sun May 5, 2013, 11:48 PM

91. That's a non-sequitur:

If its the 'centrists' who garner the power, then the attacks clearly don't have much of an effect.

--

BTW- Thank you for informing us that the only thing the Left needs to succeed is to silence its left-wing critics. Let us blame the failure of the Gun Background Check bill on the Democrats' left wing instead of the people who actually stopped it.

You see, its fun to be a psychopath... After having done most of the work of stamping out overt socialism from the political landscape and lingua franca in the mid-late 20th century, a Democrat who has 'failed' can always be certain that its merely some odd person in the room, suggestive phrase, or other subtle and subversive influence (like empathy for the poor) has crept in and caused the "real" politics to go off-balance. Thankfully, there are plenty of corporate-news entertainers who will take up the task of denouncing the unsavoury influence post-haste, so that one can hopefully try again properly with Wall St aligned methods.

Of course, there is never any need for the neoliberal elite to blame themselves unless they have somehow offended a large corporate interest.

--

As to the OP question of how we got here:

The system has been set to fail for decades. No part of it is equipped to deal with a lack of 'frontier' or ecological concepts of limits. These conditions scare TPTB mightily because they know that unsustainable pressures are building and the task of rebuilding a national identity and core business models (even civilization) is not the career they signed up for; in 'doing the right thing' they see myriad decisions that are thankless or worse. So, they say F-ck it, lets ride this consumerism juggernaut for all its worth and see if it can whip up some zero-sacrifice, delivered-to-your-door techno fixes that keep every fatcat's business model intact. This requires work to undermine democratic institutions, but at the behest of the corporate class so that their media outlets will celebrate you while you celebrate consumption. (BTW- Jimmy Carter definitely did not celebrate consumption.)

The Left has so little influence because it collided with consumerism sometime in the early 1970s. Our natural audience became an unnatural class of consumer zombies, mollified by a plethora of new marketing schemes, product and brand obsessions, antidepressants, randy sexual pursuit, and a new mythology of what it means to be 'happy' (no ideas admitted-- unless they are for new products and services, thankyouverymuch).

Some points of failure on the road to consumerism-as-policy:

1. Central banking and Corporate personhood became tools of the financial elite back in the Edwardian era. A fix has been too long in coming.

2. The White Flight away from coexistence and toward an 'American dream' that marries shallow materialism with the illusion of pastoral ("country") suburban living and white identity. This lasted until the 2008 crisis and has borne as much malignancy as any other development.

3. Baby boomers reacting to their 'cold' upbringing (partly due to postwar attitudes, and the erasure of community atmosphere because of the White Flight and general increased mobility)... A flight toward irrational world views followed (hippies and evangelical neocons sprouted from the same branch and have much in common) with the pursuit of strong emotion in everyday life.

4. 'Lifestyles': The resurgence of marketing and PR influence, computerized and re-tuned to the identities and fantasies of the 70s counterculture and fashionable hangers-on. The counterculture had been anti-consumption up to that point. Now people with psychology degrees wearing torn bluejeans brainwash us into seeing products/services as the lens through which we resolve emotional fulfilment; to stop planning, live in the moment and respond impulsively.

4a. The explosive increase of sugar and meat in our diets, with behavioural consequences.

5. The War On Drugs: A trashing of the Bill Of Rights. Very bad precedents were set when people responded to this hysteria, causing mass disenfranchisement and a burgeoning police state.

In the post-cold war years, the above factors combined to alienate working class people from each other (with relations at an all-time low now) while merger-mania concentrated corporate wealth and power. News media were routed, their most recognized/trusted visages pasted onto the carapace of Wall St. conglomerates while the 'journalism' became remunerated with stock options. Few configurations could yield more natural antipathy toward the Left.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cprise (Reply #91)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:38 AM

109. Brilliant!! The Left enjoyed a lot of victories in the 1960's, but when Johnson declared that

the South was lost to the Republicans due to the extension of civil rights, that was the end. We got Nixon because LBJ was too politically bruised to run again. (That's why it is so ridiculous to compare Obama to LBJ or JFK; the historical and political circumstances were completely different!)

Watergate changed everything!! After Watergate, Americans grew increasingly distrustful of government and that ironically played right into the hands of the Republican Party. I felt sorry for Jimmy Carter because he not only inherited the horrible economic politicies of Nixon/Ford, he also inherited the apathy of the American people. Reagan was able to craft a message that worked well, and the political right was able to manipulate the American voter, playing on racial fear and hatred, distrust of the government, the preeminence of the corporations. It worked. The conservative movement was able to do something phenomenal: marry corporate interests/anti-government sentiment with Christian values.

Thomas Frank's "What's the Matter With Kansas" and "The Wrecking Crew," along with Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine," is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand why the political left is losing this war.

"Conservatives Without Conscience," by John Dean discusses pre- and post-Watergate sentiment and how conservatives were able to capitalize on that sentiment through clever messaging, imagery, and pro-corporate/anti-government propaganda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #109)

Wed May 8, 2013, 05:00 AM

241. Government was 'taken away' from whites by the civil rights movement

...on paper and in concept at least. That allowed social conservatives to align with free-market "conservatives" and both had fundamentalist factions that grew considerably after Johnson's term.

The rectitude of the Left in its stance on race and gender was so towering, and the sea change so bracing, that the Right could neither argue against nor reconcile with the new American identity. And the lens that brought the new identity into focus counter to the white patriarchy was a (big) government that set about mingling their kids with other races and upending their home lives via social services that judged them and often "took" their families away (actually enabled their families to "rebel" against them).

If the unreconstructed dominant white males could not have a government devoted to them specifically, then no one else could have it, either. As groups like the Heritage Foundation preached free-market fundamentalism to social conservatives, the recurring theme they evoked was the disposal or murder of government-- make it small enough to drown in a bathtub, like some biblically wayward child. (Its no surprise to me that today's Right that grew up on this stuff has created an America so hostile to children; Its part of the neocon/neoliberal social template.)

The above is what motivates the average, non-elite conservative demographic at its core.

A new facet was added in the 1990s: Anti-environmentalism which stands in for anti-communism. The pursuit of living large is non-negotiable, otherwise there is no reason for average people to believe they are going to make it big one day; no reason to identify with the wealthy and their aims.

Within this miasma of political instinct and calculation you have three tracks: 1) Those who believe that sabotage of government regulation and infrastructure is desirable because it allows a less encumbered environment for bringing people to Jesus before the imminent Second Coming; 2) Those who worship the market instead, and believe that pure "free trade" is preferable to democracy and will bring government under the control of market forces-- when infrastructure fails its because the market deemed it necessary to smite the "evil" poor; 3) Elites who tell themselves that 1&2 can't really be serious or influential enough in modern times to do much damage, and that borrowing from their zeitgeist is OK because it allows the private sector to get things done for their social strata.

1) Dominionist, 2) Social Darwinist, 3) Third Way... they all preach and abide by consumerism. Frighteningly, its 2&3 that do so for the same reasons which are economic growth, innovation and keeping people entertained/docile.

Some would say there is a fourth segment, the Tea Party. They are the unsophisticated cohort of 1&2 for the most part. But I'd say that doesn't make them any less of a burgeoning fascist movement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cprise (Reply #241)

Wed May 8, 2013, 05:43 AM

243. Good post

I think you nailed it with this..

The rectitude of the Left in its stance on race and gender was so towering, and the sea change so bracing, that the Right could neither argue against nor reconcile with the new American identity.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Mon May 6, 2013, 01:26 AM

96. That's the answer. nt


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:05 AM

102. dingdingdingdingding! n/t

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:37 AM

108. Exactly.

Instead of attacking others, they should just get their message out. By attacking only, imo, they just come across as cranky asshats with no clear agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Mon May 6, 2013, 11:35 AM

125. because the rightist apparatchiks control the apparatus; same reason that for the last 50 years

 

only UFT apparatchiks have gotten into power in the NYC teachers union.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #125)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:52 PM

167. It is always easier to blame "them", or use terms that every day people understand, but

don't use.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestate10 (Reply #167)

Tue May 7, 2013, 12:54 AM

179. who should i blame but the guilty? and ps: *i'm* an everyday person too.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Mon May 6, 2013, 03:41 PM

131. Heh!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Mon May 6, 2013, 03:48 PM

133. Hey! It's not their fault people don't appreciate being "corrected"



I thought that's why people signed onto sites like DU- to have their moral and ethical betters explain to them the myriad ways they are deficient and doing it wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Wed May 8, 2013, 05:16 AM

242. Yep. Losing sight of the REAL problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 04:54 PM

3. Rhetoric.

The RW won the propaganda war a long time ago - to the point that even the word "Liberal" had bad connotations. What is happening now is that more people are experiencing the bad effects of the RW policies and are beginning to see the rhetoric as the lies that they are.

