Print

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

[Reelya]

I wasn't putting words in your mouth. What I was making the point was that not addressing core issues in the party just ensures a repeat. Introspecting is needed. If you only look forward you never learn from mistakes. If you don't give a fuck about the problems, then you might as well say you don't give a fuck about their being a Democratic Party.

There seems to be a slight air that suggests people think that anyone who says the Dems need reform are traitors or double-agents or something.

[Rolepgeek]

Yes, which we established months ago, so why are we arguing about it now?

This argument of who to blame is completely and utterly missing the goddamn point of this whole fucking thing that I wonder if there's even going to be a Democratic party left by 2020.

"Now when we are weakest is not the time to point fingers and work out what went wrong! Never question the program, the program is sound!"

It's probably more the time for that right now than ever, actually.

It's not even that. Now is not the time to punch people in the face over a fight! What do you accomplish by telling him to go fuck himself? He's not part of the DNC! You're not gonna be able to influence it by attacking him! You should well know that people don't change their minds when attacked about their ideas!

You put the 'Never question the program, the program is sound!' bit into his mouth. And maybe the 'work out what went wrong' bit. He seemed mostly to be talking about pointing fingers part. He said who to blame, not 'what went wrong'.

[Max™]

OI!

Calm your shit the fuck down, lest Toady lock the thread, Reelya.

And that goes for you, too, Dozebom! Both of you, take a break from posting until you can think clearly. We're all dorfs here. Don't get into fights about shit like this so soon after the election. Discuss, sure. Not this shit, though. You wanna do that, you go to fucking 4chan and deal with the anons.

Make sure you start spreading the meme: Gabbard/The Rock 2020: Even better than the Cookies!

And then the chairperson stepped down, didn't she?

Indeed she did. But only after being caught with her panties down, and the damage done.

The DNC does not have clean hands.

Not saying they do, but they would literally be in their rights to tell Sanders to fuck off, instead they tried to work with him halfway-sorta.

Also didn't say they did nothing wrong, it was definitely wrong, they did lots wrong, they were just totally allowed to do it as a private body.

Anybody seen Kill Bill?

Know when she's talking to the kid?

'It was not my intention to do this in front of you, but when you grow up, if you still feel raw about it... I'll be waiting.'

[wierd]

Indeed. The pattern of behavior indicates systemic problems.

No max, he was on their ticket, as a democrat.

Their own damn rules demand fairness in treatment. They did not deliver.

[Reelya]

Yes, which we established months ago, so why are we arguing about it now?

This argument of who to blame is completely and utterly missing the goddamn point of this whole fucking thing that I wonder if there's even going to be a Democratic party left by 2020.

"Now when we are weakest is not the time to point fingers and work out what went wrong! Never question the program, the program is sound!"

It's probably more the time for that right now than ever, actually.

Literally putting words in my mouth, turning around and saying you weren't putting words in my mouth.

Try again.

That's a fucking Simpsons reference. Take a chill pill and recognize humor / sarcasm.

[Reelya]

But my point is sound. You say not to look at who's to blame, but to look forward to surviving to 2020. I countered that this viewpoint is only going to repeat the problems. It's actually the best time to shed deadweight from the party right this minute.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

Uh, guys... gals... other-or-none-of-the-above... robots-waiting-to-take-over-who-will-have-my-absolute-loyalty-my-masters... you are all aware that the DNC is not an arm of the government and is under absolutely zero requirements to be fair or impartial right?

Well we fricking expect it to be.

Getting mad at the DNC for not supporting Sanders is like getting mad at any random group of people who didn't specifically support Sanders, it puts up candidates, it's not the US Government itself.

I'm mad at the DNC for pretending to be democratic but actually supporting Clinton. I mean, if they advertised that they were interfering with the democratic process, I'd be fine...

