All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[Gray Lensman]

I think you should study up on your history a little more. Really pay attention to the people of color who frequently post in this thread. A little outreach can go a long way.

I'm going to point out that the first person that comes to mind for people of color who post frequently is the biggest Bernie Booster on the boards.

[Dalak]

A lot of people who voted for Trump did because their basic philosophy of life is "You can't tell me what to do!" But it's starting to seem like some liberals have the same philosophy. Maybe it's time for us all to grow up and realize that our parents told us to eat our vegetables for a reason. Just because your favorite candidate in the primary doesn't get the nomination doesn't mean you should sit out the general election. When you vote for "none of the above," they don't count your vote.

While I agree with you totally on the voting mater, but the "You can't tell me what to do!" is very widespread, even if it's just "Back up your claims" online. Acting like you don't have to support your arguments is one of the biggest symptoms of Trumparrhea.

Trump was a celebrity. Nobody was going to out do him in free media. Same with rules not applying to him. Same with Russia. The thing was Hillary lost a close election with a ton of baggage on her end and then all the extrernal crud pushing it over the edge. Bernie without a good deal of her baggage wins.

Bernie excited the base far more than Clinton. The base of the Democratic Party are liberals and progressives.

Bernie had the same problem with the Base that Clinton did - A Bitter Primary causing infighting. Bernie winning wouldn't have made that go away and would still have handed the election away. Nor did the Sierra Blanca story get proper play on top of the other issues mentioned, so you can live in your idealistic world where Bernie would have coasted to victory but it's not reality.

While voters were worried about the consequences of Trump winning, enough were concerned about the consequences of the alternative of Democrats winning again. There wasn't much of an effort to reassure them, although we'll never know the counterfactual (would a Hillary Clinton who have made more inroads with moderates have lost more on the left to Stein?)

Oh Boy, consequences of the economy improving and racist people being prosecuted more than emboldened . . .

Mets: More people didn't vote than voted, and they just didn't care or were convinced their votes didn't matter. They weren't scared of Democrat Victory, they weren't scared of Trump Victory, they just didn't vote. People who see themselves as Republicans who voted for Trump despite any misgivings are of the "Anyone with an R" camp and just as much to blame as any Trumpanzee. I'm not going to pretend I'm not going to back anyone with a chance of beating them, but it's not out of some 'Dems must win' loyalty but more a "These people **** things up whenever they have total control. They don't actually govern nor do they care about America." The Trump Presidency has done nothing but drive that point home to me.

I understand your impulse to defend your conservative brethren even f I don't agree with it or think it's a moral thing to do in many cases, but this is about more than just the conservative voters who are willing to vote for anything if it's not liberal.

It comes down to what you consider "progressive policies." What turned many people of POC off Bernie is that he almost ALWAYS pivoted to income inequality when asked about racism in society, as if well off black folks weren't getting harassed by the police all the time. (Also the fact that he thought that all drug dealers were black, but that is neither here nor there).

Do you consider gun control a progressive policy?

I wouldn't waste my time responding to someone who's got me on Ignore as long as I know it, besides the obsession with separating liberals/progressives and minorities as if they are completely unrelated groups is what's keeping the left splintered and infighting.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

I'm going to point out that the first person that comes to mind for people of color who post frequently is the biggest Bernie Booster on the boards.

I genuinely just don't keep track of who comes from what ethnic background on this board unless it's present in most of their discussions. But yeah I'd be happy to hear about that. But I generally feel like for the most part whenever I argue about Bernie a good chunk of the other side are white Clinton supporters. But that could be wrong again, because again, I'm not keeping too much track.

[Tami]

Both of my Senators are cosponsors of this bill, if anyone here has a senator who isn't on the list, especially if that Senator is a Democrat but even if they are Republicans, please call and ask them to do so.

S.3036 - Keep Families Together Act

Cosponsors: S.3036 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)

[InformationGeek]

Today is the third anniversary of the church massacre in Charleston. Dylan Roof killed 9 black people hoping to inspire a new movement of white supremacy in America. The horror of is actions is matched only by the horror of his success.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Bernie had the same problem with the Base that Clinton did - A Bitter Primary causing infighting. Bernie winning wouldn't have made that go away and would still have handed the election away. Nor did the Sierra Blanca story get proper play on top of the other issues mentioned, so you can live in your idealistic world where Bernie would have coasted to victory but it's not reality.

I really don't think the primary was the issue. A certain other Democratic candidate had a bitter primary that caused infighting with Hillary Clinton factions. Clinton came in with too many problems. For one the Republicans hated for decades so she was never getting any moderates to flip. This was an election where an outsider stood a better chance, Hillary Clinton was the ultimate insider. The Democratic Party had since moved left of Clinton politics from the 90's. She was successfully branded nearly a decade prior as the women who voted for Iraq, which Obama used to portray her as an opportunistic government by polling pol. The email situation reaffirmed why many people viewed her as an untrustworthy person. Same with the Wall Street speeches. And quite frankly, she just never was as good at speeches and rallying crowds as her husband, Obama, and even Trump.