We on the Left need to accelerate that process by sticking to the FACTS and exposing the lies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #3)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:23 AM

106. I agree very much with this...

Very much..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #3)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:45 AM

111. I sometimes wonder if we're too late. The media is now controlled by corporations. Even the local

news is chuck full pro-conservative propaganda. Newspaper subscriptions are down, and now the KKKoch Bros. are talking about buying up all the major newspapers.

This is the failure of the political left. Rather than being proactive, the left has been REACTIONARY. The left has been lazy. You see it everywhere on the left, even on DU: nothing but reaction--whining, blaming everyone but the obstructionists, not doing anything constructive but complaining. It's not just on DU; it's everywhere on the political left. And then we wonder why we can't get enough progressives elected to office. Why bother?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 04:56 PM

4. If they had the same access to money...

 

I'm sure they'd do a lot better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to burnodo (Reply #4)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:04 PM

14. And the media.

Don't forget the pathetic media, buying into Republican framing and pushing the corporate line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to burnodo (Reply #4)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:08 PM

77. There's a reason they don't. The people who shell out the most $$ for elections

don't like what progressives would to the 1%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to burnodo (Reply #4)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:02 PM

169. In the long path of human beings, money over the longterm has never beaten conviction and

discipline. The claim that money surely wins provides an easy out and avoids the long grinding engagements that people who truly change society understand must be fought.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestate10 (Reply #169)

Mon May 6, 2013, 11:38 PM

176. Who claimed that money surely wins?

 

Money gets you access to people who are receptive to what you have to say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 04:57 PM

5. Like who?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 04:57 PM

6. We have the DEM Party fighting against us, too. It's not just the GOP, y'know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blkmusclmachine (Reply #6)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:00 PM

10. So, The Dem party is stopping you from talking to your fellow Americans

and persuading them with reason and logic to vote for more progressive candidates in local, state, and national elections?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #10)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:30 PM

21. Reason and logic have no place in this country anymore.

Just ask Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #10)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:39 PM

30. Yes, our access to national platforms is exactly the same as any pro-corporate politicians is!

What the hell are we waiting for!?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #10)

Wed May 8, 2013, 12:49 PM

247. No, the Democratic Party is stopping him from having progressive candidates for whom to vote.

 

The pseudo-Dems that run the party are who determines who gets through.

See Gore Vidal;
"There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt — until recently… and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 04:58 PM

7. We have in CA.

Slowly but surely. Only 30% of the electorate votes R.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #7)

Sun May 5, 2013, 04:59 PM

8. That's One State. There are Others

CA, as big as it is, is not enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #8)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:02 PM

11. One of the largest-just saying, it's not some pipe dream.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #11)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:03 PM

13. Congrats on that, but it's still not enough

Not nearly enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #13)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:08 PM

17. Why ask then?

Your OP makes no sense. Are you saying the American Left is too lazy to get off their ass and get progressives elected or did you just want to vent about something?

Are you talking to voters and getting people to vote for progressives? Are you helping get progressive bills pass that support labor? Those are things I do. If my state with millions and millions of voters can do it, other states can too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #17)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:37 PM

28. The OP is from Canada

so I doubt they are working in the States to pass any kind of progressive policy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #28)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:45 PM

40. I thought he lived in New York for some reason.

I just don't get how an OP like this is supposed to help us in 2014.

It ignores the fact that right-wing groups have been cutting into the progressive stronghold, unionism, like a hot knife through butter, with billions of dollars.

We lost MI to right-to-work, a cultural travesty, and the more we shed union membership the harder it is to mobilize to GOTV for progressives.

I'm really not sure what his point is. I feel like it is to bash DUers for wanting the US to be more progressive and suggesting that "Hey kids, let's get out there and put on a show" is going to get more progressives elected. I think everyone knows what the stakes are, how difficult it is and what we're up against. But mass mobilization takes funding and organization.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #40)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:50 PM

44. He does, that was evidently another person with the same name on DU2.

I don't think it is meant to help, I think he is trying to understand something that is easy to grasp - who has the money and power in America? Look at that group and how they get their message out and you realize that they are NOT progressives.

They are anti-union, pro free market, right to work state type of billionaires. The Left doesn't have anything that comes close to it in comparison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #17)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:56 PM

50. I think that it is the suggestion that they are lazy

They don't get progressives elected and then complain about the other voters not doing it for them, blaming the establishment or whatever for not just electing these progressives. They seem to have a sense of entitlement. They thought Obama was going to do it for them - that's why they are so "disappointed" and "betrayed." Obama was supposed to bring in progressives with his 2008 coattails, they thought he didn't do enough, so they "stayed home" and they've been complaining ever since. They have no thoughts for an office lower than the Presidency, and expect a President to do it all for them. Every last bit of campaigning and working and convincing. The "bully pulpit" is so foolproof that if Obama's speeches don't magically cause majorities of the voters of red states to vote in progressives, it must be Obama's speeches are not angry and passionate enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #50)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:03 PM

52. Well, we've asked the OP what he is doing. So far, crickets.

I would bet a poll would show that many DUers are active in electoral work. This notion of the "lazy DUer" of the left is a strawman.

And there are states, like I explained <---- that are doing the work the OP claims to be interested in. If he actually gave a rat's ass about solutions instead of just igniting some snark-fest out of pique, we could have discussed it.

Repukes are teh problem. Focus on them instead of some leftist chimera. Is Yavin helping in other states to remove right-wing corporate influence on gerrymandering, practically guaranteeing that the legislatures are going to stay teabaggeratti?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #52)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:16 PM

57. None of us can prove anything here other than that we post on DU

Nobody can really prove they've done a lot of canvassing. California is a good start. It is a large state with a lot of votes. In a way the Senate is an unfair thing - California ends up with no more influence than Delaware.

To get the kind of change we want, with our system, we need those red states with two Senators but low populations. Somehow to find a way to get through to those people that progressive ideas are good. That is admittedly difficult, and much harder than the way they sit there and blame the President for not convincing them of that on his own. Like if his speeches were just more passionate, etc., if he just refused to compromise, then these people with disproportionate Senatorial power are just going to come over.

There are many posters here who "yawn" or get snarky about the President's "powerlessness" when we mention the reality of the Senate or the current House composition. We can have the most liberal President in the world, but we need the lower offices too. It turns out the voters don't make a hierarchy out of it. We don't have the Parliamentary system (which some days I think would be better for progressives, since most liberal programs once started are popular and people don't want to get rid of them - there is plenty of right wing angst on that - but in the US, we have a harder time getting them started).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #57)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:24 PM

60. Well, then this seems more like a meta OP.

Making posts about what Yavin thinks the work entails would be more productive than slamming a small group of people who say things that annoy him, since he also has no proof of anything he does other than post here on DU.

Otherwise it would save everyone's time if he'd just PM those people with "You annoy me". Good people who took the OP in good faith have now wasted time on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #60)

Mon May 6, 2013, 04:18 PM

140. I "slammed" people? All I did was ask a question.

All of our issues would be better served if more Americans voted for progressives across all elective offices, city, county, state, and federal.

For example, income equality would be better addressed if forming unions were made easier, but we need progressive federal and state legislators to make that happen.

Does anyone have an answer?


Where in my post do I slam anyone?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #140)

Mon May 6, 2013, 04:43 PM

144. If you'd actually been interested in answers to that, we could have discussed it.

The fact that you handwaved CA's achievements in this area as mere nothings? Doesn't really speak well of the motives of the OP.

Either like treestar you wish to take the hide out of leftists who you feel are getting snotty about Obama, or you simply wish to assert that centrism is the only thing you think wins elections, so left suck it up.

If you want to be passive-aggressive on top of it, that's on you. What seems to be implied was obvious to people who took your OP as a ripe opportunity to rip the left.

Last word to you, I'm done wasting time on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #144)

Mon May 6, 2013, 04:58 PM

145. Those are all your own interpretations

I'll leave you to debate yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #57)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:44 AM

110. And that seems enough for many: You aren't a prog if I don't see posts in "______."

And if I don't see posts in "______," "_______," and "______" you are a RW troll. Registering voters, being in marches, organizing campaigns means little. The proof of activism is posting in a lotta groups & fora, ya know? And, of course, elevating ones abilities to "hurt feelings" for some reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #52)

Mon May 6, 2013, 04:15 PM

139. Did I use the term "lazy" in my OP? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #13)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:38 PM

29. Oregon provides you with 2 Democratic Senators, 4 out of 5 House members

Washington, sort of similar. You can bet your bippy it's not enough, but the fault is a regional fault, tons of States in the Mid West and South vote for Republicans only. What State are YOU from, OP? One of those low turn out, Blue Doggy Dog States? You tell us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #29)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:40 PM

32. I'm from NY

And it's not enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:00 PM

9. It's because the Democratic Party sold its soul to Wall Street decades ago.

We've been had. The corporate types are awash in cash, while true progressives are declared "unelectable."

