Quote :

"What would have to happen for you to A. leave the party? B. Vote against a democratic candidate?"

This is a good hypothetical, but the leftists of 2017 don't like questions like this because they have zero principals so they pretty much just go with whatever the media/hollywood/celebrities tell them, and accept whatever the "victim narrative" is without thinking for themselves.

It isn't about whether or not you agree with the action, its about who did the action because all of you are brainless hacks that can't see through the media's bias.

5/6/2017 10:26:51 PM

Quote :

"Does the Iran-Contra Affair, Jack Abramoff, and Donald Trump, respectively, have any impact on you?"

So you're ok with all of this stuff because "republicans do it too!"? Thats exactly what I mean by "standing for nothing".

Quote :

"From my understanding, the only requiremnet is that they are less liberal than the DNC candidate. An extreme hypothetical is if someone just like Trump ran as a single-payer-loving conservative against someone like Clinton. Honest question: how old are you?"

So now you see the problem with the "two party" system? I'm 30.

Also this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_X__bmdIek

5/7/2017 2:46:28 PM

Sooo I'm hearing rumblings in conservative circles that the DNC hacks were not actually Russian hacks but actually leaks by a DNC insider. That DNC insider was found shot in the back last July. Sounds like they found evidence on his computer(s) of collusion with Wikileaks and trails that he sent them emails.

I wonder if there is any truth to this. His name was Seth Rich.

5/17/2017 9:21:42 AM

Oh, FFS.

You're trolling now, right?

http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/16/media/seth-rich-family-response-claims-of-wikileaks-contact/index.html

[Edited on May 17, 2017 at 9:28 AM. Reason : X]

5/17/2017 9:27:07 AM

People have called me lots of things around here, but a troll usually isn't one of them. No, I wasn't trolling, but I did hear about it.

Thank you for the link - I didn't see that this morning when I was perusing CNN. I'll put it to bed now.

5/17/2017 9:32:54 AM

^^^Not attacking you at all, but I have a few friends who have spent the last two years telling me about all the things they hear from their contacts in DC and nearly every single thing I've ever heard was wrong.

I even have personal experience - I used to work for a US Senator and during the McCain race we got "inside information" that his VP pick was going to be person A and it almost immediately turned out to be Sarah Palin (not person A).

In any event, the Seth Rich thing is highly unlikely (but not zero % chance) connected in any with Wikileaks and everything that's happened since.

[Edited on May 17, 2017 at 10:08 AM. Reason : a]

5/17/2017 10:04:56 AM

^ was it Joe Lieberman? I remember hearing he landed on Palin in a panic after it was leaked that he was going to pick Lieberman.

5/17/2017 11:22:46 AM

I can't remember honestly, though I want to say we were told Romney.

5/17/2017 1:54:50 PM

https://twitter.com/bfouhy/status/865978102114942976

This is why Bernie is so crucial to the Democrats. This is the message that needs to be sold.

The Russia stuff is important but it is NOT a message to build a platform on.

5/20/2017 2:50:47 PM

I wonder what they are saying. I hope they aren't saying ACA is great.

5/21/2017 2:01:26 PM

I guess We'll just have to take DWS word for it
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-a-dubious-russian-document-influenced-the-fbis-handling-of-the-clinton-probe/2017/05/24/f375c07c-3a95-11e7-9e48-c4f199710b69_story.html?utm_term=.8ed6e262ddd0

5/24/2017 7:47:32 PM

As trustworthy as the Steele dossier. That's to say not very.

5/26/2017 9:58:02 AM

did the Post publish that?

5/26/2017 10:56:41 AM

there has actually been quite a bit of the steele dossier that has now been corroborated

5/26/2017 12:38:04 PM

^

and further news:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/335244-official-trump-looking-at-future-of-us-sanctions-on-russia

5/26/2017 12:58:23 PM

Writing is on the wall for another "moral victory" for the party of losing tonight in GA-06.

Trump can't get out of his own way but at some point the Democrats need to learn to actually win. Hope I'm wrong.

[Edited on June 20, 2017 at 6:57 AM. Reason : And it is important -- Trump has personally made it about himself this morning ]

6/20/2017 6:57:21 AM

I don't know where else to put this, but I don't ever want to hear anyone from Hollywood talk about unequal pay for women. Gal Gidot only earned a reported 300,000 for her role in Wonder Woman.

That is just awful. How is that even justified?

6/20/2017 11:16:56 AM

That's a movie industry problem. Not a Democrat party problem.

