The radical regressive left is ruining the democrats

[Woberts]

If you treat it as just a race problem, you're ignoring the far more pressing root causes that affect everyone, regardless of ethnicity.

It's not being treated as only a race problem. Race is a big part of the problem, though.
Probably the biggest part, in fact.

 

[Woberts]

Once again the "plantation mentality" of the liberal left raises it's ugly head. Let's tell the Black Man that there is no way he can be equal in a white society, but we will always be there to protect you and makes sure you never have to try. This has been the mantra of the Democrats since Johnson's 'Great Society' ploy in the 60's.

Last time I checked, it was the right who had them working on actual plantations. While the saying is overrated, you should really learn some history.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You think AOC is "radical."

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Kinda hard for ladies (or anyone) to get any pay if AOC is going to keep running off jobs in her district....just sayin'.

Funny how Reps excuse, pardon, and accept the same exact behavior from Devin Nunes.

 

[Shiranui117]

It's not being treated as only a race problem. Race is a big part of the problem, though.
Probably the biggest part, in fact.

I honestly don't see how. Sure, people are racist, but people saying mean things is the least of people's problems. As far as I'm aware, all the laws and practices which disadvantaged blacks as far as mortgage and business loans have been done away with. Fatherlessness, joblessness and poor schools don't afflict only blacks or Hispanics, they affect whites as well. Throwing money at people of color just because they're people of color doesn't solve the issue of how they got to be poor in the first place or what is still keeping them down.

 

[Shiranui117]

Last time I checked, it was the right who had them working on actual plantations. While the saying is overrated, you should really learn some history.

What the left and the right were 170 years ago has no bearing on what the left and the right are today. The Democrats used to be the conservatives and the Republicans used to be the liberals, but now the opposite is true. The issues of a century and a half ago are not the issues that we face today. Pointing the finger at one side and blaming them for things that were promoted or practiced over a century ago won't do squat to fix the issues that we have going on right now. Nobody cares about who has the moral high road. What matters is proposing policies that will address the issues we're struggling with as Americans in the present day.

 

[BSM1]

Last time I checked, it was the right who had them working on actual plantations. While the saying is overrated, you should really learn some history.

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. It was the Democrat south that fought both the Abolition and Emancipation legislation in Congress before the civil war. It was the Republicans and the Republican president in office at the time that orchestrated the end of slavery in the US. Fast forward to modern times, it was the Democrats that opposed the Civil Rights Acts (the even had a name, "Dixiecrats"), it took the Republican congress to give Johnson the win for this law. Facts are tricky little devils.

 

[BSM1]

Funny how Reps excuse, pardon, and accept the same exact behavior from Devin Nunes.

Care to elaborate?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Care to elaborate?

Devin Nunes does lots of things that aren't a part of his job, such as attending basketball games, but Reps around here excuse such things as "whining and dining the donors." He's going here, he's doing that, and much of it isn't related to his job. The Reps aren't bearing down on him in a similar manner.

 

[Shiranui117]

Devin Nunes does lots of things that aren't a part of his job, such as attending basketball games, but Reps around here excuse such things as "whining and dining the donors." He's going here, he's doing that, and much of it isn't related to his job. The Reps aren't bearing down on him in a similar manner.

So Devin Nunes does stuff that probably costs hundreds or thousands of dollars. Sure, there's stuff to criticize there, absolutely. But let's look at what AOC did: She cost New York City 27.5 billion dollars of revenue over the next quarter-century by chasing out Amazon. That is a MASSIVE difference in scale. You cannot honestly pretend that those two things are equivalent. And the worst part? She thought that a $3 billion tax credit for Amazon to come to NYC was money that the city could spend! She may have studied economics in university, but she clearly didn't learn a damn thing.

 

[Woberts]

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. It was the Democrat south that fought both the Abolition and Emancipation legislation in Congress before the civil war. It was the Republicans and the Republican president in office at the time that orchestrated the end of slavery in the US. Fast forward to modern times, it was the Democrats that opposed the Civil Rights Acts (the even had a name, "Dixiecrats"), it took the Republican congress to give Johnson the win for this law. Facts are tricky little devils.

You're focusing on the names of the parties. When that happened, democrats were right and republicans were left. You've missed the point again.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

She cost New York City 27.5 billion dollars of revenue over the next quarter-century by chasing out Amazon.