Then there's the canard: "What are you going to do, vote for a Republican?" Of course not, Democrats hold their noses and vote for the lesser of evils (sometimes not so lesser as in the case of Blue Dogs).

Personally, I won't register as a Democrat anymore and only vote for the best ones. I vote strategically. In Texas, where Obama had no chance, I would have voted to Jill Stein, had I still be living there. He lost North Carolina as well, but it was more competitive, so I did hold my nose and voted for him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alarimer (Reply #9)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:06 PM

15. Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alarimer (Reply #9)

Sun May 5, 2013, 07:25 PM

65. This is what I would say also......

The Tennessean this morning had an article about House members and the money the ALREADY had in the bank for 2014. The Tennessee delegation of course is now very Republican with one Blue Dog (Cooper) and one actual leftish Rep (Cohen). The Republicans and Cooper, the Blue Dog have over a million dollars in the bank for 2014. How many progressives are going to be able to match this kind of corporate fundraising? And that lack of campaign funds is what makes them "unelectable".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:03 PM

12. Progressives generally don't get party backing and funding in America.

The quality of Democratic candidates is generally no better than the quality of the local and State Democratic Committees that select them. Then, there is the problem of campaign finance. When Rahm Emanual was head of the DCCC, he refused to fund many progressive candidates who had been nominated and were in need of funding.

Does that answer your question?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #12)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:06 PM

16. Why do you need funding to convince your fellow Americans to vote for progressives?

The Civil Rights marchers did not have funding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #16)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:36 PM

24. That was then, this is now.

We also didn't live in a plutocracy during the Civil Rights movement. The M$M and the 1% get to decide who they run for office, then we get to vote for them.

No one in Big Money wants a liberal pr progressive in office, they are to scared of what will happen to the free, unregulated market.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #16)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:33 PM

80. They weren't up for voting for they were busying working to get legislation passed

by targeting, sit in's and grassroots, though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #16)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:36 PM

82. Because the Party doesn't support True Progressives when they have a Blue Dog

they can push.

It's true...and have experience with it as do other DU'ers who have been active for years. We've had to deal with the "fixed Dem Party Apparatus" in our states.

You don't seem to be involved in grassroots efforts or you wouldn't have asked the question you did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #12)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:21 PM

19. that depends on the district

With gerrymandering, most of the progressives are in ultra safe Democratic districts. In a swing or lean R district, you have to run a Blue Dog if you want to win the election.

If you want to build up a progressive base in a non progressive part of the country, I would suggest to start at the local level. When you have a candidate running for office as "Councilman Progressive" or "Mayor Progressive" he/she will appeal to a lot more swing voters than "Progressive" will.

I've been a staffer on 4 campaigns, and all 4 have been Blue Dog districts. I just had an interview for another, also a Blue Dog in a rural district.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tabbycat31 (Reply #19)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:37 PM

26. This is all the more reason to run as a Blue Dog...

...but actually be progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #26)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:43 PM

38. that could be a possibility

But it also could mean that you're a one termer

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tabbycat31 (Reply #38)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:52 PM

45. So did your candidates win or lose?

I note that people often say 'only a Blue Dog can win' and yet the Blue Dogs lose anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #45)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:55 PM

49. I'm batting 500

I did an explanation on another post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tabbycat31 (Reply #38)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:47 PM

63. Why is that a bad thing?

Why can't we set up a continuous stream of one-term progressives, all of whom share a commitment to progressive causes, and are willing to continue the agenda and intents of their predecessors? Why does American politics need to be a career?

They- Republicans- lie to get elected all the time. They do it because it works: a lie can travel 'round the world while the truth is putting on its pants. In keeping with that, there is no sin in lying to defeat evil people; in that context, outright lying is a virtue, and telling truths you know will get you defeated only helps your political enemies. It's slimy, smarmy, and a disgusting perversion of the concepts of civil service and patriotism, but it's also the reality of the way the system works. We need to acknowledge and deal with what is real, and stop trying to act as if the world is as it should be.

There is a time and a place for telling the truth. American political races have no such time and place. We keep losing in these areas of the country because we have failed to learn that lesson. The Republicans win because they lie to the public about their intentions and lie about the facts and lie about their lies and are absolutely vicious about it; if they ever actually told these people the truth, the voters would not vote for them, full stop.

We need to be just as vicious. We need to be the real-life Frank Underwood from House of Cards. We need to start lying, or we will continue to lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Occulus (Reply #63)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:53 AM

112. Last week, I told the story of Representative Donna Edwards. For years she ran against a Blue Dog

Democrat named Al Wynn, and he had all the advantages: smarts, charisma, and a ton of money. She continued to lose but never gave up. Finally in 2006, she beat him...and beat him badly!! Rather than deal with the humiliation, he ended up quitting Congress and not finishing his term, so she had to run again to fill her own freaking seat.

The point is that progressives/liberals need to be more patient. The political right has always been patient. They lose elections and don't just give up or talk shit about how they are going to register as Independent or vote Green. You never hear a conservative utter such nonsense.

We need to continue to fight and if we lose a few, we lose a few.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tabbycat31 (Reply #19)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:47 PM

41. So of the 4 Blue Doggy Dogs you have worked for how many have won?

Any?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #41)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:54 PM

48. 2

And one by 648 votes in a year that wiped out Blue Dogs. (He lost in 2012).

The two that have lost--- both were long shots. One ran against a guy who in the last two elections ran unopposed and won with 89%. (This was a recall election).

The other was in a rural, southern district in a presidential year (2012) where the president lost by 29 points. We outperformed the other Democrats on the ticket (president, senate), but that seat is much more winnable in a midterm year. A Blue Dog held that seat for 28 years until 2010 when he was wiped out. The district had been trending red for awhile.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:09 PM

18. they do

and people ignore them and vote for the candidates the media tells them are realistic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:25 PM

20. It boils down to race, and profit

Not the president's race.

Race: From Cadillac welfare queens to Willy Horton to where we are today, Republicans have convinced their followers that all entitlements are going to inner city blacks and Hispanics, people so unlike themselves as to be damn near alien species.

Profit: Whether as the result of a long-term strategy or simply due to greed, wealthy conservatives have found a way to profit from all the changes due to the defunding of the federal government, including for-profit health care and education, privatization of previously federal responsibilities, etc.

Sure, sure, the issues are far more complex, but I think it boils down to these two factors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to matt819 (Reply #20)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:00 AM

113. AMEN!! RACE has always been the undergird of American politics. We see this today

with Gingrich's "Welfare President" and now turning unemployment insurance, social security benefits, Medicare/Medicaid...it's ALL welfare. The conservative movement has done a masterful job of racializing politics. It may not work for them all the time, but ask President Obama--he knows it's about race; he just can't admit it, sadly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:31 PM

22. this is so simplistic

there is a large segment of the population that cannot be convinced. PERIOD. not to mention that there's the whole red state/blue state divide. Do you actually think you can get progressives elected in Oklahoma? nope. not gonna happen.

there is hope. It lies in demographics and states like Texas eventually going blue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:34 PM

23. Because America votes for whoever the PTB decides will run for office.

If they don't like someone, they don't get to run. There are some exceptions, but that is pretty much SOP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:37 PM

27. So, Based on most of the posts on my thread, it's a lost cause

Because of money, the Dem party, the media, etc., there's nothing that the American Left can do to convince more Americans to vote for progressive candidates.

Do I have that right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #27)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:39 PM

31. No you are skipping over the reason and cherry picking your result.

So no you are wrong, it has nothing to do with that. How do you guys do it in Canada? I hear you have a really shitty RWing in charge right now. What are you doing to get progressives back in office?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #31)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:41 PM

34. I dunno. I'm not from Canada. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #34)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:43 PM

37. My apologies then, it must have been another Yavin on DU2

that I talked to that was from Canada. My mistake. How do you guys do it in NY then?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #34)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:49 PM

43. Then where are you from, because you speak of Americans as if we were separate from precious

Yavin4. What do you do, float above all nations like the transfigured Elijah?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #27)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:53 PM

47. You do.

There is a type personality that prefers to be cranky. Thus all positive suggestions will be shot down. There must not be any hope! If there was, they'd have to get away from the keyboard and get involved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:41 PM

33. It costs money to buy air time.

Most of the campaign dollars raised go to buying commercials for radio and tee vee.

Odd how many of those same media also are owned by conservative corporations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #33)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:42 PM

36. So, there's no hope then.

It's all about TV ads and nothing else. Do I have that right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #36)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:43 PM

39. It is about money, do you understand that?

It is a money thing and power thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #39)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:52 PM

46. If enough Americans were persuaded they could donate the money

A large number of small donations can be a lot more than big donations from a few rich donors.

