House Democrats are turning on themselves ...

[brycejones]

You can sometimes catch a glimpse of unicorns on the path of stupidity. I have a stick up my ass, so it impairs my judgment. It makes me really self conscious when you draw attention to it.

Do you need surgery to have it removed? Its been there for years now.

 

[Jhhnn]

Will Rogers once said he wasn't a member of an organized political party because he was a Democrat. A lot has has changed about the Party in the meanwhile but that still holds true. Democrats' messaging is organic, a lot of it the result of independent thought in diverse communities so of course we won't see it the same way all the time. Squabbling is to be expected.

GOP messaging is created in a whole different way.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Then admit when you are wrong or are mistaken and people will respect you more and you are more likely to receive kudos. Imagine how your conscious will feel when that happens!

I do admit when I am wrong or mistaken. My ego is not so fragile that I need kudos from anyone here.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Do you need surgery to have it removed? Its been there for years now.

You’ve managed to function with your head up yours, so there is hope for me yet!

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

It's about as indisputably true as you're going to get with something like this. Clinton won the most votes on election day and Clinton led in basically all polls of likely voters, registered voters, and all Americans and we all know the national polls were highly accurate, predicting the end result within about 1 point of the actual results.

So yes, it's true. More Americans wanted the liberals to win and there's no way around it.

Why wouldn't exactly the same thing be true for liberals in red states? If you can show me any credible evidence that shows a majority of Americans actually preferred Trump I am open to hearing it. Literally all evidence I am aware of says the opposite though.

Cool story bro. She won a game of soccer when we were playing baseball. That's awesome. Cool story. No one cares.

If you liberals want to talk about proper debate - stating anything on the basis of the election such as "She would have won if..." or "She won if we didn't..." is the EPITOME of stupidity -and the epitome of improper debate.

So all I can say is in the case of shorty's thread on proper debate - put your money where your mouth is - You can't claim bullshit of "X would have happened if we voted by Y".

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

This isn't even my tangent, so asking me what my angle is makes no sense.

1) I said Democratic and AOC's policies are mainstream because most people support them.

You're absolutely right - many people support these policies... Or rather, they support the RESULTS that AoC says. The ENTIRE debate is what causes do we need to enact in order to get to the RESULTS. That is where the debate ultimately is.

 

[ondma]

This isn't even my tangent, so asking me what my angle is makes no sense.

1) I said Democratic and AOC's policies are mainstream because most people support them.
2) Someone said as a counterpoint that the Democrats lost the last presidential election, implying that meant their policies aren't mainstream.
3) As evidence that they were mainstream I noted that in that election Democratic policies got millions more votes than the alternative. ie: most people supported them.
4) Now you're saying 'why does that matter, they lost the election'. The election never mattered to begin with, that was your guys' point!

My point is very simple - mainstream policies are most easily defined as policies that the most people support. The evidence is that most people support the Democrats' policies. If other people want to argue that conservatives get to win elections anyway because of institutional bias in their favor have at it. It doesn't change what most Americans want.

Your fallacy is assuming that people vote only on policies. Despite your attempt to dismiss them as "bullshit" there are many other reasons people vote or will not vote for someone, which I have already stated. And BTW, Clinton's policies are a model of moderation compared to several of the most recent Democrats to come out of the woodwork. If they nominate some of these highly left leaning candidates, they are conceding the election before it is ever held.

 

[blackangst1]

Yes. Why do you ask?

Interesting. OK.

 

[ivwshane]

Interesting. OK.

What's interesting about that? That you thought everyone was like you and put party before country and anyone not voting with your party are enemies?

 

[fskimospy]

Your fallacy is assuming that people vote only on policies. Despite your attempt to dismiss them as "bullshit" there are many other reasons people vote or will not vote for someone, which I have already stated. And BTW, Clinton's policies are a model of moderation compared to several of the most recent Democrats to come out of the woodwork. If they nominate some of these highly left leaning candidates, they are conceding the election before it is ever held.

Nowhere have I argued that people only vote based on policies.

 

[fskimospy]

Cool story bro. She won a game of soccer when we were playing baseball. That's awesome. Cool story. No one cares.

If you liberals want to talk about proper debate - stating anything on the basis of the election such as "She would have won if..." or "She won if we didn't..." is the EPITOME of stupidity -and the epitome of improper debate.

So all I can say is in the case of shorty's thread on proper debate - put your money where your mouth is - You can't claim bullshit of "X would have happened if we voted by Y".

Who cares if she would have won the election or not? It has nothing to do with my point. I never even brought up the election.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Nowhere have I argued that people only vote based on policies.