Yes there were plays against Bernie, but the playbook on Clinton was already there before the election. Her time really was 2008 and Obama beat her.

[Dalak]

Both of my Senators are cosponsors of this bill, if anyone here has a senator who isn't on the list, especially if that Senator is a Democrat but even if they are Republicans, please call and ask them to do so.

S.3036 - Keep Families Together Act

Cosponsors: S.3036 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)

It would be more of a waste of my time than posting here, and a greater waste of breath.

I really don't think the primary was the issue. A certain other Democratic candidate had a bitter primary that caused infighting with Hillary Clinton factions. Clinton came in with too many problems. For one the Republicans hated for decades so she was never getting any moderates to flip. This was an election where an outsider stood a better chance, Hillary Clinton was the ultimate insider. The Democratic Party had since moved left of Clinton politics from the 90's. She was successfully branded nearly a decade prior as the women who voted for Iraq, which Obama used to portray her as an opportunistic government by polling pol. The email situation reaffirmed why many people viewed her as an untrustworthy person. Same with the Wall Street speeches. And quite frankly, she just never was as good at speeches and rallying crowds as her husband, Obama, and even Trump.

Yes there were plays against Bernie, but the playbook on Clinton was already there before the election. Her time really was 2008 and Obama beat her.

Did you notice that your response to "Bernie wouldn't have won either" is to talk about how bad Clinton was? BTW, that you even bought into the 'Emails' when several of those investigating her and criticizing her the loudest used less secure private emails in pretty much the same way is telling. Everyone with a brain was saying that it was a hypocritical attack before all that came out. That there's any issue of Clinton being untrustworthy compared to Donnie shows how much of a doublestandard you and many others bought into.

And before I'm painted as just another white Clinton supporter or Never Berner I'll reiterate: I voted for Bernie in the primary and don't particularly like Clinton as I've mentioned in many posts. I'm still waiting for you to prove who are Never Berner's too, since you say that you don't pay attention to things like race or forum reputation except when you post like you do.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

It would be more of a waste of my time than posting here, and a greater waste of breath.



Did you notice that your response to "Bernie wouldn't have won either" is to talk about how bad Clinton was? BTW, that you even bought into the 'Emails' when several of those investigating her and criticizing her the loudest used less secure private emails in pretty much the same way is telling. Everyone with a brain was saying that it was a hypocritical attack before all that came out. That there's any issue of Clinton being untrustworthy compared to Donnie shows how much of a doublestandard you and many others bought into.

And before I'm painted as just another white Clinton supporter or Never Berner I'll reiterate: I voted for Bernie in the primary and don't particularly like Clinton as I've mentioned in many posts. I'm still waiting for you to prove who are Never Berner's too, since you say that you don't pay attention to things like race or forum reputation except when you post like you do.

I don't think it should remotely be taken as a given that Bernie wouldn't have won and my point was that Clinton had many negatives going in that were exclusive to her. And I'll reiterate I voted for Bernie in the primary and voted for Clinton in the general. But her problems were obvious and they were stated.. And yes whether you like it or not the emails did play against her. Whether it was fair or not. And it was another issue everyone came into the race knowing about.

[Kevinroc]

I'm going to point out that the first person that comes to mind for people of color who post frequently is the biggest Bernie Booster on the boards.

Should go without saying but people of color do have different opinions. There are several posters who have made clear they have problems with Sanders.

[Dalak]

I don't think it should remotely be taken as a given that Bernie wouldn't have won and my point was that Clinton had many negatives going in that were exclusive to her. And I'll reiterate I voted for Bernie in the primary and voted for Clinton in the general. But her problems were obvious and they were stated.. And yes whether you like it or not the emails did play against her. Whether it was fair or not. And it was another issue everyone came into the race knowing about.

Considering some of the biggest problems 2016 had (Russia, Voter Suppression, Far more bitter divides on the Left than '08 & Media) would still be on Bernie there's no reason to assume he'd coast to victory, even without the Emails. On the Emails again, your response to "You got suckered" was "Like it or not it had an effect" so I'm wondering - Can you admit you were wrong on any matter at all? Or do you seriously still believe that 'Her Emails' is proof of anything but the hypocrisy of the media, politicians, and the voters who bought into it?

[zinderel]

That's fine but you're the one who said "it feels like". I'm genuinely curious if progressive policies do turn off minorities or if there is a way to reconcile that.

I think, and I'm spitballing here, that the issue isn't with progressive policies turning off minorities, and more that minorities hear white liberals saying things like, "Put your identity politics away for now and join us on this economic policy bandwagon. We promise it is more beneficial than whatever race/sexuality issue YOU care about!", and even if the truth is that economic policy changes will benefit more people than whatever 'identity politics' issue is being dismissed as less important, it comes across as dismissive, condescending, and problematic, given white America's track record of keeping promises to minorities...