But that's a cop out, too. We can talk to people day to day, convince people to look into more than just the slick TV ads and such; think about the issues. It seems there is this giving up by saying oh well they have more money and most voters don't care, so there is nothing we can do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #46)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:01 PM

51. There are a few here trying to define it as 'there is nothing we can do'

and you are right there is a lot we can do. Some things we cannot do are what is crippling us I think right now. Something we cannot do is get our foot in the door with the M$M. That we cannot do. We cannot get progressives elected to the national stage in huge numbers, so far. That is something we are working on.

Right now the Left is behind the 8-ball. Thanks to so many people out there that love to bash it on a daily basis and so many from our own party too. It hurts our chances when our own party hates us.

The 1% are not progressives nor do their numbers rank as liberals either. It is hard to get liberals to become shallow minded assholes like their billionaire counterparts in the RWing. And it is not just a few rich donors...that is simply not true.

We need our own national spotlight and some down to earth progressives manning that spotlight and NOT the crazy side of the Left either. Last thing we need is a libertarian pretending to be a liberal on national TV speaking for that side of the party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #51)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:09 PM

53. They complain of being hated, but the reason is they are the ones

always bashing the people in the center (rather than those on the right!). That works against their own goals, so I don't know why they do it. They seem determined to take the center/slightly left of center down more than they want to take the right down. That gets frustrating, so it's no wonder they are "hated." They don't have any plans to help, just criticism and crying "betrayal" as if their opinions are inherently more valuable that those left of center but not as far left as they are, or expect the nation to be.

I usually agree with them politically, but the reality is they are causing damage to any cause they want to espouse, blaming the rest of us for not convincing the center to be as far left as they would like. They think the President's "bully pulpit" means he alone should be able to convince right wingers into progressiveness! If they are willing to take any of it off of his shoulders, they blame Pelosi or Harry Reid. They seem to think the leaders should just do it for us, and if they don't they don't have Svengali-like hold over the masses, they deserve our scorn.

The reality is, this country's Constitution makes progressive change slow. It is geared to avoid changes and requires a lot of votes to get them made. Even the right wing would see that, in that they complain the liberal programs they don't like will never go away (why didn't they repeal them all when they had the chance after 911? That just shows how hard and long term it is).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #53)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:16 PM

56. The GOP is lucky that the other party likes to hate on itself.

The GOP has an infinite amount of power compared to grass roots progressives. Progressives and liberals cannot get their own party to like them. I don't think it has anything to do with the Constitution, since republicans love to violate it on a term by term basis.

As long as there are some that will not listen to any kind of criticism, progressives have no chance at a national shot. There are too many that will hate on them in their own party. And the haters are in the majority, so I wouldn't expect any progressive as POTUS anytime soon.

I mean I do not in the least bit...too much blind obedience and shouting down at those the simply disagree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #53)

Mon May 6, 2013, 07:35 PM

161. The reality is that things are getting worse consistently for the last 40 years for the 99%.

And at each stage the centrists say that it's ok, it could be worse. Pres Obama is certainly better than a republican but his continued appointments of conservatives will not help our recovery. You say change takes time. But during the Bush admin lots of changes happened and quite easily. He literally stopped the operations of most departments. Katrina was an example of his neutralizing government agencies. Trillions were looted. The Constitution didnt stop him and doesnt limit change. The Patriot Act and domestic spying are a couple of examples where the Constitution was completely ignored. As well as the AUMF. Bank bailouts and massive transfers of wealth. And yet the centrists will tell you that the left has "lofty ideals" (I got that from an earlier post today).

I dont want SS and Medicare cut. In fact I want the SS cap raised and Medicare for all. I want affordable health care for all or at least for all children. I want the banks to be held accountable for stealing millions of people's homes. I want my government to punish employers that steal employees retirement accounts. These are not lofty ideals. They are basic and decent.

I get frustrated when the Pres not only ignores Wall Street but appoints Wall Street friendlies to regulating positions. And then he spends my tax money prosecuting medical marijuana dispensers and sends them to prison for 20 years.

I want SS and Medicare strengthened. The far right wants to kill them altogether. The so-called center thinks that small cuts are needed to keep the far right happy.

We are in a class war with the left on the side of the 99% and the right on the side of the 1%. Which side is the so-called center?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #51)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:54 PM

86. Edit-- responded to the wrong post.

Last edited Mon May 6, 2013, 01:39 AM - Edit history (1)

Pardon me there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #51)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:04 AM

114. Honestly, we liberals need to stop bashing center-left or moderately liberal Democrats.

The purity test is ridiculous. Once we do that and become more unified against the right, we'll have more of a chance. But this constant bashing of fellow Democrats does more damage. This unwillingness to accept that a Democrat from Utah can't be as liberal as a Democrat from my home state of Maryland, hurts us!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #114)

Tue May 7, 2013, 10:03 PM

217. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #36)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:49 PM

42. There's always hope. We can use the Internets and the public spaces of our communities.

Create the first ripple, other drops fall in and create more ripples...once enough waves join together we can form a wave that can knock over anything. For that to happen, all we have to do is spread the truth. Person to person. Through the Internet. At the local public space. Wherever citizens gather who care. That is our most powerful weapon and it's free.

PS: We need the President to lead on this. It's been a long time since I've heard one say he was proud to be a Liberal and wanted to use the powers of government to make life better for ALL Americans. Without that leadership from above, it's just more work for those of us drebs who give a damn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #36)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:26 PM

61. It's not that there's no hope...

It's that right now you have a vicious cycle where you need money to advocate for those who don't have any money and there isn't a clear and easy path to get out of that logjam. But if big money won 100% of the time, there never would've been a New Deal or a Great Society. You keep fighting the good fight and one day there will be an opportunity to turn the tide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 05:41 PM

35. Because they are shut out of the American propaganda machine.

The message is not heard; and, when it is, it is demeaned, disparaged, and diminished. By the Democratic Party, and by Democrats.

The best candidates are always attacked as "fringe" and "unelectable," which is the propaganda machine's way of wielding fear to keep people obediently in line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #35)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:11 AM

116. There is truth in this ^^^

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #35)

Mon May 6, 2013, 03:44 PM

132. True - how often do you see a true liberal on the Sunday morning talk shows?

Barbara Boxer, Bernie Sanders, Raul Grijalva, etc?

Almost never.

Too often, the non-Administration Democrats on those shows are moderates like Harry Reid, Diane Feinstein, Max Baucus, Kent Conrad, etc. (And, Joe Lieberman was very popular for several years from 2000-2008) I can understand Reid, since he's the Senate majority leader.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:11 PM

54. on many social issues incredible advancements have been made. But on economic issues things have

largely gone backwards. At the moment progress on economic and even foreign policy issues do look like a lost cost - But things can change and change quickly

I grew up in a world where all Help Wanted adds even from major city newspapers were strictly segregated - Help Wanted Women - Help Wanted Men. Very few people even thought at the time that things could or would ever be different. I grew up in a world where it was liberal to believe that homosexuality was a disease that should be treated as opposed to criminal behavior that must be punished. Almost everyone thought that way and very few people imagined the world would ever be different. You would have had trouble counting on one hand the number of even the most liberal and progressive of elected office holders that would have said publicly that gay people were normal and should have full equal rights. Even most gay people thought there was something wrong with themselves and would certainly have never foreseen the day when 58% of Americans believed that gay people should have equal marriage rights like everyone else.

The ark of history moves slowly and unevenly and sometimes takes steps backwards - but in the big picture - it moves always toward progress . - At some point we may see equally dramatic changes - just as incredible on the economic front and even the foreign policy front that we have seen on the social issues front.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:19 PM

58. the left havent whored themselves like the center or right

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:22 PM

59. Because we don't have a lot of money

And you need money to get your message out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 06:44 PM

62. Corporations control the major media?

Last edited Mon May 6, 2013, 02:50 PM - Edit history (1)

Corporate media paints a distorted picture of reality. Especially including supposedly "liberal" MSNBC.

This is a typical example of the kind of emotional appeals and propaganda that MSNBC brainwashes their "liberal" viewers with -



Can you believe that piece of crap actually ran on the Rachel Maddow and Ed Shultz shows just to brainwash liberals?

Here's another example -


Our opponents own everything so it's hard to compete with that kind of power.

The propaganda model is a conceptual model in political economy advanced by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky that states how propaganda, including systemic biases, function in mass media. The model seeks to explain how populations are manipulated and how consent for economic, social and political policies is "manufactured" in the public mind due to this propaganda.

