What are they Hiding?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Mar 11, 2004
23,102
5,581
146

Yay, you win jackass of the thread award. How great. Not like you really needed yet another. But I see you wanted to absolutely dominate the competition for it by fully displaying your profound(ly stupid) argument of "I keep saying I hate Turmp and what the Republicans are doing, but damnit I can't vote Democrat because they won't stop the Republicans from being pieces of shit! So I'll keep enabling the Republicans to be pieces of shit and then play stupid and blame the Democrats for the Republicans being pieces of shit."
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,515
6,129
126
What's the other choice?
Obviously to risk campaigning time at home and grind judicial confirmations to the maximum degree possible, to campaign on spine rather than speeches. People who lack any real moral fiber have no idea how deeply people who do want to see it in their leaders. Nobody, I would suggest, really knows how that calculus might play out in reality. Personal I'm not much into winning with filthy hands. This calculated shit devoid of moral passion is exactly why democrats can't seem to win elections on their own and depend on the other party being a total joke for any chance to get in.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,266
15,021
136
Obviously to risk campaigning time at home and grind judicial confirmations to the maximum degree possible, to campaign on spine rather than speeches. People who lack any real moral fiber have no idea how deeply people who do want to see it in their leaders. Nobody, I would suggest, really knows how that calculus might play out in reality. Personal I'm not much into winning with filthy hands. This calculated shit devoid of moral passion is exactly why democrats can't seem to win elections on their own and depend on the other party being a total joke for any chance to get in.

So to prolong the inevitable and forget about ever regaining control and possibly let the Republicans have a super majority in the senate?

Sounds like an easy choice.

You and hayabausa are a Republican's wet dream.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,515
6,129
126
So to prolong the inevitable and forget about ever regaining control and possibly let the Republicans have a super majority in the senate?

Sounds like an easy choice.

.......

No I don’t think so. What I said is something quite different. What I actually said was that there is debate among democrats as to the wisdom of definitely sacrificing the judicial branch on the uncertain proposition it will save the senate according to the link I posted. So you were offered the option of going with your preconceptions or considering other options. It was you who made the easy choice, your opinion and to hell with anybody else’s. Personally, I don’t know the answer; I don’t know if Schumer made the right choice. My point was that there is debate, and that the path traditional democrats seem predestined always to make, loses elections. But hay, at least your intellectually superior even though morally crippled.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,266
15,021
136
No I don’t think so. What I said is something quite different. What I actually said was that there is debate among democrats as to the wisdom of definitely sacrificing the judicial branch on the uncertain proposition it will save the senate according to the link I posted. So you were offered the option of going with your preconceptions or considering other options. It was you who made the easy choice, your opinion and to hell with anybody else’s. Personally, I don’t know the answer; I don’t know if Schumer made the right choice. My point was that there is debate, and that the path traditional democrats seem predestined always to make, loses elections. But hay, at least your intellectually superior even though morally crippled.

Ah moonbeam! The great purveyor of all things moral!

I'm sorry I pointed out how ridiculous your choice was (sorry, I didn't mean your choice because you obviously can't make decisions yourself because your moral superiority prevents you from thinking intellectually/eyeroll).

Meanwhile, schummer chose the path that addresses the "traditional" Democrat weakness and chose to give his members a fighting chance to, you know, win elections.

So yeah, I guess if the options are to delay the inevitable or win elections, I guess there is some debate to be had/eyeroll


Btw, morals got you trump. Morals get you Republican administrations with a 50 year history of corruption.

Fuck your morals!
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
Ah moonbeam! The great purveyor of all things moral!

I'm sorry I pointed out how ridiculous your choice was (sorry, I didn't mean your choice because you obviously can't make decisions yourself because your moral superiority prevents you from thinking intellectually/eyeroll).

Meanwhile, schummer chose the path that addresses the "traditional" Democrat weakness and chose to give his members a fighting chance to, you know, win elections.

So yeah, I guess if the options are to delay the inevitable or win elections, I guess there is some debate to be had/eyeroll


Btw, morals got you trump. Morals get you Republican administrations with a 50 year history of corruption.

Fuck your morals!


Ecce Homo
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,266
15,021
136
Ecce Homo

Yeah, a good faith attempt to stop a nomination that will go through if Republicans have the vote, regardless of Democrat actions, is exactly what you two are wanting. It doesn't get Democrats elected/reelected and that supposedly what you guys want.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Yeah, a good faith attempt to stop a nomination that will go through if Republicans have the vote, regardless of Democrat actions, is exactly what you two are wanting. It doesn't get Democrats elected/reelected and that supposedly what you guys want.