As to how to rectify the disconnect? Honestly, the best we can do, as white progressives, is to stop telling minorities what WE think is best for them, and listen to them and act in good faith on what THEY think is best for themselves. We have 200+ years of making promises to minorities that we don't keep to make up for. Listening to and supporting minority issues rather than telling them what their issues should be would probably help a lot in regaining - or really, at this point just GAINING - a measure of trust and support from them.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Considering some of the biggest problems 2016 had (Russia, Voter Suppression, Far more bitter divides on the Left than '08 & Media) would still be on Bernie there's no reason to assume he'd coast to victory, even without the Emails. On the Emails again, your response to "You got suckered" was "Like it or not it had an effect" so I'm wondering - Can you admit you were wrong on any matter at all? Or do you seriously still believe that 'Her Emails' is proof of anything but the hypocrisy of the media, politicians, and the voters who bought into it?

Her emails absolutely impacted her chances in the election to the point where she has outright stated herself that what swung it late to Trump was the Comey letter concerning the emails. Yes it was an incredibly close race and taking off just a little of Clinton's baggage could have made all the difference in the world as far as outcome. Clinton herself likely wins without the Comey letter.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

I think, and I'm spitballing here, that the issue isn't with progressive policies turning off minorities, and more that minorities hear white liberals saying things like, "Put your identity politics away for now and join us on this economic policy bandwagon. We promise it is more beneficial than whatever race/sexuality issue YOU care about!", and even if the truth is that economic policy changes will benefit more people than whatever 'identity politics' issue is being dismissed as less important, it comes across as dismissive, condescending, and problematic, given white America's track record of keeping promises to minorities...

As to how to rectify the disconnect? Honestly, the best we can do, as white progressives, is to stop telling minorities what WE think is best for them, and listen to them and act in good faith on what THEY think is best for themselves. We have 200+ years of making promises to minorities that we don't keep to make up for. Listening to and supporting minority issues rather than telling them what their issues should be would probably help a lot in regaining - or really, at this point just GAINING - a measure of trust and support from them.

Idk any progressives who say minorities should put identity politics aside. I hear Republicans say that alot.

[zinderel]

Idk any progressives who say minorities should put identity politics aside. I hear Republicans say that alot.

Bernie, who I supported in the primary, for the record:

"It is not good enough for somebody to say, ‘I’m a woman, vote for me'...No, that’s not good enough. What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industry. In other words, one of the struggles that you’re going to be seeing in the Democratic Party is whether we go beyond identity politics."

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ss-race-debate

Just one example of a progressive I respect being UTTERLY dismissive of the importance of 'Vote for me, I am a woman/person of color/LGBT+' to women, people of color and LGBT+ americans. I don't think he's wrong, mind you! I too think that the main problem in America is the MASSIVE, unsustainable inequality between economic classes, which proportionately affects minorites more than it affects white people. I have marched with signs reading "No war but class war!" I just think he's tone deaf as to how that comes across to the minorities he was supposed to be courting. For minorities, seeing representation matters more right now than policy wonkery, even if said policy wonkery is objectively good for EVERYONE, because minorities want to see that their issues are being addressed by themselves, not by the whims of 'well-meaning whites'.

I don't doubt that white progressives mean well. Hell, I AM a white progressive! But I also understand that minorities have literally zero reason to trust us when we say, "We know what is best for you." Some examples of 'we know what's best for you' in action: Any government panel/committee/hearing on womens health that features only old, white, cis/het, male, 'Christian' politicians. Any government panel/committee/hearing on issues affecting people of color staffed by...old, white, cis/het, male, 'Christian' politicians. Any government panel/committee/hearing on LGBT+ issues that is run by...you guessed it, old, white, cis/het, male, Christian politicians. Do you see the pattern, and why that might be an issue for minority voters? Do you understand why minority voters who raise this issue get turned off when they hear 'reverse racism!' or 'Sure, that has to change, but FIRST...'

That has been America since it's inception, and only relatively recently are we seeing that start to change in progressive circles, with the elections of more women, people of color and LGBT+ folks. This is why 'liberal' has become a joking insult among leftists. To most leftists and, I imagine a lot of minority folks, liberal just means 'a white person who is progressive until they get theirs, then goes back to trying to get their kid into a private school so they don't have to go to public school with our kids.' So maybe we should instead actually listen to them and give their ideas merit and real consideration, instead of cavalierly assuring them that what we think is important is more important than what they think is important.

[Dalak]

Her emails absolutely impacted her chances in the election to the point where she has outright stated herself that what swung it late to Trump was the Comey letter concerning the emails. Yes it was an incredibly close race and taking off just a little of Clinton's baggage could have made all the difference in the world as far as outcome. Clinton herself likely wins without the Comey letter.

I'll say it again - You got suckered.