The theory posits that the way in which news is structured (through advertising, media ownership, government sourcing and others) creates an inherent conflict of interest which acts as propaganda for undemocratic forces.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to limpyhobbler (Reply #62)

Sun May 5, 2013, 07:49 PM

68. +100 did not watch the videos but corporate media plays ...

a Large role.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 08:01 PM

70. Six corporations control 98% of the media

This is one of many reasons to break up the monopolies

Can this be changed? I believe the web is one means, why you are seeing efforts to bring it under total corporate control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 09:06 PM

72. Things aren't bad enough yet

My brother is a Democratic/progressive activist in North Florida. He is absolutely tireless in campaigning for Democrats and liberal causes. I greatly admire that about him. We had a long conversation a few months ago about WHY things aren't changing and/or fast enough.

My conclusion, which he did not strongly disagree with, is that things simply aren't bad enough yet economically. Yes, things ARE bad but the official data does not reflect it and the media by and large does not reflect it.

I hate to say this, because I desperately do not want this to happen, but things seem to have to get worse before they get better. The critical mass of angry motivated people is not there yet. Too many buy into the conservative corporate paradigm and blame themselves when their situation is unhappy.

On the social issues front, I think progressives ARE making progress. It's the economic issues that lag far behind. Again, I do NOT want things to get worse but the Great Depression sure as hell motivated people to change the system from the semi-fascist 1920's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Reply #72)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:07 AM

115. We need to be a Liberal Stalwart like your brother and NEVER give up! The wingnuts never give up!

NEVER!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Reply #72)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:26 AM

118. Your brother is probably right. As long as the hologram of prosperity (cheap consumer goods)

Can be maintained and accessed thru more credit/ debt expansion, things won't be seen as so "bad." If consumption goes south, then the rumbles will be felt.

I grew up in N. Central Fla & was active there for years before transferring that to Texas decades ago. Frying pan meet fire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 09:13 PM

73. Co-opted by the "Not as Bad" party with the issues watered down to useless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:00 PM

74. No media access

this isn't rocket science

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:04 PM

76. because they are conditioned to like flash over substance

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:34 PM

81. 'Cause the American Left

doesn't get taken seriously. We are all loony dreamers or hard core anarchists, according to the media.............. :O)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:37 PM

83. "Well done is better than well said" - Ben Franklin

Most "progressives" run for office as progressives, and upon gaining office sprint hard right and attach to Wall Street's teat like a Rottweiler to a sirloin.

Obama meets regularly with Jamie and Lloyd. Krugman is persona non grata. Judge the results for yourself.

So people elect Progressives, continue to be economically sodomized, and wonder "where's the beef?" Doesn't help the Progressive brand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 10:56 PM

87. The Progressive Caucus is the largest in Washington.

Problem is, the DLCers control the Party and the message. The Corporatist Dems even view Progressives as a greater enemy than Republicans. One only has to look at Wasserman-Schultz, who when she was director of the DCCC "Red to Blue" program, denied funds to progressive candidates running against her Republican friends. The Democratic Party of Florida is even more hostile to Progressives. And then theres Rahm Emmanuel's outright hostility and scorn of Progressives. Frankly, if this trend continues (and I see no evidence it won't), then Progressives will continue to leave the party (as they did voting for Nader) and vote Green or something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 11:00 PM

88. A great question but I think you need to take it one step at a time.

First, we need to understand why the American Left hasn't convinced more Democrats to vote for Progressive Candidates. If we can't get our "own house in order", I don't think we can expect non-Dems (or "not currently Dems") to get excited about our candidates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Sun May 5, 2013, 11:47 PM

90. Over 18,000 posts and you don't know? Really? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 01:20 AM

95. Suiciding, accidenting, overdosing, Reserve Army of Lone Gunmen, & Media Fear n' Disruption machine

We will not get anywhere unless the media and telecom are re-regulated... and that will probably have to be done by force.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 01:39 AM

97. It sounds like you accept the notion that we have a far right party and a center right party.

So why don't you tell us why you think the left has little to no representation in our government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #97)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:53 AM

122. Well, for this post anyway. Third Way messaging demands the same sort of mental contortions

as Schroedinger's Cat.

Either our Democratic politicians are right-wing because the country really leans rightward and those "fucking retarded" (thanks, Rahm) hippies just are out of touch with that reality...

OR our Democratic politicians really do care about the elderly and the poor and the same values and policy goals as traditional Democrats, but they just can't get past those recalcitrant Republicans to represent the will of the people.

It's like living in Wonderland, with all the shifting excuses. But it's a very special type of Wonderland, unequalled in its snide contempt for average Americans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #122)

Mon May 6, 2013, 12:33 PM

126. Exactly-- shifting excuses.

It's why I don't bother really engaging on questions like this anymore. The entire groundwork their argument is based around can flip 180 degrees as needed. And back again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #97)

Mon May 6, 2013, 04:21 PM

142. That's your interpretation of what I asked

Not what I asked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #142)

Tue May 7, 2013, 01:05 PM

202. It naturally follows from your point. /nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:03 AM

101. Everyone with money and power scales centrist to batshit-insane right wing-ding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:07 AM

103. It is the money, honey.

Big money runs the show now. Big money does NOT bankroll progressives.
It is, IMO, ludicrous to point fingers at complaining progressives. And you know what? An example - Obama made some progressive noises, and progressives voted for him and then oh dear, we should have known he was not a progressive.
Where is the chance to elect a progressive to higher office these days?

So - are people seriously fucking telling progressives they must change what they believe in and be enthusiastic for the current crop, Obama on down, of corporate-owned third-way DLC Dino's? Fuck that.
I end up voting for what really is the lesser of two evils - but I am supposed to join the choir and warble hosannas?

The tea baggers are successful BECAUSE THEY HAVE KOCH MONEY BEHIND THEM.
It is not a matter of principle. If progressives had as much money and power behind them, they could be as successful as the teabaggers.
But the 1% is not going to back any liberal or progressive candidate, ever.

There's a great Leonard Cohen song that pretty much spells out how things have been for a long long time - "Everybody Knows" - check the lyrics out sometime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #103)

Wed May 8, 2013, 07:01 PM

257. +10000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:23 AM

105. I agree! We have failed miserably in terms of messaging. And when we lose battles we tend to

give up. The political right NEVER does that. Their voters NEVER threaten to stay home and not vote. They seldom start third parties (ironic, since the Republican Party was a third party) to hurt their own party. They just never give up no matter how badly they lose, no matter what issues haven't been taken up. They are resilent.

The political left is unorganized, sloppy, and whiny. Rather than come together and support a person, we tend to run away from candidates who are not ideologically pure on every single issue. There are too many issues on the left. If the candidate neglects to address any one or more of the millions of issues, we get angry and fail to support that candidate. The political right keeps things simple: God, guns, and gays. That's it. Pretty simple. Idiotic but simple. Dumbed-down, but still simple.

We also don't have a masterful language manipulator working for us like a Frank Luntz. There are great people out there like Drew Westen, for instance, but the Democratic Party is an ideologically fractured and diverse party. That's the good news. The bad news is that it is because the party is so diverse that it is often difficult to come up with a unifying message or messages on more than a few issues.

And finally, we must realize that the machine that the conservative right has created has taken decades to build. From the think tanks, to the political mastery of grooming candidates at the local level for office. The left is impatient and lazy. Democrats used to excel at running local candidates for office. The party's recruiting efforts were unmatched. But then we lost the drive and the message. The Republicans built their conservative empire from the ground-up and they were able to manipulate the message through dominance of talk radio and mainstream media. The creation of think tanks funneled that message, too, and an effort to color facts with a conservative bias became the norm.

When Reagan got rid of the Fairness Doctrine, conservatives were able to push their *simple* messages through a filter. Anti-government sentiment is not new. It's always been here since the country's founding. But for some reason, conservatives have been able to push the message that the government does nothing good...to the point where you hear Democrats buying into this crap, too.

Liberals need to realize that in order for the president to get anything progressive done, you must MAKE him do so by electing more progressive Democrats to Congress. It's really that simple. However, if we liberals continue to fail at messaging, continue to be disorganized and divided, and rather than taking action, whine about what's not being done, then we have to accept the status quo.

Just my thoughts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #105)

Mon May 6, 2013, 07:59 PM

162. THREAD. WINNER. Thank you for your HONESTY.

But I guess when you can blame everything on corporations and Third Wayers (and notice that the people who do this never, ever seem to blame Republicans for anything), why the hell would you ever need to do some introspection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #162)

Tue May 7, 2013, 01:10 PM

204. But you think the goals of liberals are "lofty and laughable".

So really, how can you expect anyone to take you seriously when you then downplay the relevance of terms like "Third Wayer"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #204)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:24 PM

209. Oh, so you DID see my post to you!

I was wondering 'cause you were so quick to leap into the conversation with your "machine gunning support" comment but turned blind and fingerless when I and another poster called you out on it.