You mean they're pointedly ignoring the greater battle for a Senate majority? Should Senate Dems actually campaign? Nah. Better to tilt at windmills in DC. Because of concerns, obviously.

McConnell definitely likes that attitude.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,099
136
Yeah, a good faith attempt to stop a nomination that will go through if Republicans have the vote, regardless of Democrat actions, is exactly what you two are wanting. It doesn't get Democrats elected/reelected and that supposedly what you guys want.

To be fair, I think he and haybusa are suggesting that passionately opposing the GOP judicial nominees might be better at turning out the dem base in November than spending more time campaigning. I'm not really sure what is the right decision here myself. It's a tough call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bitek

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,258
48,463
136
To be fair, I think he and haybusa are suggesting that passionately opposing the GOP judicial nominees might be better at turning out the dem base in November than spending more time campaigning. I'm not really sure what is the right decision here myself. It's a tough call.

It’s unclear to me why people think going around talking about how you’re going to oppose Trump is going to be better at persuading voters than actually opposing Trump.

While in the end it is nearly certain that Kavanaugh will be confirmed it will be a high profile news event where Democrats can get a good national stage for pointing out Trump’s corruption and the threat of a radicalized Supreme Court.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bitek

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
63,064
11,434
136
Yeah, would THAT finally do it? I think so, peeps in the streets.

Nah...never happpen...beyond a few outraged green haired SJW’s...the average American doesn’s care...and to me, that’s scary as hell...
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,099
136
It’s unclear to me why people think going around talking about how you’re going to oppose Trump is going to be better at persuading voters than actually opposing Trump.

While in the end it is nearly certain that Kavanaugh will be confirmed it will be a high profile news event where Democrats can get a good national stage for pointing out Trump’s corruption and the threat of a radicalized Supreme Court.

I assume that they're going to do that, at least in relation to Kavanaugh.

Do you think Schumer is mishandling this?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
To be fair, I think he and haybusa are suggesting that passionately opposing the GOP judicial nominees might be better at turning out the dem base in November than spending more time campaigning. I'm not really sure what is the right decision here myself. It's a tough call.

If Trump's win didn't impress you with the importance of town halls, rallying & being there in person then I don't know what to say. Challengers can do all of that they want. Dem Senators held in DC by McConnell's skullduggery can't. Dems have 10 seats up for re-election in States Trump won. The GOP has 1 one Senator up in a state Hillary won.

Make no mistake about it, McConnell is a shrewd & ruthless partisan who knows how to wield power.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,266
15,021
136
To be fair, I think he and haybusa are suggesting that passionately opposing the GOP judicial nominees might be better at turning out the dem base in November than spending more time campaigning. I'm not really sure what is the right decision here myself. It's a tough call.

Then he doesn't know Dem voters very well. Dem voters aren't like Republican voters where a supreme court nomination can get it the vote. Opposing trump for the sake of opposing trump (which is how this would be spun and how voters would see it), won't energize the base or new voters.

The reality is that Hillary barely lost and she lost because of a poor electoral strategy and and not going to "safe states" and campaigning.

Dems lose in mid terms because they don't show up. Dems don't show up because the DNC doesn't run anywhere unless its a guaranteed win or close to that.

The DNC has been running candidates everywhere and people are showing up to vote.

If people want the Democrats to abandon what's been working for them this past year, then yeah, let's get them wasting their time delaying the inevitable! That'll show them!
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,258
48,463
136
I assume that they're going to do that, at least in relation to Kavanaugh.

Do you think Schumer is mishandling this?

I do, I think people drastically overstate the effects of campaigning and doing campaign events as opposed to focusing on real, major stakes things like this nomination.

It seems to me like the primary goal here is reminding voters of the consequences of allowing Republicans to continue to hold Congress. I think a nationally televised event that a lot of people pay attention to is a way better venue for that than holding a town hall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bitek

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,266
15,021
136
I do, I think people drastically overstate the effects of campaigning and doing campaign events as opposed to focusing on real, major stakes things like this nomination.

It seems to me like the primary goal here is reminding voters of the consequences of allowing Republicans to continue to hold Congress. I think a nationally televised event that a lot of people pay attention to is a way better venue for that than holding a town hall.

