First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply the truth about the democrat party
25473 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Beyond The Wall
Offline
Posted 5/29/17
Ive shown this to so many other black people and they still want to stay on the plantation. I just dont get it.
1690 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M
Offline
Posted 5/29/17
Another right-wing concern troll trying to tell the democrats about the Democratic party while ignoring 50 years of history and the southern strategy. That's BTW where the GOP were in ruins and on the verge of collapse took in all the Dixiecrats. Why? Because the democrats threw out the southern conservatives or Dixiecrats over civil rights, and became insanely popular as the face of a new wave of political enthusiasm. What worse for the GOP is this was after FDR and the democrats remained in majority power for the most part following WWII. The GOP fearing the end of there party Latched onto the old southern racists and made them a fundamental part of there party where they have stayed to this day. But you go ahead and ignore what is now 50 years of political history right wing concern troll, and keep pushing the same talking points I've seen over the past 20 years.
10209 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Abyss
Offline
Posted 5/29/17 , edited 5/29/17
Ignorance is bliss OP <3

Edit: Bliss not blizz
7 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/29/17
Both parties are limited by their focus on capitalism and allowing money in politics. It's disgusting. I love the Green Party, and the Libertarians have nice ideas as well. Too many divisions, we need to heal our one world commUnity for our children to have a planet to live on.
37069 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 5/29/17 , edited 5/29/17
The sad part about this thread is that there actually are present day criticisms to be leveled against the Democratic Party. Complaints to be made against things they're doing right now. Like arguing that their charter's language requiring unbiased primary processes isn't to be interpreted as requiring unbiased primary processes in any legally substantive way. Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't, the case is still being litigated, but damn if that doesn't at the very least represent a fundamental moral failing of those at the top of the party. Or how about their assertion in the same case that they have the right to stop holding primary elections altogether and decide who their candidate will be in a smoke-filled backroom? That one's definitely true, but it again represents a fundamental moral failing on the part of the party leadership's outlook. How about the party's financial support for opposition to initiatives they purportedly support, such as efforts to shut down referendums for implementing single payer healthcare or drug price negotiation at the state level? How about their use of rule changes to give big money donors access to positions in the party they might otherwise not have, as happened in Florida recently?

I mean, fuck. We've seen Republican chairmen and strategists openly admit they specifically devised a successful political strategy to court the very people you're pointing to as representative of the "Democrat Pawtuh". We can look at the political career of Strom Thurmond and watch that shit happen in real fucking time. Get with it.
317 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Somewhere in the...
Offline
Posted 5/29/17 , edited 5/29/17
Idea:
Let's rename the Republican Party to be the "Conservative Party" (with an "Authoritarian Party" splinter) and the Democratic Party to the "Progressive Party" (with a "Socialist Party" splinter) That should clear up any confusion.

The modern split would be approximately
15% Authoritarian
25% Conservative
35% Progressive
15% Socialist
10% Other
21712 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F
Offline
Posted 5/29/17

Dark_Alma wrote:

Ignorance is bliss OP <3

Edit: Bliss not blizz


no no, bliss is blaziken
27671 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 5/29/17 , edited 6/23/17

redokami wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_a7dQXilCo

pretty interesting, though I already knew about most of this
just one other reasonwhy I hate the left
I wish more people would realize this stuff though....it would help alot


+1

Outstanding video. The truth hurts.
31051 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 5/29/17 , edited 5/29/17

BlueOni wrote:


Actually, a big part of the estimate is accounting for people who lose their policies due to premium hikes as states take up the offer to opt out of prohibitions against insurance companies discriminating against customers with preexisting conditions. So I guess now you're both someone saying he wants to actively take away healthcare from sick children, old people, and poor people and a liar.


You do realize that the CBO report was using static scoring when dynamic is in fact the more accurate choice in matters like these? They're only fed information by the congress (I don't think I need to tell you how the democratic party as well as the republican party are experts at manipulating the system to make a bill look favorable or not). People are not forced to buy insurance if they don't want it or need it. There are plenty of innovations that insurance companies are coming up with that will provide lower cost insurance. Hell, the report doesn't even take into effect the affordability of health care and its effect on the different types of policies that would be available. Your quick, gullible mindset on how "Oh meh gawd, the sick children, elderly and poor people won't have insurance?! Down with trump!" is very naive. I would pay more attention if I were you and quit listening to outlets like the nytimes...

10456 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / People's Republic...
Offline
Posted 5/29/17 , edited 5/29/17

Nalaniel wrote:

All the video does is talk about the history of the Republican and Democratic Party. What it fails to mention is that things have changed considerably in the last few decades. Does the term "Southern strategy" ring a bell?


Will you know in the past it was blacks they said were subhumans despite biology and today it's the unborn. 55 million Innocents dead is a lot of blood on your hands and makes the Nazis look like amateurs. In addition they're starting to support segregation again as racist quotas were not evil enough
10456 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / People's Republic...
Offline
Posted 5/29/17 , edited 5/29/17

neotag wrote:

Another right-wing concern troll trying to tell the democrats about the Democratic party while ignoring 50 years of history and the southern strategy. That's BTW where the GOP were in ruins and on the verge of collapse took in all the Dixiecrats. Why? Because the democrats threw out the southern conservatives or Dixiecrats over civil rights, and became insanely popular as the face of a new wave of political enthusiasm. What worse for the GOP is this was after FDR and the democrats remained in majority power for the most part following WWII. The GOP fearing the end of there party Latched onto the old southern racists and made them a fundamental part of there party where they have stayed to this day. But you go ahead and ignore what is now 50 years of political history right wing concern troll, and keep pushing the same talking points I've seen over the past 20 years.