Though, after reading this post I can understand why you didn't bother responding upthread. That is one seriously bad interpretation of what I didn't say. I said some liberals think that being a liberal means nothing more than tearing down Dems that don't meet their laughable ideals of what a liberal should be. How you get "I think the goals of liberals are lofty and laughable" out of that is something ever so... special indeed.

The relevance of the Third Way only appears to dwell in the minds of the paranoid cretins who think that calling someone this is an insult. Most of us don't know or care about the Third Way. And the ones that seem to be so absolutely CONSUMED by this group/movement/cause whatever seem to be the most incoherent ones here. So that does say something, but probably not what the anti-Third Wayers were hoping.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #209)

Tue May 7, 2013, 06:43 PM

212. You act like you think you posted some kind of clever argument.

Yes, I saw your post upthread. I chose not to respond because you weren't doing much more than mindlessly ranting, and because your "lofty and laughable" comment was, I felt, a better condemnation of your position than anything I could ever say.

"...your lofty and mostly laughable ideals of what a liberal should be". Those are your words, describing the divide between people like yourself and people on "the left". I'd love to know which of those lofty, laughable traits you disagree with, however-- if you can keep yourself together for a moment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #212)

Tue May 7, 2013, 06:54 PM

215. And you act as though you've posted something honest or even remotely relevant

that "..." before the cherry picked bit of quote that you posted says everything that needs to be said about you. Truly.

And you keep using the word "mindless." If ever there was a case of projection, you have highlighted it beautifully.

Edit: And I just double checked, my comment about some liberals tearing down Dems that don't meet their lofty and laughable ideals ws in response to rhet orick, not you. So your comment that you didn't respond because of that particular comment shows that you are even more dishonest and full of it than at first glance. Not a good look. At all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #105)

Thu May 9, 2013, 07:10 PM

263. ^^^^ This!!! ^^^^

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 09:28 AM

107. nanny-statism

Bloomberg et al.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #107)

Tue May 7, 2013, 12:53 PM

200. AKA corporate welfare

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:28 AM

119. Let Me Guess.....CUZ OBAMA!!!!!!!

Am I right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skraxx (Reply #119)

Tue May 7, 2013, 12:49 PM

199. The whiny center-right

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:38 AM

121. What snide, disingenuous Third Way propaganda this is.

Last edited Mon May 6, 2013, 04:32 PM - Edit history (5)

As though the mechanisms for silencing liberal voices weren't brazenly clear and in our faces every single day.

This inane OP pretends that the multi-billion dollar corporate media machine does not exist, and that it does not dominate the airwaves and the national conversation to promote its own candidates and destroy non-corporate upstarts before they even have a chance to begin. It entirely denies and ignores the billions and billions in funding required even to compete in elections at the national level. It ignores the deliberate restructuring of countless aspects of our political process over the past 30 years to shut out non-corporate voices, including the shameful seizing of control of the debate process and access to debates by the two corporate parties, changes in balloting and districting, and changes in campaign financing that allow plutocrats to hand-pick candidates and media memes.

The tone of this OP is the same, sneering "blame the victim and rub it in your face" garbage that we have come to expect from the Third Way. Like in the very same corporatists' "bootstraps" speeches to impoverished families, we are mocked and told, ludicrously, that we are just not trying hard enough.

This when ALL the evidence shows that the electorate is on our side already, but just are not given the chance to vote for a candidate who represents our views. Polling screams over and over again that the electorate craves more progressive policy positions. The proof of the scam is that corporate candidates invariably veer LEFTWARD during election season, brazenly lying that they support a public option, or want to defend Social Security...because they know as well as we do what the country really wants to hear. They spew the lies and the promises, and the desperate masses vote overwhelmingly for the lesser of two "viable" evils we are presented, and then as soon as the election is over these faux liberals are fellating the One Percent again.

What cynical, simplistic, manipulative garbage this OP is. What a marvelous example of how stupid Americans are assumed to be, and in what contempt we are held by the very ones who claim to represent us and be working on our behalf. And the icing on the cake is the use of the pronoun, "we," as though these Third Way vultures share any of the same economic values and goals as the millions of human beings out in the country they continually lecture and mock.

No, the country is not right-leaning. No, competing in national elections and the media is not simply a matter of will-power and a superior message. And, no, the Third Way is not on the side of the American people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #121)

Mon May 6, 2013, 11:22 AM

124. Well and truly said. Thank you. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #121)

Mon May 6, 2013, 01:01 PM

127. I have a question for you.

If this is true:

This inane OP pretends that the multi-billion dollar corporate media machine does not exist, and that it does not dominate the airwaves and the national conversation to promote its own candidates and destroy non-corporate upstarts before they even have a chance to begin. It entirely denies and ignores the billions and billions in funding required even to compete in elections at the national level. It ignores the deliberate restructuring of countless aspects of our political process over the past 30 years to shut out non-corporate voices, including the shameful seizing of control of the debate process by the two corporate parties, changes in balloting and districting, and changes in campaign financing that allow plutocrats to hand-pick candidates and media memes.


then how can this be true?:

when ALL the evidence shows that the electorate is on our side already, but just are not given the chance to vote for a candidate who represents our views. Polling screams over and over again that the electorate craves more progressive policy positions.


If the electorate is brainwashed by the corporate dominated media, then why do they crave progressive policies?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #127)

Mon May 6, 2013, 03:01 PM

129. Could it be a little of this, a little of that?

The mass media define the terms of the debate. For example convincing people we must cut Social Security to reduce the deficit, and repeating that as if it were a fact.

People still oppose Social Security cuts and wish they had more candidates who would vigorously defend Social Security. But over time, after enough exposure to the big lie presented as factual news, some people get confused and start to believe it.

In general it seems like the people who control the mass media and restrict the acceptable range of debate, are also the same people who restrict the options available to us when we go vote. They own and fund the media channels. They slobber money over politicians.

The big money special interests use their money to dominate the media message, spewing lies and emotional appeals, trying to shape public opinion. To the extent they aren't able to convince people, they also use their money to dominate the political process. They restrict the available political options and they influence the election results by campaign donations and direct spending such as via super-PACS and astroturfing.

So a little of this, a little of that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #127)

Mon May 6, 2013, 03:35 PM

130. Unfortunately, skilled, smooth talking, charismatic corporate sponsored politicians

pretend to be progressive and get nominated by deceiving too many gullible people into believing they are progressive by repeatedly lying to us while they are campaigning.

After they get elected, they only primarily represent the wealthy private interests that sponsor them.

This is how the Third Way/DLC operates. They are skilled corporate marketers who make a living preying on the hopes, dreams, and needs of naive and uninformed citizens.

People crave progressive policies due to their reason and necessity.

People get RW Third Way representation because of their naivete.

Marketing. It's what wealthy private interests do to increase their profit, power, and control. They excel at deception.

You can make a lot of coin selling snake oil in this world ~ all you need is a smooth, forked tongue, a pretty face, and a shiny bottle of dreams to sell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #130)

Mon May 6, 2013, 04:14 PM

138. So, the people are "too gullible" to see through the mass media

They just swallow what the charismatice corporate sponsored pols tell them, and there's no other way of reaching out to them. No other way to counter the mass media. No other way to reach them.

And there's nothing that the Left can do about it?

Do I have that corect?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #138)

Mon May 6, 2013, 11:16 PM

174. Yes, you have that correct. The system is controlled by wealthy private interests.

The only possibility for change is some form of revolution.

We need an Elizabeth Warren, but we will be forced to accept a Hillary Clinton ~ the MSM and the DNC will insure that a Hillary Clinton is nominated. The Hillary Clinton will run against the heinous republican, and we will all be forced to vote for the Hillary Clinton. The bottom line of the 1% will increase, and the 99% will continue to sink into serfdom.

As for the gullibility of the conservative center, and right, spectrum of American voters...this about says it all:



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #127)

Mon May 6, 2013, 07:34 PM

160. AWESOME questions. AWESOME

If the electorate is brainwashed by the corporate dominated media, then why do they crave progressive policies?

I made a similar point upthread - that Americans have always naturally leaned towards liberal principles but yet, tend to truly despise liberals. Corporations have gotten much too powerful and hold far too much sway in how we think, what we see etc. but there is really no getting around these questions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #121)

Mon May 6, 2013, 01:49 PM

128. *snap* ~ Thread win. You are awesome real, woo.

Real progressive democrats have nothing to hide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #121)

Mon May 6, 2013, 07:28 PM

159. Bravo! Bravo! You have totally and awesomely hit the nail on the head!

I'm damn sick of being blamed for the boot on my neck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 04:14 PM

137. The mainstream party sabotages them, and the corporate press and media deny them publicity

That's what I've seen ever since the craven DLC decided that traditional Democrats were "too liberal" and had to become quasi-Republicans to succeed.

But maybe the peasants are starting to revolt.

