Well Nancy the honeymoon might be over...

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,239
136
It's sad how often this needs to be repeated.

IMO, it shows it's not a very good catch phrase as it's so easily confused and prone to offense or resulting in needlessly controversial answers.

What's important is that the sentiment translates into activity in the real world rather than Twitter hashtags and threads.

Hard to tell if any tangible changes are taking place, or just dumb Twitter fights amongst progressives.
 

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
It kills me. For someone they think is a loser, the right is so concerned for how Pelosi is causing a schism in the Democratic party. The reality is they are really scared shitless of her.


I don’t think the right is very concerned about her nor do I think they are “scared shitless” either. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greenman

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
White separatists complain of BLM identity politics. Hilarious.

Wait.. no, the other thing... tedious.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
22,230
6,428
136


The comments are cracking me up. The girl that asked the question seems so innocent and cute and then ol well-meaning Nancy sucks all the damned oxygen out of the room :D

Some of by favorites:

Womp womp womp​
this is really not good​
Maximum anger levels reached for this Sunday morning, thanks signing off now​
the longest "No" I've ever heard.​
Lol, Nailed it! Throw in a “respect the troops” while she’s up there.​
They murdered her in the comments. She should have just said "yes" and moved on.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,496
16,979
136
Too fucking bad for them. All lives do matter. When Black lives are disrespected, all lives are disrespected because life doesn’t have a color. If the hatred against color, read race, is defined as racial, as if that bigotry had validity, then continuing to maintain that identity just feeds the issue. We can speak of the history of racism and the deficits it has scarred us with even the need to redress it with emphasis, but I would say we should speak of racism historically and focus on injustice generically for the future. It is time, I think, to prevent Republicans from dividing people along racial lines by Democrats speaking to the life of everybody without distinction. Any real and effective solutions will help those furthest behind the most whoever they be.

So when the police and the court system treat people of color differently than white people, according to actual statistics, its your opinion that the obvious racial factor should be ignored? Ignoring the obvious seems like a pretty horrible way to fix systemic issues.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
39,288
32,786
136
So when the police and the court system treat people of color differently than white people, according to actual statistics, its your opinion that the obvious racial factor should be ignored? Ignoring the obvious seems like a pretty horrible way to fix systemic issues.
I'll answer the question for him, yes.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Although I think the Dems will attempt to get legislation through (some good, some spiteful), Nancy is as relevant today as 3.5 floppies.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,496
16,979
136
Although I think the Dems will attempt to get legislation through (some good, some spiteful), Nancy is as relevant today as 3.5 floppies.

So pretty fucking relevant? I'm having trouble understanding your analogy. Are you saying that a representative from one of the most progressive districts in the country, doesn't get today's youth and their move towards more progressive ideas? Or are you saying that the most successful house speaker in modern history regaining power as speaker of the house isn't a big deal? Or are you saying 3.5" floppies are relevant again?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
Although I think the Dems will attempt to get legislation through (some good, some spiteful), Nancy is as relevant today as 3.5 floppies.

Yeh, that whole anti-corruption bill is pure spite, I'm sure.

And if Pelosi is irrelevant, why is there no Wall funding? And what's with all these investigations starting up?
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,496
16,979
136
Yeh, that whole anti-corruption bill is pure spite, I'm sure.

And if Pelosi is irrelevant, why is there no Wall funding? And what's with all these investigations starting up?

Alternative reality is hell of a drug.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
So pretty fucking relevant? I'm having trouble understanding your analogy. Are you saying that a representative from one of the most progressive districts in the country, doesn't get today's youth and their move towards more progressive ideas? Or are you saying that the most successful house speaker in modern history regaining power as speaker of the house isn't a big deal? Or are you saying 3.5" floppies are relevant again?

It isnt a big deal. If you think people get elected because their ideas are great, you might want to think about that more thoroughly.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Yeh, that whole anti-corruption bill is pure spite, I'm sure.

And if Pelosi is irrelevant, why is there no Wall funding? And what's with all these investigations starting up?

You mean the anti-corruption bill Warren introduced?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,732
6,755
126
So when the police and the court system treat people of color differently than white people, according to actual statistics, its your opinion that the obvious racial factor should be ignored? Ignoring the obvious seems like a pretty horrible way to fix systemic issues.

I am asking you to take apart what you are saying here and note how it promotes the concept of racism. You suggest that the police and the courts treat people of color differently than white people and that I am suggesting we ignore the obvious. Well, what is it that you and the police and the courts are noting that is so obvious? It is the color of the victims. You are as much aware of the cause of the discrimination as the courts and the police and the whole system, and thus you want to base your cure for this injustice on the color of one's skin. But statistically you can abuse colored people in many places at twice the rate that you victimize whites and still abuse many more whites than people of color.