Yup. And to quote Lyndon Johnson : "if the ni**ers are going to vote then I'll have them voting Democrat for the next fifty years". And, he managed to keep them on the plantation.

But hey forget the willingness to literally split the country in two so they could contribute abusing and violating human rights... because muh subbin stertergy
37069 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 5/29/17

theunlocked wrote:

Idea:
Let's rename the Republican Party to be the "Conservative Party" (with an "Authoritarian Party" splinter) and the Democratic Party to the "Progressive Party" (with a "Socialist Party" splinter) That should clear up any confusion.

The modern split would be approximately
15% Authoritarian
25% Conservative
35% Progressive
15% Socialist
10% Other


I think you're largely right about the fracture points, and this is probably more or less exactly what would happen if a combination of preferential voting and runoff elections were to replace FPTP as the prevailing electoral system in the US, but given recent polling data I've seen I'm not so sure I agree with the numbers.

I would think the left parties would split their share about 50-50 given recent electoral results at first, with the "Socialist Party" ultimately winning out and claiming a larger share of the overall left vote over time given the relative popularity of figures like Tulsi Gabbard and Bernie Sanders compared to the relative unpopularity of figures like Tom Perez, Hillary Clinton, and indeed the Democratic Party as an institution. I'd also intuit that the "Authoritarian Party" would prove quite strong given it was the Republican base that decided they ought to run Trump against every doubt, concern, and tactical push put on by their party's upper echelon. Maybe you'd eventually start losing pro-business liberals to the "Conservative Party", but that faction proved surprisingly small and weak in the last cycle. The "Never Trump" movement amounted to essentially nothing.
1690 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M
Offline
Posted 5/29/17 , edited 5/29/17

karatecowboy wrote:


neotag wrote:

Another right-wing concern troll trying to tell the democrats about the Democratic party while ignoring 50 years of history and the southern strategy. That's BTW where the GOP were in ruins and on the verge of collapse took in all the Dixiecrats. Why? Because the democrats threw out the southern conservatives or Dixiecrats over civil rights, and became insanely popular as the face of a new wave of political enthusiasm. What worse for the GOP is this was after FDR and the democrats remained in majority power for the most part following WWII. The GOP fearing the end of there party Latched onto the old southern racists and made them a fundamental part of there party where they have stayed to this day. But you go ahead and ignore what is now 50 years of political history right wing concern troll, and keep pushing the same talking points I've seen over the past 20 years.


Yup. And to quote Lyndon Johnson : "if the ni**ers are going to vote then I'll have them voting Democrat for the next fifty years". And, he managed to keep them on the plantation.

But hey forget the willingness to literally split the country in two so they could contribute abusing and violating human rights... because muh subbin stertergy


Like how you replied ignoring everything i wrote to continue the concern trolling. It's almost as if you're disingenuous about the whole issue.
mxdan 
10838 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 5/29/17 , edited 5/29/17

redokami wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_a7dQXilCo

pretty interesting, though I already knew about most of this
just one other reasonwhy I hate the left
I wish more people would realize this stuff though....it would help alot


Does it strike you as weird that the parties on both sides share almost nothing in common anymore?

The two parties share name from the 1800s but that's just about it. On both sides. Saying this is the truth like it somehow defines Liberalism is about as truthful as saying wagons define cars.


karatecowboy wrote:


neotag wrote:

Another right-wing concern troll trying to tell the democrats about the Democratic party while ignoring 50 years of history and the southern strategy. That's BTW where the GOP were in ruins and on the verge of collapse took in all the Dixiecrats. Why? Because the democrats threw out the southern conservatives or Dixiecrats over civil rights, and became insanely popular as the face of a new wave of political enthusiasm. What worse for the GOP is this was after FDR and the democrats remained in majority power for the most part following WWII. The GOP fearing the end of there party Latched onto the old southern racists and made them a fundamental part of there party where they have stayed to this day. But you go ahead and ignore what is now 50 years of political history right wing concern troll, and keep pushing the same talking points I've seen over the past 20 years.


Yup. And to quote Lyndon Johnson : "if the ni**ers are going to vote then I'll have them voting Democrat for the next fifty years". And, he managed to keep them on the plantation.

But hey forget the willingness to literally split the country in two so they could contribute abusing and violating human rights... because muh subbin stertergy


Logical fallacy. He is talking about a majority trend not an individual. You can find many individuals who are racist in every single party you want but they more then likely don't define the party as a majority.

Lyndon Johnson =/= Changing Democratic Majority
37069 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 5/29/17

Lemontitties wrote:

You do realize that the CBO report was using static scoring when dynamic is in fact the more accurate choice in matters like these? They're only fed information by the congress (I don't think I need to tell you how the democratic party as well as the republican party are experts at manipulating the system to make a bill look favorable or not). People are not forced to buy insurance if they don't want it or need it. There are plenty of innovations that insurance companies are coming up with that will provide lower cost insurance. Hell, the report doesn't even take into effect the affordability of health care and its effect on the different types of policies that would be available. Your quick, gullible mindset on how "Oh meh gawd, the sick children, elderly and poor people won't have insurance?! Down with trump!" is very naive. I would pay more attention if I were you and quit listening to outlets like the nytimes...


Yeah, and those "innovations" insurance companies are "coming up with" are things that have already been around. High-risk pools aren't some crazy new thing that insurers just thought of now. They've existed before, and their results are well known. Hint: it's not what you're predicting.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.