That's been debunked because NYC doesn't need Amazon, who of course is already doing business there And if the community doesn't want you, bugger off because you aren't wanted. And why should they give Amazon money? Aren't Republicans opposed to such wealth redistribution?
https://www.theverge.com/interface/...yc-hq2-collapse-secrecy-incentives-automation
And that's not at all her doing things not related to her job. She represented her constituents, which is what she's supposed to do. And, one of the towns I lived near in Indiana, are they radicals for fighting against Walmart for so many years and not allowing them in?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

The very idea of "white privilege" is identitarian. Back before Occupy Wall Street, we could all agree that there was definitely "rich privilege". It doesn't matter what your race is--if you're poor, you're far more likely to have underfunded schools with teachers who don't care, you're far more likely to have police illegally break into your house and point guns in your face or otherwise be mistreated by them, you're far less likely to successfully complete a college education if that's what you want to do, and you're far more likely to get a harsher prison sentence for similar crimes.

If whites are so privileged, then why are Elizabeth Warren and Beto O'Rourke trying to play down their whiteness? Warren claimed for years that she was Native American, and Robert O'Rourke goes by "Beto" to sound less white. The Democrats are keeping tabs on all their presidential candidates' races, genders and sexualities, and there are serious talks about whether a straight, white man can or should win the Democratic nomination this year. Your campaign strategy should not revolve around the color of your skin, or your genitals, or the people you're sexually attracted to. It shouldn't even be a factor.

If you're going to butt in on other people's conversations, do try to respond to the actual questions people asked. Thanks for the "not all white people" rant, though.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. It was the Democrat south that fought both the Abolition and Emancipation legislation in Congress before the civil war. It was the Republicans and the Republican president in office at the time that orchestrated the end of slavery in the US. Fast forward to modern times, it was the Democrats that opposed the Civil Rights Acts (the even had a name, "Dixiecrats"), it took the Republican congress to give Johnson the win for this law. Facts are tricky little devils.

 

[Shiranui117]

If you're going to butt in on other people's conversations, do try to respond to the actual questions people asked. Thanks for the "not all white people" rant, though.

It's not all people of color, either. That's the whole point. If we help poor people, and if poor people are predominantly minorities, then that ultimately means we're helping minorities anyway. We're just doing so in a manner that's fair to everyone involved.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

It's not all people of color, either. That's the whole point. If we help poor people, and if poor people are predominantly minorities, then that ultimately means we're helping minorities anyway. We're just doing so in a manner that's fair to everyone involved.

No idea what any of this has to do with anything I said or asked, but sure, you do that.

 

[serp777]

Two things immediately come to mind:

- AOC isn't the "radical far left;" she's center-left. The Democratic establishment is center-right.

- you seem upset that elected officials would try to make things better for the people they represent. Isn't that what elected representatives are supposed to do?

Lmao the democratic establishment is center right? What are you talking about? I mean AOC is relatively close to Carl Marx on the left. She wants pure unadulterated socialism.

And They aren't doing things that are beneficial for the people they represent so i don't see what your point is.

 

[serp777]

Democrats aren't far left.

Here are the candidates from the primaries for the 2016 election. Red is Republican, blue is Democrat.

Bernie Sanders, the guy many people called a socialist, was a solid centrist.

US politics is just heavily skewed to the right.

How exactly was this generated? Where are your sources? How are you calculating the center offset? Who would be someone today on the farthest left? Also political leanings are relative anyways. So if you shift it based on the current political climate then the would get something more reasonable. But this graph can be changed however you want depending on what you define the center as. And of course that's inherently subjective. Also its pretty insane that Trump and Bush are a step away from Hitler since presumably he's in the top right corner.

 

[sooda]

The radical regressive left, most exemplified by Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, has been supremely damaging for the democratic party. The amount of division she has sown is really hurting the democrats for the next election.

Where did all of these super far left democrats come from? What happened to the days when we just had a mainly center left party? Its almost like there are two democrat parties now.

What's it going to take for the democrats to move past this tunnel vision obsession with race, feminism, LGBT rights, and social justice? I feel like we have already removed most legal obstacles based on race, gender, etc, . I really want to know why people are really getting hysterical about this stuff.

If the democrats could just focus on important issues like improving education, repairing infrastructure, implementing carbon free nuclear power, expanding science and nasa funding, fixing social security and medicare funding, and maybe even trying to reduce the deficit, then I think they would attract a lot more people from the center.

We really need the democrats from the 80's and 90's to come back and right the ship. Identitarian politics seems to be alienating a lot of reasonable people to the right unfortunately. I don't have any citations for that, its just my impression from the news and what i've seen on youtube in addition to the last election.

Anyways do you guys agree or disagree that the identitarian/regressive left is ruining the democratic party? Are identitatrian politics important or is it all nonsense?

Trump is all about identity politics.. are you confused?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Lmao the democratic establishment is center right? What are you talking about? I mean AOC is relatively close to Carl Marx on the left. She wants pure unadulterated socialism.

And They aren't doing things that are beneficial for the people they represent so i don't see what your point is.

Still waiting for you to qualify any of your claims. Socialism isn't just a meaningless epithet, just FYI.