IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Thank me? I didn't vote for him. Or HIllary in the primary for that matter.
Those are the two groups you should thank.
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
New Correction:
it should read "Thanks to you, and people like you".

There are two groups of hopelessly stupid people in this country - those who voted for Trump, and those who did not vote against him.

When you can see the flood waters coming, it's not real smart to refuse to get in the only boat available, just because it has a few leaks and you'll have to do a little bailing to keep it afloat.
New I'm not buying it.
If you voted for Trump, well, you deserve everything that's going to happen to you.
If you voted for Hillary in a Primary, well, congratulations! You helped nominate the only possible candidate who could actually lose to Trump.

There is a third group, of course, responsible for Trump's victory. It's tiny and obscenely wealthy (read: one per centers). AFAIK, that little group is the only group happy about what's happening. Well, okay, them and Putin.
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
New And you are entirely wrong - as usual.
You are an idealist - and idealists by definition have a seriously warped view of reality. Pol Pot was of your ilk, a Communist idealist trained in Paris, and he killed millions of his country people in service of his ideal - and you want a bloody revolution right here to "fix things". Yeah, sure it will.

You have never understood Trump. You have never understood his campaign. You have never understood the people to whom he pitched his campaign - your sacred proletariat. He would have plowed Saint Bernie under without breaking step - a much easier target than Hilary, who actually has some substance.

The Proles don't want socialism - too complicated, they would have to think (horrors!). They want a strong leader and fascism. Trump was the man with the right message to mobilize the Proles, and knew how to exploit it - he had studied Hitler's speeches, intensively. He would have plowed under anyone, so long as the election was by the electoral college, dominated by farmers and your Proletarian "friends".

Bernie spouts a line very attractive to certain idealists, but he has no substance - no accomplishments of note, no actual plans, just words attractive to a minority.
Trump would only have needed to call him a "Socialist" - game over.

Early on, you were all in favor of Trump winning - because it would bring on the bloody revolution, but the people you expect to bring on the revolution are precisely the people Trump preached to, the people who elected him President.

You were all telling us "it doesn't matter which one wins, it's all the same". Now you know better - but you'll soon forget - it's inconsistent with your ideology.

And now we can't do anything about it, because if we dethrone Trump, we get Pence, who is even worse, and in tighter with the 1% and their bought and paid for servants in the legislature.

You're a good Commie idealist - you want to see blood flowing in the streets - REVOLUTION! It's been proven over and over that revolution just bring greater repression than what came before - but you are an idealist - so you can't see that. Facts are meaningless to an idealist.
New Given time, I may become as cynical as you.
I've already posted my recent feelings (or doubts, if you prefer) after reviewing some of Trotsky's final works, so I won't repeat them here. In then end, I may be cheering the arrival of an outsized asteroid.
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
New I was going to let it pass, but I can't. You could NOT be more wrong.
Enlighten yourself:

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-bernie-beats-trump-20161222-story.html

http://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-donald-trump-popular-vote-poll-569606

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/11/09/bernie-sanders-donald-trump/93530352/

Affluent, well meaning Right Wing Democrats (that'd be people like you) helped yet another Corporate Tool get the Democratic nomination. Where are those Wall Street transcripts again? Let me guess, next to the transcript of the $400,000 Wall Street speech Obama just gave? I don't know why you all don't just go ahead and register as Republicans. That's what you all are. Old School Republicans. But you don't much like the stink of that in polite company, so you pretend that New Democrats like yourselves "are on the side of the working class" because that sounds better at a cocktail party, right? The trouble is the working class has been screwed over hard for the last 37 years and they're not going to drink the Kool-Aid anymore. You can delude yourself all you want about a vote for Hillary not being a vote for Trump, but that's what it was. Despite all that, she very narrowly lost the Electoral College. So narrow in fact, that Bernie would have been our sitting President right now if Right Wingers (that'd be you) didn't insist that another tool of Wall Street be the nominee. Keep it up and I'll be dead before a Democratic majority in either house or a Democratic President exists.

You might also like Q4 here: https://www.pollfish.com/dashboard/results/13230/-1818385646
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
Expand Edited by mmoffitt May 12, 2017, 10:18:59 AM EDT
Expand Edited by mmoffitt May 12, 2017, 11:01:49 AM EDT
New I don't agree with 100% of this
But close enough to not waste my time trying to improve on it: https://thepolicy.us/fuck-bernie-fucking-sanders-fe49195c97cd
Yes, I agree. We need to do everything we can to stand together against a corrupt con man who hides his tax returns, whines about rigged elections, benefitted from the the DNC hack, panders to the gun lobby, has shadowy ties to Russia and refuses to accept the indignity of losing to a woman by millions of votes. Oh, you thought I meant Trump?
--

Drew
New I find that sort of thing remarkable.
Bernie's supporters made up almost 50% of Democrats who voted in primaries. Hillary barely beat a man in his 70's who was a self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist. Hillary lost the general in no small measure because Millennials and traditional, working class Democrats (who made up a rather large share of Bernie's supporters in the primaries) found an establishment Democrat like Hillary so repugnant they didn't show up to vote for her. And yet, somehow, the conventional wisdom of the folks who claim they want to see Democratic candidate victories in future are wasting no time further alienating this rather large slice of their own party's membership. It is an incredibly stupid argument that goes like this: "We've had our asses handed to us for more than 30 years, ever since we turned toward Wall Street and adopted Republican policies as our own. Our inside track Democrats have lost two-thirds of state legislatures and governorships, and our last inside track Democrat was so reviled that she lost to Donald Trump. Miraculously, the answer to the problem does not involve supporting the sorts of policies Democrats had stood for during the entire time they were in power (free state college tuition, Medicare expansion to all, etc., basically, pick a policy Bernie campaigned on); rather, it is to further alienate the half of the Party that has not responded well to our paid-for donor owned candidates. We will ridicule those horrid Bernie supports, we will call them names like "purity ponies" and blame them for our losses. But we will absolutely not do anything different because our policies have broad appeal. That will bring them all back."

To which I say, "Good luck."

On a side note, Hillary supported Trump's 59 missile launch.

http://time.com/4730416/syria-missile-attack-hillary-clinton-assad/

Edit: I read dmcarls' link after I'd written this, but it underscores the point I make here:
If you look at the numbers, Bernie Sanders is the most popular politician in America – and it’s not even close. Yet bizarrely, the Democratic party – out of power across the country and increasingly irrelevant – still refuses to embrace him and his message. It’s increasingly clear they do so at their own peril.

A new Fox News poll out this week shows Sanders has a +28 net favorability rating among the US population, dwarfing all other elected politicians on both ends of the political spectrum. And he’s even more popular among the vaunted “independents”, where he is at a mind boggling +41.

This poll is not just an aberration. Look at this Huffington Post chart that has tracked Sanders’ favorability rating over time, ever since he gained national prominence in 2015 when he started running for the Democratic nomination. The more people got to know him, they more they liked him – the exact opposite of what his critics said would happen when he was running against Clinton.
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
Expand Edited by mmoffitt May 15, 2017, 12:30:23 PM EDT
New Concur..
New Popularity has little to do with policies
Elections are literally a popularity contest. Some people gain popularity because of their policies, but the election itself only measures popularity, not the reason why.

Trump weaponized this knowledge to a greater degree than most people believed was possible. He's a glib, charismatic, likable guy ... as long as you're not counting on him to hold up his end of a deal.

If the Democratic party wants to win elections, they won't do it by refining - or overhauling - their positions. They'll do it by grooming more likable candidates.

We've had our asses handed to us for more than 30 years, ever since we turned toward Wall Street and adopted Republican policies as our own.
30 years ago was the middle of Reagan's second term. Since then it's been Bush Sr. for 1 term, Clinton for 2, Bush Jr. for 1, Obama for 2, and now Trump. That's about as equal a split as you can do.
--

Drew
New Oh, that explains why Democrats insisted on Hillary OVER the most popular politician in the US!
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
New The Democratic Party doesn't vote
The biggest difference between the two parties lately is that the Democratic Party chooses candidates based on policy/ideology, while the Republican Party chooses based on who will win.

Reagan used to be a Democrat? Who cares, he's popular. Trump used to be a Democrat? Who cares, he's popular. The Tea Party is openly opposed to the current leadership of the party? Who cares, they're popular.

Republicans prefer to win first, then negotiate within the party to decide what to do. Democrats have the negotiation first, then try to win with the "best" candidate.

Bernie didn't support the Democratic party platform. They don't have to let him run under their banner.
--

Drew
New Dude, Bernie WROTE a lot of the Democratic Platform. HTH.
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
New Apparently not the parts the cared about
--

Drew
New A) Which of the terms 2001-'04 and 2005-'08 is it that doesn't count?
Also, B) Who owned Congress during those years? Having the presidency but not being able (or even willing to try?) to do anything with it because one or both Houses blocks you is also pretty much "having your ass handed to you", and I seem to recall which party's Presidents have been in that situation and which party's haven't.

And, C) Being popular enough to win both Presidency and Congress might perhaps have a little something to do with having popular policies after all, donchathink?

No fucking wonder the Democrats have lost Congress seemingly forever, when their Congressmen are to all intents and porpoises indistinguishable from (most; the old just-Jesus-and-plutocracy kind) Republicans. (Though, admittedly, usually not the newfangled totally-out-of-their-gourd ones.)
--
Christian R. Conrad
Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi

(Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
     Who will stop Tinpot Trump? - (mmoffitt) - (17)
         No one - (crazy) - (15)
             Thank me? I didn't vote for him. Or HIllary in the primary for that matter. - (mmoffitt) - (14)
                 Correction: - (Andrew Grygus) - (13)
                     I'm not buying it. - (mmoffitt) - (12)
                         And you are entirely wrong - as usual. - (Andrew Grygus) - (11)
                             Given time, I may become as cynical as you. - (mmoffitt)
                             I was going to let it pass, but I can't. You could NOT be more wrong. - (mmoffitt) - (9)
                                 I don't agree with 100% of this - (drook) - (8)
                                     I find that sort of thing remarkable. - (mmoffitt) - (7)
                                         Concur.. -NT - (Ashton)
                                         Popularity has little to do with policies - (drook) - (5)
                                             Oh, that explains why Democrats insisted on Hillary OVER the most popular politician in the US! -NT - (mmoffitt) - (3)
                                                 The Democratic Party doesn't vote - (drook) - (2)
                                                     Dude, Bernie WROTE a lot of the Democratic Platform. HTH. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                                                         Apparently not the parts the cared about -NT - (drook)
                                             A) Which of the terms 2001-'04 and 2005-'08 is it that doesn't count? - (CRConrad)
         n Thanks for this Mehdi Hasan Gem - (Ashton)

Dude.
150 ms