First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Thoughts on last election and what happened to it.
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/4/17

"sjws" are a different breed from real progressives, and in my opinion we need to separate the wheat from the chaff

Only this way will the now jaded who left the left will reconsider coming back .

I do think one way Trump got elected was fake people the "sjws", the focus on radical third wave feminazis and such and such misrepresenting and alienating working class whites . it was all too easy for trump to woo them to him. I do think its no secret clinton alienated her base and many for bernie went over to trump over voting for her.


I think that if we could better distinguish between straw leftist and the fakes and distance from the extremists we might make progress but we cant do it without the average joe. We need the liberal elite not letting their achievements making them aloof from the working people they were elected to represent .

In short TLDR, a party for labour needs to be for the labor force. We dont have that. We have neolibs on both sides here and were made to think there is a difference.

One thing I hate about neolib Dems is that they lie they say theyre for the poor when Republicans dont and are straight up with their agenda at least, theyre also for the rich vig business but unlike dems dont try to hide it .
What are your thoughts. Keep it civil.
1507 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
15 / F / Texas
Offline
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/5/17
It was a mess with two havoc causing people.. Trump: who'd do it up front Hillary: who'd do it behind our back.... So much rather know what mess ups are happening rather than the problems be in the dark for future problems....
16291 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Offline
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/4/17
Memetic demons possessing hungry ghosts ignorant to their own tendencies.
30239 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
49 / M / The Past
Offline
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/5/17
First off, Labour? Wrong country for that.

If you paid attention the last few elections have all been reactionary shifts to the previous administration.

Bill Clinton got in because of fury over George Bush Senior lying to Americans with "Read my Lips, No New Taxes."

George Bush 2 got in because Bill Clinton was busy doing things with interns he should not.

Barrack Obama got in because of fury over "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and to prove to the world America's not racist.

Donald Trump was elected because Barrack Obama pushed too far on the control ideas, everything from restricting what people could eat to reincarcerating people who had already served their prison terms because his administration didn't think they'd been sentenced to enough time. Plus you add to that there were still enough old people that remembered what went on at the end of the first Clinton era to not want a repeat of that foolishness.


You are correct, no one stands for something, they have all been opposed to something. That however the current nature of the beast that is modern politics is pure reaction. Until people wake up and pay attention to what they are actually voting for it's going to be who ever hits back the hardest that will be the winner.
qwueri 
25810 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / TN
Offline
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/5/17
Starts off ranting about SJWs and ends with "keep it civil". This is going to go places.
25236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
54 / M / In
Online
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/4/17
Not even going to bother
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/4/17

uncletim wrote:

Not even going to bother


Why post if you dont have anything to contribute just go.
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/5/17

qwueri wrote:

Starts off ranting about SJWs and ends with "keep it civil". This is going to go places.


Because they arent real? That and there is no reason any topic cannot be discussed civilly.
qwueri 
25810 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / TN
Offline
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/5/17

Madamspica wrote:

Because they arent real? That and there is no reason any topic cannot be discussed civilly.


Because "SJW" is a pejorative used to describe any number of people that dare vocalize socially liberal ideas, and invites the same invective that got old since the gamer-gate debacle.
8663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
100 / a pop tart
Offline
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/5/17
*sigh*

Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/4/17

qwueri wrote:


Madamspica wrote:

Because they arent real? That and there is no reason any topic cannot be discussed civilly.


Because "SJW" is a pejorative used to describe any number of people that dare vocalize socially liberal ideas, and invites the same invective that got old since the gamer-gate debacle.


Its because of inciting drama for a cause they themselves dont believe in.
Dont get it twisted. Its abused but its proper use is for fake attention seekers some of which are quite mentally disturbed and. I say they more thsn earned the moniker sjw well deserved.

There are indeed these people that the name fits to a T.

Yes the right calls all leftist talk sjw but there are actual sjws , often strawmen, and my use of the term aligns with this.
16615 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / AH / Helipad
Offline
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/5/17

qwueri wrote:


Madamspica wrote:

Because they arent real? That and there is no reason any topic cannot be discussed civilly.


Because "SJW" is a pejorative used to describe any number of people that dare vocalize socially liberal ideas, and invites the same invective that got old since the gamer-gate debacle.


I think it was pretty apparent that OP was not calling all liberals SJW's
qwueri 
25810 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / TN
Offline
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/7/17

Madamspica wrote:

Its because of inciting drama for a cause they themselves dont believe in.
Dont get it twisted. Its abused but its proper use is for fake attention seekers some of which are quite mentally disturbed and. I say they more thsn earned the moniker sjw well deserved.

There are indeed these people that the name fits to a T.

Yes the right calls all leftist talk sjw but there are actual sjws , often strawmen, and my use of the term aligns with this.


Right, what better way to start a civil discussion than to use a pejorative aimed at insinuating an unspecified group of people is full of nothing but phony attention seekers.
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/4/17

qwueri wrote:


Madamspica wrote:

Its because of inciting drama for a cause they themselves dont believe in.
Dont get it twisted. Its abused but its proper use is for fake attention seekers some of which are quite mentally disturbed and. I say they more thsn earned the moniker sjw well deserved.

There are indeed these people that the name fits to a T.

Yes the right calls all leftist talk sjw but there are actual sjws , often strawmen, and my use of the term aligns with this.


Right, what better way to start a civil discussion than to use a pejorative aimed at insinuating an unspecified group of people is full of nothing but phony attention seekers.

Butthurt? I guess if the shoe fits wear it!

Sjws who are only for something on the internet are cancer and exactly why noone can have serious discussion online without being compared to one.
qwueri 
25810 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / TN
Offline
Posted 12/4/17 , edited 12/7/17

Madamspica wrote:

Butthurt? I guess if the shoe fits wear it!


And now the "umad" response. Glad to see this has turned out thought provoking.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.