Yet your entire argument falls apart without that premise. If people vote for reasons other than policy, then you can’t make the argument that their vote is necessarily an indication of preference to liberal policies. A vote against Trump is not a vote for something else. Which is what this thread is about. The Democrats took the House due to political energy against Trump, but are now splintering on how to enact their “mainstream” policies.

Also, as several have pointed out, most Americans do agree on certain outcomes for our society. Those outcomes don’t have a political bias. It’s the means that cause disagreement.

Clouding the conversation are a few hot button emotional topics for which there will never be resolution.

 

[fskimospy]

Yet your entire argument falls apart without that premise. If people vote for reasons other than policy, then you can’t make the argument that their vote is necessarily an indication of preference to liberal policies. A vote against Trump is not a vote for something else. Which is what this thread is about. The Democrats took the House due to political energy against Trump, but are now splintering on how to enact their “mainstream” policies.

Also, as several have pointed out, most Americans do agree on certain outcomes for our society. Those outcomes don’t have a political bias. It’s the means that cause disagreement.

Clouding the conversation are a few hot button emotional topics for which there will never be resolution.

Jesus fucking Christ, I never argued that voting was the way to determine that. YOU GUYS DID.

I said that by every measure I am aware of people prefer liberal policies. Other people brought up elections as a counter-example. I showed that even by YOUR standard people prefer liberal policies.

I am still waiting for a single, solitary piece of evidence that shows a majority of Americans prefer the Republican Party platform to the Democratic one. All you guys have done is waved your hands because you know I’m right.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Jesus fucking Christ, I never argued that voting was the way to determine that. YOU GUYS DID.

I said that by every measure I am aware of people prefer liberal policies. Other people brought up elections as a counter-example. I showed that even by YOUR standard people prefer liberal policies.

I am still waiting for a single, solitary piece of evidence that shows a majority of Americans prefer the Republican Party platform to the Democratic one. All you guys have done is waved your hands because you know I’m right.

What measures are you using other than election results? What measure truly matters other than election results?

 

[fskimospy]

What measures are you using other than election results?

Basically all scientific polling on the subject shows that when policy is framed in a neutral way people want US policy to be much more liberal than it is.

What measure truly matters other than election results?

You just got through saying election results couldn’t be used to measure this, now you’re saying they are all that matters.

Pick one.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Basically all scientific polling on the subject shows that when policy is framed in a neutral way people want US policy to be much more liberal than it is.

And?

You just got through saying election results couldn’t be used to measure this, now you’re saying they are all that matters.

Pick one.

I didn’t say this. If anything, I’ve been saying election results could be a measure of many things, and election results are all that truly matter independent of what motivated voters to swing an election a certain way, because holding office is how you enact policy policies.

 

[fskimospy]

And?

Great, then we agree.

I didn’t say this. If anything, I’ve been saying election results could be a measure of many things, and election results are all that truly matter independent of what motivated voters to swing an election a certain way, because holding office is how you enact policy policies.

That has nothing to do with whether or not policies are mainstream, which is the only thing I have ever been arguing.

 

[ElFenix]

People want universal health care...until you tell them they will lose their existing plans

all of about 3 people like their existing plan.

 

[blackangst1]

What's interesting about that? That you thought everyone was like you and put party before country and anyone not voting with your party are enemies?

And what, per se, is "my party"? You have no idea. As usual.

 

[ivwshane]

And what, per se, is "my party"? You have no idea. As usual.

I only know what you project on this forum. If you aren't some partisan hack who sides with republicans most of the time then that's your fault.

 

[blackangst1]

I only know what you project on this forum. If you aren't some partisan hack who sides with republicans most of the time then that's your fault.

Then you havent paid any attention whatsoever to what I post. Ive stated many times I vote on both sides of the ticket. So fuck off with your assumptions.

 

[Maxima1]

What measures are you using other than election results? What measure truly matters other than election results?

Even by election results, the Democratic policies are obviously preferred. Moreover, there's a reason why Republicans do everything they can to try to get less people to vote in elections; they realize if we have more participation in elections, they would get completely anniliated and would have to shift their party platform leftward to maintain competitiveness.

 

[ivwshane]

Then you havent paid any attention whatsoever to what I post. Ive stated many times I vote on both sides of the ticket. So fuck off with your assumptions.

That's what you trumpers all say. Sorry I don't believe you.

 

[blackangst1]

That's what you trumpers all say. Sorry I don't believe you.

Do they? Most Trumpers Ive ran across wouldnt even admit if they voted D for anything. And Im fine with you not believing me. No skin off my back

 

[ivwshane]

Do they? Most Trumpers Ive ran across wouldnt even admit if they voted D for anything. And Im fine with you not believing me. No skin off my back

LOL, yeah, I've never seen a trumper say, "I voted for Obama twice!".

Get the fuck out of here!