Quote :

"It's a surprisingly low number in the superhero-movie world, given the hundreds of millions of dollars paid to make and promote the films. But it's not the first time an actor has gotten that kind of paycheck — Chris Evans also got a base pay of $300,000 for "Captain America: The First Avenger." However, most actors in the first "Avengers" movie earned between $2 million and $6 million after bonuses, while Robert Downey Jr. took in $50 million. And Henry Cavill earned $14 million for the first time he played Superman in "Man of Steel." With "Wonder Woman" having earned over $570 million worldwide to date, Gadot can expect a raise when the sequel is announced."

The industry is trying to protect themselves against major busts. Similar to NFL rookie contracts

[Edited on June 20, 2017 at 11:26 AM. Reason : sda]

6/20/2017 11:25:47 AM

Quote :

"I don't know where else to put this, but I don't ever want to hear anyone from Hollywood talk about unequal pay for women"

even if they use this as an argument for equal pay?

6/20/2017 12:23:32 PM

lol she signed a 3 movie deal for $300k each to do BvS, WW, and JL with her only prior claim to fame as "not Michelle Rodriguez" from the F&F movies. Chris Evans got $300k for First Avenger with an actual resume prior to signing on with Marvel. Hemsworth only got $200k for Thor. There are plenty of examples of women getting the short end in Hollywood, but this aint one of them.

6/20/2017 2:37:53 PM

I'd take 300 fucking grand for 45 days worth of work.

6/20/2017 2:42:44 PM

http://www.avclub.com/article/rumors-gal-gadot-getting-screwed-over-wonder-woman-257082

6/20/2017 7:36:32 PM

Here we go..

I say Handel +2. Republicans WILL vote for their people with enthusiasm no matter how shitty they or their leaders are.

[Edited on June 20, 2017 at 7:51 PM. Reason : Plus GOP still all in with Trump who put himself on line for Handel]

6/20/2017 7:51:07 PM

nvm

[Edited on June 20, 2017 at 8:38 PM. Reason : k]

6/20/2017 8:21:23 PM

My prediction:
Ossoff will lose
Parnell will lose

Although both will drastically outperform the 2016 result-- still losses for the democrats.

6/20/2017 8:25:09 PM

Every time I accidentally find myself on r/neoliberal I genuinely can't tell if it's satire or serious. I still have no idea.

6/20/2017 8:53:40 PM

^^^^

^^

6/20/2017 9:34:34 PM

I know these are strong GOP leaning districts but this was the last best chance to stop the abortion of a health care bill from passing.

Oh well. I'm sure they will win house seats in 2018 but fall short of a majority because that is what the Democrats do.

[Edited on June 20, 2017 at 9:56 PM. Reason : X]

6/20/2017 9:55:48 PM

Can the DNC dissolve now?

6/20/2017 10:07:56 PM

Bros the Republicans won a house seat that they have won for decades, DAE think the Democratic Party is done for?!

6/20/2017 11:21:55 PM

A centrist bland party that is too scared to stand for anything. Can't get fooled again.

6/21/2017 12:05:36 AM

Trey Parker and Matt Stone have some old quote from an interview where they said they hate conservatives but really hate liberals. This statement always bothered me until now. Tulsigabbard is possibly as annoying a poster as JCE. I'm not sure he's worse, I wouldn't go that far. But there's an argument to be made he's as consistently bad lately

6/21/2017 9:41:05 AM

They're both trolls, posting solely for attention.

6/21/2017 10:25:31 AM

Holier than thou attitudes are annoying.

6/21/2017 10:27:24 AM

It's "annoying" because you disagree with me but you can't logically refute what I say.

Also DNC = Leftists, not liberals. Has been that way for awhile. Classical liberals have nothing to do with the present day DNC.

6/21/2017 10:38:29 AM

it's really funny to me how the center-left hates the far left more than the far right

6/21/2017 10:50:29 AM

its the result of being indoctrinated their entire life, it's not surprising

6/21/2017 11:34:32 AM

Just make sure you aren't mistaking everyone's hate for Earl with hate for progressives. Cause they aren't even close to the same thing.

6/21/2017 11:40:22 AM

I am specifically referring only to Earl in this case

6/21/2017 11:49:38 AM

It would be far more accurate to say the center left hates the far left more than the center right (which is why you see a whole lot of W Bush approval rating nonsense this morning).

There is not a chance in hell the center left on aggregate would prefer the far right over a populist far left candidate.

[Edited on June 21, 2017 at 11:52 AM. Reason : X]

6/21/2017 11:52:09 AM

There are a lot of smart people here and the best analogy for what goes on would be the French person who refuses to speak English. A lot of politicians also do this and use translators because even though they know English, and may even be fluent, they are insecure about using it because their vocabulary isn't fully developed and their accent might make them sound inexperienced, or even dumb. They stick with their first language which is the one that will make them sound most competent.

A lot of people on here are the same way with talking outside of their known political spectrum of democrat, republican and libertarian talking points. It puts them out of their comfort zone and is such a small number of people that its easier to just dismiss as crazytalk than to actually engage. I find it sad that people have egos big enough to get in the way of intellectualism, even on the internet.

Its telling though. A lot of Americans want to be "good" and "win" instead of using logic. This is why groups form in the first place. Americans just take it further and want to actually be on the "winning team". The superbowl is another example of this phenomenon. A week before the superbowl, millions of people who have never watched football become "fans" of one team or the other. Some buy apparel, some bake cakes, and many cheer enthusiastically and display anger when their team messes up. They have no idea why they are cheering for this team, they just know that they picked that team and the team they picked had better win so they too, can be a winner.

If you actually look at the posts, you can see I'm not the one posting one liner flame posts. I rarely shit post. Most of my entry-posts are loaded with content, explanations, and data but the responses I get almost always include a few flames. The responses I get on green party boards are overwhelmingly "duhs" but I don't want to isolate myself by talking with the "woke left" ~2% of the population.

When most people on here say "progressives" they are talking about the "progressive wing" of the democratic party. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, etc. Thats about as progressive as the hegemony gets. Anyone who questions the hegemony is crazy or just a troll. This sort of shit was invented to control the way people think and keep power over them.

6/21/2017 12:36:39 PM

6/21/2017 12:49:54 PM

^^ you're all over the place with that 'analogy', but the dumbest part is the Super Bowl nonsense. If you're going to play logical hopscotch, you'll need to step up your game right quick.

6/21/2017 1:31:29 PM

two different analogies about two different things in two different paragraphs

6/21/2017 1:51:00 PM

Nah I think this is my favorite:

Quote :

"If you actually look at the posts, you can see I'm not the one posting one liner flame posts. I rarely shit post. Most of my entry-posts are loaded with content, explanations, and data"

There's multiple one-line posts including 2 he wrote in the last 24 hours calling the for the DNC to dissolve and how democrats don't stand for anything on the same page Earl wrote this.

6/21/2017 1:55:47 PM

Did you not even notice the words "rarely" and "most"?

My reactions to the election result were completely in the context of the topic of democrat party credibility watch. When I say shitpost, I'm talking about memes, namecalling, and off-topic discussion.

Also, election night is a big event that doesn't need to be cited. Everyone should have known the data (election results) I was referencing without me posting it. I've already thoroughly explained my position somewhere in this thread. No need for repetition but definitely a need for reiteration after my previous points were supported once again by the facts of the election.

[Edited on June 21, 2017 at 2:22 PM. Reason : people take it personal if you talk bad about their team.

[Edited on June 21, 2017 at 2:23 PM. Reason : It was a really tough night for you guys and I guess I did rub your faces in it.]

6/21/2017 2:20:10 PM

Come on, man. Before that rant (super bowl cakes?), you posted 5 times in this thread. 4 times you shitposted/trolled (call it what you want, it's the same thing) this thread with one liners about how (1) shitty DWS is (2) ACA is crap (3) DNC is done (4) D's are a centerist party now. Judging by this page alone, you mostly troll/shitpost and rarely bring up anything of substance.

I like the viewpoints you sometimes bring to threads but that was a bit hypocritical, no?

6/21/2017 2:36:51 PM

mainline democrats and republicans are both bad at taking criticism

tulsi criticizes democrats more than anyone, and i think it has irked you guys to the point where you immediately dismiss him without attempting to understand his points. you nitpick things like the superbowl analogy, which wasn't perfect, but did make sense.

personally, i appreciate his willingness to bounce controversial ideas off the wall. the left clearly needs a push toward self-reflection.

6/21/2017 4:05:57 PM

You must not be familiar with Earl

6/21/2017 4:17:56 PM

sure, he made a lot of good points and also enjoyed riling you guys up

tulsigabbard is more of the former, less of the latter

[Edited on June 21, 2017 at 4:58 PM. Reason : i know they're the same person]

6/21/2017 4:51:09 PM