How many people watched the last nomination?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
It’s unclear to me why people think going around talking about how you’re going to oppose Trump is going to be better at persuading voters than actually opposing Trump.

Well there's a thing, leaders are doing just that talking without action, or many are. Let's talk about how bad Trump's Tweets are. How about Kavanaugh! Oh those 100k hidden files. On second thought there's no passion just lamenting about how things can't be done. Ok I'm Joe Citizen who has seen what is going on. Trump pushes, maybe his staff or Republicans can reel him back a little. The Dems as usual are useless, they won't even try. I've heard that time and again from many IRL.

Sometimes it's better to fight and be seen. The talk of "picking your battles" seems to something which can never happen because there's no battle that can be won. Just sit back and wait for the day which may never come and then perhaps not rock the boat.

Now it's been said that these people get what they deserve, the implication being that they didn't run to support this candidate or that, but that's not how things ever worked. The party needs people more than the reverse. They will always be here but all parties can fall whether from decadence or hubris.

If a party cannot multitask and figure out how to get among the people which is needed and plan to do that while throwing whatever roadblocks in the Reps works. I have seen no real resistance on the part of too many, but I'll vote for Dems because they are the alternative. Others with fewer political sensibilities than we here may note the same old same old, and just stay home.

People are persuaded by what they see more than anything else.

Edit- words
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,266
15,021
136
Well there's a thing, leaders are doing just that, or many. Let's talk about how bad Trump's Tweets are. How about Kavanaugh! Oh those 100k hidden files. On second thought there's no passion just lamenting about how things can't be done. Ok I'm Joe Citizen who has seen what is going on. Trump pushes, maybe his staff or Republicans can reel him back a little. The Dems as usual are useless, they won't even try. I've heard that time and again from many IRL.

Sometimes it's better to fight and be seen. The talk of "picking your battles" seems to something which can never happen because there's no battle that can be won. Just sit back and wait for the day which may never come and then perhaps not rock the boat.

Now it's been said that these people get what they deserve, the implication being that they didn't run to support this candidate or that, but that's not how things ever worked. The party needs people more than the reverse. They will always be here but all parties can fall whether from decadence or hubris.

If a party cannot multitask and figure out how to get among the people which is needed and plan to do that while throwing whatever roadblocks in the Reps works. I have seen no real resistance on the part of too many, but I'll vote for Dems because they are the alternative. Others with fewer political sensibilities than we here may note the same old same old, and just stay home.

People are persuaded by what they see more than anything else.

See what? You still haven't explained exactly what you want the Democrats to do or what you think they can do.
Who is going to be watching this? Each party's base or the independents who each party needs in order to watch elections? What will they be watching? The Democrats using stall tactics and the Republicans steamrolling right over them?

You are expecting Democrats to act like Republicans in order to get the same results Republicans get. I'm not sure why you think that would work.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Nah...never happpen...beyond a few outraged green haired SJW’s...the average American doesn’s care...and to me, that’s scary as hell...

Never underestimate the power & passion of the pussy hats.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,099
136
I do, I think people drastically overstate the effects of campaigning and doing campaign events as opposed to focusing on real, major stakes things like this nomination.

It seems to me like the primary goal here is reminding voters of the consequences of allowing Republicans to continue to hold Congress. I think a nationally televised event that a lot of people pay attention to is a way better venue for that than holding a town hall.

I assume that is going to happen in the case of Kavanaugh. Fighting to the max on the lower court nominees won't be noticed. It seems we're debating a false dilemma here. The dems can campaign hard and vigorously oppose Kavanaugh.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,258
48,463
136
See what? You still haven't explained exactly what you want the Democrats to do or what you think they can do.
Who is going to be watching this? Each party's base or the independents who each party needs in order to watch elections? What will they be watching? The Democrats using stall tactics and the Republicans steamrolling right over them?

You are expecting Democrats to act like Republicans in order to get the same results Republicans get. I'm not sure why you think that would work.

Who exactly do you think goes to candidate events? The base wants to see Democrats fight and the non-aligned are best swayed through events that garner media attention - ie: not campaign stops.

Republican policies related to judicial appointments are insanely unpopular. The more you can highlight that the better.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,258
48,463
136
I assume that is going to happen in the case of Kavanaugh. Fighting to the max on the lower court nominees won't be noticed. It seems we're debating a false dilemma here. The dems can campaign hard and vigorously oppose Kavanaugh.

I suspect fighting on them will be noticed more than local campaign events. I just don’t see much value in them.