FU DNC

UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Then answer what I asked you earlier; why is it better to support a "Democrat" who votes republican more than 70% of the time over an actual progressive who supports the middle-class?
Click to expand...
heidi heitkamp does not vote republican 70% of the time though. check her voting record.

she voted in favor of a few cabinet members who were going to be nominated anyway so she would stand a chance at reelection next year. "hey, 65% republican north dakota, look how good i am at compromise! i am willing to give the president you overwhelmingly elected a chance". no need to mention they'd all have been nominated anyway.

how is this even remotely difficult to understand?
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
heidi heitkamp does not vote republican 70% of the time though. check her voting record.

she voted in favor of a few cabinet members who were going to be nominated anyway so she would stand a chance at reelection next year. "hey, 65% republican north dakota, look how good i am at compromise! i am willing to give the president you overwhelmingly elected a chance". no need to mention they'd all have been nominated anyway.

how is this even remotely difficult to understand?
Click to expand...
I don't want someone who want's to placate Republican retards

I want someone who will stand up for progressive values

How is that even remotely difficult to understand?

Sanders, the bigger progressive, beat Clinton the moderate, in North Dakota. Heitkamp is a moderate, you admit it yourself, just like Clinton.

"They were gonna be nominated anyway!" is a bullshit excuse. If they were going to be nominated anyway, then the actual progressive thing to do, to you know, actually represent your constituents, would be to vote against them. Those that didn't will be held accountable.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Sanders, the bigger progressive, beat Clinton the moderate, in North Dakota.
Click to expand...
what part of "among democrats" is so fucking difficult to understand?

Padawanbater2 said:
"They were gonna be nominated anyway!" is a bullshit excuse.
Click to expand...
it's actually a fact, but whatevs.

Padawanbater2 said:
If they were going to be nominated anyway, then the actual progressive thing to do, to you know, actually represent your constituents, would be to vote against them.
Click to expand...
her constituents voted 65-27 in favor of trump.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:

what part of "among democrats" is so fucking difficult to understand?

it's actually a fact, but whatevs.

her constituents voted 65-27 in favor of trump.
Click to expand...
Done with you, bud. Not interested in it. No point.

Watch what happens in 2018 under Perez' leadership. Watch 2020. Good luck.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Done with you, bud. Not interested in it. No point.

Watch what happens in 2018 under Perez' leadership. Watch 2020. Good luck.
Click to expand...
you demand she represent her constituents, i point out to you that she is doing exactly that, and you blow a gasket.

politics is not just smashing republicans with a baseball bat. it is nuanced. deal with it.

the DCCC doesn't have the time or resources to put every candidate through a purity test. they run the best person who they think can win. same with the DSC.

one day you'll realize that you can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
So using your logic, you think it's better to have a Democratic senator in congress who agrees with Trump more than 70% of the time than it is to primary his bitch ass with an actual progressive in the same state Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton in in the Democratic primary by more than 15 points. Explain that, please

12 Democrats and 39 Republicans voted against it
32 Democrats and 12 Republicans voted for it

That's not failing on party lines, see here;

Bennet (D-CO) - 2022 https://ballotpedia.org/Michael_Bennet

Booker (D-NJ) - 2020 https://ballotpedia.org/Cory_Booker

Cantwell (D-WA) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Maria_Cantwell

Carper (D-DE) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Thomas_R._Carper

Casey (D-PA) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Bob_Casey,_Jr.

Coons (D-DE) - 2020 https://ballotpedia.org/Chris_Coons

Donnelly (D-IN) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Joe_Donnelly

Heinrich (D-NM) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Martin_Heinrich

Heitkamp (D-ND) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Heidi_Heitkamp

Menendez (D-NJ) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Robert_Menendez

Murray (D-WA) - 2022 https://ballotpedia.org/Patty_Murray

Tester (D-MT) - 2018 https://ballotpedia.org/Jon_Tester

Warner (D-VA) - 2020 https://ballotpedia.org/Mark_Warner
Click to expand...
<mating crickets>
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
one day you'll realize that you can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Click to expand...
One day you'll realize a marital portfolio does not, a party make.

Further, if your marriage fell apart today, guess who you'd still be talking to?
 
Last edited:
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
heidi heitkamp does not vote republican 70% of the time though. check her voting record.

she voted in favor of a few cabinet members who were going to be nominated anyway so she would stand a chance at reelection next year. "hey, 65% republican north dakota, look how good i am at compromise! i am willing to give the president you overwhelmingly elected a chance". no need to mention they'd all have been nominated anyway.

how is this even remotely difficult to understand?
Click to expand...
We can make the same argument.

Why is it 'who Pada got elected', and not yourself?

How is this even remotely difficult for YOU to understand?

So funny..you were told this was EXACTLY what was going to happen..Millenials are a part of the electorate now and they will NOT fall in line..Black populace did NOT show for Hillary- her base..You think they saw through the carries 'hot sauce in her purse' ruse?

You can't fit a square peg into a round hole.

You can't bully people into voting what they don't wish to vote for..making the case to those who weren't even born during Nixon all they can do is read about..you and I are the last generation to fall in line and that's at half-hearted level even.

Pushing Clinton got us Trump, Sessions and Scalia-lite. :clap:

And you're STILL doing it..what's the definition for insanity?