Here in Minneapolis, some DFL city council members who had voted corporate welfare for a billionaire's football stadium (without following the rule that any such expenditures have to be put up for a vote) are finding themselves not endorsed at the precinct caucuses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lydia Leftcoast (Reply #137)

Mon May 6, 2013, 04:19 PM

141. Okay. How does the Left counter that then?

What would you propose that the Left do?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #141)

Mon May 6, 2013, 11:16 PM

173. Guerrilla marketing

I've told the story before, but in the 2004 Minnesota caucuses, Kucinich got 17%, his best showing anywhere. This was not because "Minnesota is a liberal state," because DK did not do well in Madison, Wisconsin, or Portland, Oregon, or Berkeley, California, or any other place that is typically considered more left than average.

We had a dedicated team of volunteers who leafleted at the State Fair in 2003, set up a table at any event that allowed tabling, had campaign info translated into the major immigrant languages, leafleted at Twins and Vikings games, put signs on freeway bridges, and badgered local media to provide coverage. We leafleted our neighborhoods. Dennis came to speak in the Twin Cities four times.

Some of the volunteers "adopted" a county in Iowa, and DK won that county. He got 27% in the urban areas of the Twin Cities and won a few precincts.

Sad to say, I and the other veterans of 2004 were ready to go when DK announced his candidacy in 2007, but the call never came. None of us were contacted until we got a begging phone call asking for money just before Dennis withdrew. I don't know if someone deliberately sabotaged the campaign or what.

But anyway, this offers a clue for how to get leftists elected, especially now that so many people are so discontented with both parties. If the mass media and the party power structure won't respect you, bypass them.

If I were telling a real left party or faction how to gain control, I'd tell them to start small. Do what the righties did. Run for school board, city council, anything that doesn't require a lot of money and can make efficient use of person-to-person actions.

Also, be sure to find out what the real local concerns are and propose solutions. Back in the 1980s, someone ran for city council on the Citizens' Party platform. Unfortunately, his campaign was all about non-intervention in Central America and nuclear disarmament, both laudable goals, but Minneapolis was not sending military advisors to Central America or making nuclear weapons. Minneapolis residents in those days were concerned about snow removal, a remarkably ham-fisted school integration program, and a cabal of real estate speculators who were driving up rents. The Citizens' Party candidate had nothing to say about those issues and barely got any votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 05:05 PM

146. Weak candidates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 06:07 PM

151. Gerrymandering

Much of it has to do with the way the districts are gerrymandered for all levels of elections. In a federal election, my democratic vote means nothing because I live in Texas. Here in Dallas, I live in a area that is strongly Democratic, but the state and local keep slicing the districts apart so the powers to be can have their selected candidates elected. Scott Griggs used to be my Dallas city councilman. Now he has been thrown in with another city council member because he did not vote for the toll road in the river bottoms. I have not good choice for councilman anymore, both candidates will vote with the white citizens council to build the toll road. I have voted against the road once and the matter won't die because land developers who own the land edging the flood area keep the matter alive. They just keep changing the make-up of the voting districts and sooner or later they will get what they want. I image it is happening everywhere. Look at Austin, a heavy democratic stronghold, it was split up, I think with parts of the town in five districts. I used to live in Anchorage, Alaska and had the same thing happen there. I lived in the Muldoon area, but had to go out on O'Malley road to vote because of gerrymandering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 06:09 PM

152. The silly protesters taking down LBJ gave us everything bad and in fact,made the war go on longer

 

The democratic party easily could have been president since 1960

and if not for those hating "the egghead" and electing Reagan the first(Eisenhower),
in actuality, the democratic party would have had the presidency since FDR.

stupid were the fracturers and the protesters and the whiners who wanted 100%.

Do you all remember-it took LBJ getting republican votes and having 67 senators to ram through what ONLY LBJ did.

yet the silly protesters blamed LBJ for the one thing any president would have done, and in fact Truman/Eisenhower/JFK started Vietnam anyhow.

and they would happily sell the party down again


EASY ANSWER-
ONE has to vote straight democratic, get the 67 that LBJ had, get rid of the REPUBLICANS from office the next 6 cycles

and then it can be 80-20.

doing anything else is just well, oh so obvious.

any defection only helps Jeb Bush and the Bush family again.

one can whine and hide that fact, but it is the truth.

these stupid soundbytes the 3rd way is the Nader way.Stop with the soundbytes. Take the loss and whine whine whine.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 07:04 PM

155. The "American left" is not blameless...

They have not tried to convince voters that their side is the correct one. They have simply gone along with the PTB within the Democratic Party. For the last 25 years, that has been the DLC, a group of centrist Democrats that persuaded the rest of the Party, including the left, that they were better at winning elections. But it did not come without a price.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 07:27 PM

158. Too much emphasis on gun control

I've run across a few folks with the same story: "You know, I'd be willing to give my vote to some of these Democrats, but the only thing stopping me is that I'm afraid they're gonna rip up the Second Amendment, so that's a deal-breaker."

Democratic candidates need to get behind Toomey-Manchin and promote the hell out of it until it becomes a reality. But any loose talk about new gun bans or even magazine bans will be met with increased resistance even within our own party. And with the midterms coming up before we know it, this could be rather important.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 08:10 PM

163. Because......

even to many democrats and liberials have the attitude "I have mine. Fuck the rest of you." or "Until it happens to me and my family I'm not getting involved."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Mon May 6, 2013, 10:53 PM

171. Because it takes some intelligence to vote for progressive candidates.

And stupid people always go with the candidate who tells them what they want to hear: that they are smart people (which they're not), their bigotry is A-OK (which it's not), that the poor are poor because they made poor choices (also wrong), and that looking down on others makes them feel better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #171)

Tue May 7, 2013, 07:23 AM

192. Yeah! Stupid Voters! That's a good way to appeal to 45% of the electorate!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #192)

Tue May 7, 2013, 12:40 PM

198. It's time for truth. Conservatives and conservatism are bad for children.

Conservatism has all but destroyed our country and democracy. Reagan and Bush were violent, evil monsters; austerity is causing human suffering worldwide.

Being conservative is stupid, and is totally not cool.

Shout it from the rooftops, acknowledge the obvious truth: Conservatism is anti-life. It is a destructive and inhuman philosophy of action and being.

We must stop coddling conservatives, stop pretending that their ideas have any constructive value. It has been proven over and over that conservatism is a destructive force in every area of human and planetary existence.

Limbaugh and his ilk were successful at brainwashing naive people into believing that conservative is good and liberal is bad by repeatedly pounding that message into people's heads day after day, month after month, year after year.

Liberal became a four letter word because of deliberate, sustained RW corporatist propaganda, and even some on the left bought into the lies

This is generally apparent; quite obvious even here at DU.

Now we are faced with having to undo the brainwashing Limbaugh and his fascist ilk have instilled into the national collective consciousness. It's time for kindness, reason, equality, justice, and sanity to reign.

Corporatism = Conservatism

Sing it with me:

♫ Conservatives, and conservatism, are really bad for children, kittens, all life, and our lovely home, this planet earth. ♫

Really, really bad.

This is what conservativism does to children

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #198)

Tue May 7, 2013, 10:09 PM

218. Those people who represent today's political Right are not true conservatives.

Last edited Tue May 7, 2013, 11:09 PM - Edit history (1)

They're nothing but reactionaries and regressives. They favor policies that mirror what life used to be like in the Gilded Era. Most so-called conservatives nowadays care very little about actually "conserving" anything, whether it's the Big 3, Roe v. Wade, Affirmative Action, gay rights, the Civil Rights Act, affordable health care, or the environment. And they always increase the deficit and unemployment when in office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jamaal510 (Reply #218)

Tue May 7, 2013, 11:27 PM

220. But who is/was a true conservative? Strom Thurmond? Ronald Reagan? Jesse Helms?

Joe McCarthy? George Wallace? J. Edgar Hoover? Richard Nixon? Pat Buchanan? Pat Robertson? Barry Goldwater? Rahm Emanuel? Dick Cheney? Gerald Ford? Evan Bayh? William F. Buckley? Herbert Hoover? Calvin Coolidge? Ayn Rand? Hitler? Mussolini? Limbaugh? Stalin? Fred Phelps? George F. Will? Al From? Will Marshall?


Honestly, I think this ideal of "the true conservative" is nothing but a myth created by people who grew up during the Reagan years and got brainwashed into believing that conservatism was something noble and desirable.

It simply isn't. Conservatism is intolerant, greed driven, icky, stupid, and destructive.

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/07/22_politics.shtml

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #171)

Wed May 8, 2013, 12:27 AM

228. It's the old Adlai Stevenson joke

His advisors told him that Adlai was winning the intellectual vote, and he responded with, "Yes, but how do we get the other ninety percent of voters?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 03:55 AM

188. there is no organized american left. there's a bunch of front groups associated with the demo-

 

cratic party and some special interest groups funded by foundations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 07:21 AM

191. ...because Americans aren't, by and large, progressive.