Now, Gabbard, she is someone that was told to shut up and get in line over Sanders, and she is someone who has reason to feel raw about it, as an actual Democrat, which I guess is a reality I figured was more well known so I didn't point it out, but the fact that they didn't tell Bernie to fuck off back to the woods is amazing, because they would have been perfectly in their rights to tell Bernie to fuck off back to the woods if they wanted. We should thank them for giving him any sort of aid and indeed for helping him get his message out to a wider crowd.

Or they could just be impartial, you know? Seems like an easy solution - don't mess with the democratic process. Done.

I mean, "shut up and get in line" is bad whether it's "get in line with Sanders" or "get in line with Clinton." But there's a gray zone in between "fuck you Sanders, you aren't what the establishment wants" and "fuck you, anybody who doesn't like Sanders, time to get in line".

Reelya:

I'm pretty sure I've been misreading your posts. I read this:

Clinton made an error and spoke in a way such that she alienated minority voters.

I'm pretty sure you wrote this:

Clinton did not appeal enough to minority voters.

I agree. You then continue to imply:

This is due to a failure on Clinton's part.

This may be true, but I wouldn't ignore the effect of the media. It could quite possibly be both.

It was paraphrasing the simpsons and literally in quotes. It was clearly humor.

or

That's a fucking Simpsons reference. Take a chill pill and recognize humor / sarcasm.

Your first post was better, seriously. (Also not everybody watches the Simpsons...)

But my point is sound. You say not to look at who's to blame, but to look forward to surviving to 2020. I countered that this viewpoint is only going to repeat the problems.

He's not saying to stop investigating this, he's saying that you're beating a dead horse and pointing fingers, both of which are counterproductive and useless.

[Rolepgeek]

Not even that; regardless of whether you intended it to be humor, the context for it was more than a little aggressive. Saying 'it was only a joke, obviously!' doesn't excuse it. That's what we have for. That is the 'making a silly' indicator.

Quotes also indicate what someone is saying, and when you're responding to someone who's literally just said 'This argument of who to blame is completely and utterly missing the goddamn point', and you just told someone else to go fuck themselves, it might be understandable why someone could think you were being somewhat aggressive.

[Reelya]

Man, you Americans are going to be real hard to talk to for the next 8 years. Democrats have gone from super-smug to super-defensive overnight.

And it is right after a big loss that you ask the hard questions about what your party did wrong. That's just how it works.

[wierd]

Behave children. Don't call down the toad.

[Reelya]

I lost my shit because I was accused of calling Clinton a racist, which I let slide at first, but then the same person called me out for using the word "apologetics" and started hammering me for that. So yeah, I got angry but I had a good reason to be angry.

[wierd]

It sounds like you both agree that the misdeeds of the DNC and its members and staffers contributed heavily to the failure of this election. Good.

Now drop the ad hominems, and we can move on.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

I lost my shit because I was accused of calling Clinton a racist, which I let slide at first, but then the same person called me out for using the word "apologetics" and started hammering me for that. So yeah, I got angry but I had a good reason to be angry.

Oh, for fuck's sake.

1. It was a misunderstanding. I thought that you said that Clinton said something that lost the minority vote for her, but you were actually saying that she failed to attract the minority vote enough. There's a difference. The second is possible, the first is false.

2. I said "racist, patronizing, etc." to refer to all the ways that Clinton could fuck up.

As for the "apologetics" part, do you not see the religious connotation present in that word? Accusing me of participating in a Clinton religion is just... dude, that's both false and nasty. Of course I'll call you out on that.

[Reelya]

Actually I have no specific views on the DNC one way or another. But I think after a big loss you need to be pointing out failures from all stakeholders, not looking for scapegoats.

Basically, other people who screwed up could throw DNC under the bus, and that could mask important flaws that contributed to the overall failure. That's why it's important to look at every avenue, the campaign, the candidate, the organization etc. Not just say "Sanders supporters" or "DNC" as the "explanation".

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

So why were we even arguing, again?