Also, you can even bring the rate of abuse of whites up and the abuse of blacks up but less so and even out the statistical abuse at some huge number of people.

I simply suggest then, that if your aim is to eliminate the statistical level of abuse between color and white by focus on the inequality of the numbers victims by percentage you will not address the real problem that the police, the courts, and the system victimizes a really lot of people. And if you state as a goal to prioritize your concerns for the victimization of people by race you will create envy and anger because being victimized makes you mean and mean people caused to be mean based on what color they are will divide people politically.

I recommend, then, that while you may note the greater percentage of abuse people of color may experience in a predominately some other color culture, that is only due to the fact there is a greater flow of bigotry in one direction. That means that, for white people in the US to day due to demographic shifts, they will soon have their turn in the racial barrel.

For these and other reasons, I say that victims should unite with victims to fight injustice and de-emphasize race. The problem is injustice and if you can fix that racism will go away. The ineffable part of the human being we refer to worthy of the highest dignity does not have a color and if you see God within your brother you won't be worried about the color of the skin.
 

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
No shit, huh? Concern trolling the Democrats, hoping to spread some division & discontent.

You keep putting people like “rich liberals deal maker" Pelosi and republican-lite corporate Clinton in the forefront of representing the democrat party and then you cry the blues when the Trumps and their type get elected into office.

Your sacred cow democrat leadership is owned by the rich no different from the republicans you hate and no amount of mental gymnastics you like to play makes it right or good for the working middle class.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...cy-pelosi-speaker_us_5bf41f2de4b0376c9e68ffce
Democratic Donors Suggest They May Withhold Donations If Nancy Pelosi Isn’t Elected Speaker
 
  • Like
Reactions: s0me0nesmind1

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
9,215
6,820
136
You keep putting people like “rich liberals deal maker" Pelosi and republican-lite corporate Clinton in the forefront of representing the democrat party and then you cry the blues when the Trumps and their type get elected into office.

Your sacred cow democrat leadership is owned by the rich no different from the republicans you hate and no amount of mental gymnastics you like to play makes it right or good for the working middle class.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...cy-pelosi-speaker_us_5bf41f2de4b0376c9e68ffce
Democratic Donors Suggest They May Withhold Donations If Nancy Pelosi Isn’t Elected Speaker

I know the Democratic leadership can be problematic, but please... drop the "more enlightened than thou" shtick. You know damn well that the Democrats are infinitely better than Trump and the Republicans right now, and that the only acceptable thing for you to do come 2020 is to vote exclusively Democrat. You must not vote independent; you must not abstain.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
26,141
15,574
136
You keep putting people like “rich liberals deal maker" Pelosi and republican-lite corporate Clinton in the forefront of representing the democrat party and then you cry the blues when the Trumps and their type get elected into office.

Your sacred cow democrat leadership is owned by the rich no different from the republicans you hate and no amount of mental gymnastics you like to play makes it right or good for the working middle class.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...cy-pelosi-speaker_us_5bf41f2de4b0376c9e68ffce
Democratic Donors Suggest They May Withhold Donations If Nancy Pelosi Isn’t Elected Speaker
She is 82 right? What kind of leverage do you think they hold over her?
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
I know the Democratic leadership can be problematic, but please... drop the "more enlightened than thou" shtick. You know damn well that the Democrats are infinitely better than Trump and the Republicans right now, and that the only acceptable thing for you to do come 2020 is to vote exclusively Democrat. You must not vote independent; you must not abstain.
You don’t build sustainable gains by giving people something to vote against. You have to give them something to vote for. The “problematic” Democrat leadership you acknowledged helped pave the road that Trump went roaring down.
 
Feb 4, 2009
35,862
17,403
136
I will say my Pelosi fears are confirmed
She’s being shit on for something dumb and offers no comeback
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
You keep putting people like “rich liberals deal maker" Pelosi and republican-lite corporate Clinton in the forefront of representing the democrat party and then you cry the blues when the Trumps and their type get elected into office.

Your sacred cow democrat leadership is owned by the rich no different from the republicans you hate and no amount of mental gymnastics you like to play makes it right or good for the working middle class.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...cy-pelosi-speaker_us_5bf41f2de4b0376c9e68ffce
Democratic Donors Suggest They May Withhold Donations If Nancy Pelosi Isn’t Elected Speaker

Yeh, bothsides & shit.
 

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
9,215
6,820
136
You don’t build sustainable gains by giving people something to vote against. You have to give them something to vote for. The “problematic” Democrat leadership you acknowledged helped pave the road that Trump went roaring down.

I know, but that doesn't change the practical reality: you either vote Democrat in 2020 or Trump keeps wrecking the country. I'd like better leadership from the Dems right now, but they're literally the only hope the US has right now.