Cat's out of the bag, Buck..Democratic Party is no longer party of 'we the people', rather which Hedge Fund do you prefer?
 
Last edited:
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
you demand she represent her constituents, i point out to you that she is doing exactly that, and you blow a gasket.

politics is not just smashing republicans with a baseball bat. it is nuanced. deal with it.

the DCCC doesn't have the time or resources to put every candidate through a purity test. they run the best person who they think can win. same with the DSC.

one day you'll realize that you can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Click to expand...
schuylaar said:
One day you'll realize a marital portfolio does not, a party make.

Further, if your marriage fell apart today, guess who you'd still be talking to?
Click to expand...
I honestly don't understand why you protect the one that is forever alluding to stuff in your personal life in an insulting way (along with all her other shit too).
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
We can make the same argument.

Why is it 'who Pada got elected', and not yourself?

How is this even remotely difficult for YOU to understand?

So funny..you were told this was EXACTLY what was going to happen..Millenials are a part of the electorate now and they will NOT fall in line..Black populace did NOT show for Hillary- her base..You think they saw through the carries 'hot sauce in her purse' ruse?

You can't fit a square peg into a round hole.

You can't bully people into voting what they don't wish to vote for..making the case to those who weren't even born during Nixon all they can do is read about..you and I are the last generation to fall in line and that's at half-hearted level even.

Pushing Clinton got us Trump, Sessions and Scalia-lite. :clap:

And you're STILL doing it..what's the definition for insanity?

Cat's out of the bag, Buck..Democratic Party is no longer party of 'we the people', rather which Hedge Fund do you prefer?
Click to expand...
So, Oregon has a progressive Democratic congressional caucus. The Democratic Party electorate in Oregon selected them in primaries, then enough people in Oregon voted them into office. I would hope the likes of Wyden and DeFazio meet your expectations but it doesn't matter to me if they don't.

Doesn't the same system apply to North Dakota? If a progressive can beat Heitkamp in the primary, then so be it. WTF does your opinion matter to the people of North Dakota? Once they elected Heitkamp, what exactly do you expect the Democratic congressional caucus do?

There are groups like CREDO that run progressive candidates against conservative Democrats during primaries. It's the primary where Democratic Party voters can weigh in on what kind of representative they want to run in the main election. Somehow you seem to think that liberals in Florida or California have a say in North Dakota. I think the people in North Dakota have the right to choose their own representation. I guess you don't.

Booker represents New York. The voters of New York elected him as senator. Not I. I hope CREDO picks him off the next time he runs. His votes for Wall Street, Big Pharma and now this turn me off to him. He has presidential aspirations and I'm already dead set against him as a candidate for the president. What he does in congress is New York's problem. What I want my congressional reps to do is find common ground with him and others where they can. Some compromise in order to present a unified front to Trump is OK too.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
So, Oregon has a progressive Democratic congressional caucus. The Democratic Party electorate in Oregon selected them in primaries, then enough people in Oregon voted them into office. I would hope the likes of Wyden and DeFazio meet your expectations but it doesn't matter to me if they don't.

Doesn't the same system apply to North Dakota? If a progressive can beat Heitkamp in the primary, then so be it. WTF does your opinion matter to the people of North Dakota? Once they elected Heitkamp, what exactly do you expect the Democratic congressional caucus do?

There are groups like CREDO that run progressive candidates against conservative Democrats during primaries. It's the primary where Democratic Party voters can weigh in on what kind of representative they want to run in the main election. Somehow you seem to think that liberals in Florida or California have a say in North Dakota. I think the people in North Dakota have the right to choose their own representation. I guess you don't.

Booker represents New York. The voters of New York elected him as senator. Not I. I hope CREDO picks him off the next time he runs. His votes for Wall Street, Big Pharma and now this turn me off to him. He has presidential aspirations and I'm already dead set against him as a candidate for the president. What he does in congress is New York's problem. What I want my congressional reps to do is find common ground with him and others where they can. Some compromise in order to present a unified front to Trump is OK too.
Click to expand...
Booker represents New Jersey, not New York

Isn't this the 'same old strategy' the Democratic party has tried to use before? Why do you expect the same old to win when that's exactly what lost this last election?

Establishment Democrats have had control of the Democratic party since Clinton was in office. Under Obama, the Democratic party lost something like 1,020 seats in national and local government all across the country.. How can you say that we should just keep doing what we've been doing to build the party? Establishment Democrats want to keep accepting corporate bribes to fund campaigns, progressive voters are demanding a change in campaign financing. How can these two positions possibly be reconciled? We've seen what happens when we accept corporate bribes, we lose, Republicans win because they're better at it and shameless, they will accept any amount of money from any crooked or corrupt source, their base does not care. Progressives do care. When Booker accepts bribes from the pharmaceutical industry, we know he will support legislation that benefits them, and would you look at that, he does!

You guys want to stay the course, exactly what Hillary Clinton campaigned on and lost. It's not a viable option, it's a losing strategy. Lucky for you I guess establishment Democrats have total control over the party at the moment, so you'll likely get what you want and we'll see how it plays out in 2018 and 2020. Booker or some establishment candidate like him will probably be ordained by the DNC under Perez and I predict he will still lose to Trump in 2020.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top