They're middle of the road, centrist, and VERY small "c" conservative (not ideologically, but resistant to major change in either direction).

As a result, faced with a progressive who wants to change things and a Conservative who claims he doesn't (whether or not that's true), they'll tend to go for the Conservative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 08:28 AM

193. That requires a sustained effort that offers people positive choices using positive language.

The folks who think that the Democratic Party is not progressive enough do not seem to be able to put anything like that together.

They are very good at attacking Democrats and other people. They don't seem to have much political game beyond that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #193)

Tue May 7, 2013, 09:32 AM

194. IOW, We Have To Be More Likeable. If people don't like you, then they turn off to you.

How would you propose overcoming the massive advantage that the corporate media has?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #194)

Tue May 7, 2013, 10:40 AM

195. Not exactly. The message has to be a positive one, not necessarily the folks saying it.

Although that helps.

Negative wording and campaigning works in elections and it works to stop other folks initiatives for being passed. It's not so good as a reason to adopt a slate of laws or policies that you are suggesting are best for people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #193)

Tue May 7, 2013, 06:40 PM

211. Very nicely said, Steven. And as has been pointed out, Exhibits A-Z of exactly what

you're talking about have shown up over and over again in this thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 01:13 PM

205. Because the AMERICAN RIGHT owns the media.

Period. Seriously, end of discussion.

If the mythical "George Soros" was everything that the Right claims he is, the left would own several tv networks. But it's all bullshit. We're wallowing in the results of a concerted 30+ year effort by the GOP to take over the dialog through sheer force of DOLLARS. The left still thinks we can play fair, while the right kicks us in the balls and laughs about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 05:58 PM

210. We're too busy talking down to red states

Unfortunately, there is a vast cultural gulf between progressive and conservative areas of the country that requires bridging. Instead of trying to understand rural and southern America, progressives like to mock and belittle them endlessly with a (somewhat unearned) sense of inherent superiority.

It's difficult to persuade someone you're actively shitting on.

But, we still delight in it. Just read the gun threads around here. I am pretty solidly for gun control, but holy hell, I'm glad no one reads DU to be persuaded. The hatred and disdain for the Other is so thick, I can't believe people don't actively choke on it.

We have, over time, become a not so pleasant people. Not that Republicans are either. But you can't ask for a vote after spitting on someone. Just doesnt work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 06:48 PM

213. all politicians want to win. All politicians are convinced their constituents are far more

conservative than they actually are. Therefore politicians run on a conservative agenda. And voters complain they can't fine progressives to vote for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 06:48 PM

214. Two reasons, I think

The first is the biggest and hardest to combat. When it comes to progressive economic issues, the message is, if not counterintuitive, at least somewhat complicated compared to the right wing's simple sloganeering. Taxation is obvious example...teabaggers shout "no more taxes" and progressives shout "tax fairly and spend the money on infrastructure, jobs programs and other areas where it will help all of us". No one likes paying taxes, but progressives know that they are needed to maintain a strong society. It is difficult to make nuanced arguments against slogan chanters.

The second reason is related somewhat, but really is an image problem. Progressives lead with our hearts on social issues and aren't as reactionary as conservatives. We're still associated with the counter-culture in many older people's minds, and in some instances on some issues, even the younger generations. That makes us easy enough targets for simplified attacks--we're "anti-America", anti-religion, soft on crime, etc. Even when we are right and the general population moves toward our views (marriage equality) we win the battle, but still get tarred with the broad brush strokes of being anti-family, immoral, etc. Even among those who agree with most of the Democratic social platform, we're seen as the party/ideology that is more touchy-feely than pragmatic realists.

So, we have the reputation of not being as "practical" as the other side, and when it comes to economics, that is major problem. In a nutshell, we have a more difficult time explaining our economic positions and less reputation as "serious" in the realm of economic theory. The media buys into this, partly because it is in their interest to do so, partly because it all makes for grand theater (which is what they exist for).

One last example of this in action...the "job creators" meme is accepted by virtually everyone on the right, the vast majority of the middle, and possibly even a majority of the left. Business owners DO NOT create jobs. Demand for a business' products or services creates jobs. Demand comes from the people, not business owners. For instance, if Joe Blow opens a tea bagging business, he only hires someone if he absolutely must in order to satisfy his customer base. All corporations (by design) and most businesses have one goal--maximize profit. The only way to do that is to keep costs low and prices high--that means minimum workforce to supply the demand. It isn't rocket science. Businesses are not in the business of creating jobs, they are actually in the business of minimizing the amount of payroll they must pay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Tue May 7, 2013, 07:31 PM

216. The responses to this thread have been illuminating. Thanks for posting it

I do think you could have shown a bit more support to what Starry Messenger was saying.

But besides the small handful of non-reading, truth-shredding denialists, I think you've gotten at least a few people to think about how things could be done a bit differently. LiberalStalwarts posts have been phenomenal. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2804986

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Number23 (Reply #216)

Thu May 9, 2013, 09:11 PM

266. Thank you, my love. You ain't too shabby yourself!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 12:34 AM

229. Most people don't believe anything unless

they hear it from some pompous talking head on television.

And we know what they're all telling them.

The corporate stranglehold on our media is part of the problem, certainly. The left has been shut out since the early 70s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 12:35 AM

230. I also agree this was a great thread.

I would like to see more progressives elected, but it isn't easy.

I see a lot plain old bashing here on DU. Sure sometimes it's fun to bash and have a sense of humor about things. And it is important to be critical, especially if being critical can lead to change. But when people bash Obama and keep bashing him, it drives me nuts. It reminds me of kids I went to high school with. The kids who would always make fun of the teachers.


It makes me scratch my head because I joined this forum to not only learn more about politics, but also because I want to be a better citizen myself.

If you live in a district who can elect a progressive, I think it is great. Keep at it. But don't undermine the efforts of those that live in red states or purple districts. We can't help it and we have to work harder than everyone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 12:51 AM

232. Because racism trumps everything. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 02:26 AM

237. The average opinion of those on the right

is that progressives are generally weak, against individual merit, and are not in favor of hard work.

That's impression from the conservatives I've worked with. Never mind that much of the ideology on the right rests on disproven beliefs than cutting spending (austerity!) during economic downturns actually works. And don't bother mentioning such lack of investment cuts off the necessary creativity and innovation needed for the nation to get ahead.

So basically it's just blind ideological worship - on everything - environment, spending, health care, etc.

Oh and they hate gays and are paranoid because they love their guns more than just about anything else. Oh and progressives don't believe in God and hate Christians, but love Islam.

So the 3-Gs. It may be cliche, but that's all it really boils down to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 02:37 AM

238. THE PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS IS THE LARGEST DEM CAUCUS IN CONGRESS!

So, there.

And before I go, Elizabeth Warren, motherf*ckers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 04:14 PM

252. It is the Democratic party that has the most say on who runs.

You want more progressives, liberals, and leftists, then people need to organize at the local level. Get a sufficient number of progressives to run for position in the Democratic party leadership in your district or town. Elect progressives as city councils, school commissioners, mayors. Move these people to state elected office, and then federal elected office. A real "progressive" or "liberal" is not going to appear magically with a following that will get him or her elected.

The left in this country has been moribund for decades. The Republicans moved from right wing to far right wing to radical right. The democrats followed across the political center and now range from barely left to center to classic Conservatives. The Affordable Health Care Act is better than what we hand, bit is almost completely a Conservative Republican bill from the 1990's. So, in many ways, the Democratic party is now a 1990's Republican Party. The Republican Party consists of radicals and John Birch Society want-to-bes who the Republicans rejected in the 50's.

Getting real "progressives" in control will require a long slow slog and will need grassroots level organization.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Original post)

Wed May 8, 2013, 07:00 PM

256. A better question would be: Why has the Democratic Party attacked, bullied, mocked, and ridiculed...

..anything remotely "progressive", let alone "Left", and why has the Democratic Party become so much closer to the Republican Party on almost every substantive, meaningful issue?

Before you chastise the Left, realize that the Left has almost entirely been shut out of the halls of power, the media, and any public platform that would give them influence.

How do you convince more Americans to vote for progressive, left-wing candidates? It's not a fair fight to begin with. The Right has untold amounts of wealth, which buys them access to politicians of both parties and to the mainstream media (who, in this corporate conglomerate world, have the same interests as the Right-profit). The Right has a vast network of think tanks, journals, and other propaganda outlets, which subject the people to right-wing propaganda on a daily basis. And the Democratic Party at best, only mildly resists these developments and at worst, is a willing collaborator in the deprivation of the American working class and poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread