Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

How did I imply Clinton was racist? The fact that you read that into my statement is itself worrying.

Basically, I said the Dems fucked up and lost the black vote. You immediately straw-man that with "Don't imply Clinton is racist".

Which is the exact behavior where you caricature a view so you don't actually have to look any deeper.

Oh, calm down. I said "racist, patronizing, etc." Basically my stand-in word for "did something that caused them to lose the election." I'm not strawmanning, just unclear.

So I am saying that the Dems did not necessarily fuck up, that they didn't necessarily do anything wrong, but that rather they were seen as having done something wrong.

[wierd]

they were actively hostile to sanders in the primaries, paid people to start race riots at his rallies, and pretended to be impartial, while pouring resources on clinton.

did nothing wrong?  good grief.

http://www.snopes.com/2016/07/22/wikileaks-dumps-dnc-emails/

[Neonivek]

Dozebom I am trying to grapple with something I don't know how to describe.

[smjjames]

Speaking of shifting the blame, some people (well, at least one person anyway) are trying to blame the third party vote for the loss..

Which, I really don't agree with. For one, blaming it on third parties completely ignores everything else that went wrong. The third party vote is merely a symptom and a warning sign, had the Democrats or Clinton done things differently, then the Republicans would be the ones complaining about the third party vote.

[Reelya]

aying that the Dems did not necessarily fuck up, that they didn't necessarily do anything wrong, but that rather they were seen as having done something wrong.

But you are doing the apologetics thing explicitly now, when I merely suspected you before of doing it implicitly.

So yeah, what I said was on the money: straw-manning my concerns as "You're saying Clinton was racist" was in fact an apologetics statement to absolve Dems of all mistakes through a silly straw-man. So it's not Dems fault for screwing up, it's everyone else's fault for not realizing how perfect and pure they were.

Umm, election campaign here, it's your entire job to make people see you as a good choice. If you come across as a bad choice, that's the fault of your campaign. It's not logical to say they ran a perfect campaign, but people saw them differently. You didn't run a good campaign by definition then.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

aying that the Dems did not necessarily fuck up, that they didn't necessarily do anything wrong, but that rather they were seen as having done something wrong.

But you are doing the apologetics thing explicitly now, when I merely suspected you before of doing it implicitly.

So yeah, what I said was on the money: straw-manning my concerns as "You're saying Clinton was racist" was in fact an apologetics statement to absolve Dems of all mistakes through a silly straw-man. So it's not Dems fault for screwing up, it's everyone else's fault for not realizing how perfect and pure they were.

How unclear have I been?

I fucking hate the DNC for their kangaroo election. It was a mockery of democracy, and it cost us the general election. But in the specific case of how they are seen on the topic of minorities, I don't think they did much wrong. I think that this specific PR issue was caused by the media, not the actions of the Dems themselves.

[smjjames]

I too dislike them for forcing Clinton in as the inevitable nominee, thus denying any rising stars to give it a shot or show the American public what the Democratic party has to offer.

[Reelya]

Well there's media perception of Dems + minorities, that's one issue.

And there's the fact they lost real actual support from minorities, that' sort of separate to the media perception issue.

You can't just blame the media if your core constituents aren't turning up to vote. They did in fact fail to do what campaigns are supposed to do in that case. They probably took it for granted that minorities would flood to the polls to oppose Trump, and so they didn't do as much outreach as they should have.

[TheBiggerFish]

I too dislike them for forcing Clinton in as the inevitable nominee, thus denying any rising stars to give it a shot or show the American public what the Democratic party has to offer.

Aye.

I still think Bernie would have won.

[wierd]

so, referring to latin american outreach as "the taco bowl" is A OK behavior?

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/5073

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

I feel like I'm being forced into a stereotypical Clinton-supporter position. It's kind of ironic to claim that you're being strawmanned, Reelya...

Well there's media perception of Dems + minorities, that's one issue.

And there's the fact they lose real actual support from minorities, that' sort of separate to the media perception issue.

You can't just blame the media if your core constituents aren't turning up to vote. They did in fact fail to do what campaigns are supposed to do in that case.

...why can't we? If there is no clear reason for "core constituents leaving" except "the media," then that's probably it. Did the Dems do not-perfectly? Sure. Are they at fault? no.

As for the "two separate facts" part: what the hell? The real actual loss of support is a direct result of bad PR, and that is a direct result of the fucking media.

[smjjames]

so, referring to latin american outreach as "the taco bowl" is A OK behavior?

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/5073

I think that was in reference to Trump's tweet with a taco bowl from his restaruant. I forget when exactly that tweet of his was though.

edit: Yep, the tweet was the day before that email in wikileaks, so, it's in direct reference to the tweet.

[wierd]

@doze
because that is entitled as fuck thinking?

when the party expecting those votes does not represent those voters interests, and documentation proving that comes tto light, you blame the messenger?!

[smjjames]

because that is entitled as fuck thinking?

when the party expecting those votes does not represent those voters interests, and documentation proving that comes tto light, you blame the messenger?!

Not sure if that was towards me or Doze. Probably Doze.

[wierd]

so, referring to latin american outreach as "the taco bowl" is A OK behavior?

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/5073

I think that was in reference to Trump's tweet with a taco bowl from his restaruant. I forget when exactly that tweet of his was though.

edit: Yep, the tweet was the day before that email in wikileaks, so, it's in direct reference to the tweet.

snopes confirms, but still damns dnc for electioneering.

http://www.snopes.com/2016/07/25/what-we-know-so-far-about-wikileaks-dncleaks/