Print

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

[Iduno]

You can, however, legislate a time when the electioneers can give the results to the media.

True, but you can't stop news services from running their own exit polls. Which would have the same effect, but be based on less accurate data.

I'd like to say that would make fewer people watch, because people would notice that the results were unreliable. I really would.

[Frumple]

I mean. That would show like 70% don't, though? That's not how you drag someone towards you, that's how you signal quite loudly you're dependent on the majority to get bugger all you want done and most folks are better off listening to whatever that 70% is saying.

So what I'm reading is.... when they lose, we shouldn't be blamed?

*shrugs* If them losing isn't also a lose condition for more leftist groups (tip: it seriously fucking is for most of them) then I guess not? Them winning is our less lose condition at a minimum, though, so if we somehow manage to fuck ourselves by not throwing enough support behind 'em, well, blame should probably be duly apportioned.

If nothing else, getting the dems in power and making sure they stick to the voting reform promises would be a friggin' coup for the next few election cycles (with an added bonus of it being at least as much of one for them, so it's pretty damn win-win), nevermind even biden's publicly putting himself behind a lot of shit that's in the right direction. Blow out down ballot on top of getting the executive out of GOP hands and enough of congress to force something and this next cycle might be something other than fucking abysmal for the american left (and it's population in general, for that matter). Don't and we get to spend the next four years pretty omnifucked.

[SalmonGod]

*shrugs* If them losing isn't also a lose condition for more leftist groups (tip: it seriously fucking is for most of them) then I guess not? Them winning is our less lose condition at a minimum, though, so if we somehow manage to fuck ourselves by not throwing enough support behind 'em, well, blame should probably be duly apportioned.

The antagonisms of the neoliberal agenda is what feeds into the desperate angry confused reactionary populism that manifests in figures like Trump.  Trump as an individual is not the problem.  If we got an exact duplicate of the Obama administration in 2020 (and the associated continual decline into worsening war profiteering, police state authoritarianism, environmental collapse, poverty, etc), what came afterwards would be another duplicate of Trump or worse. 

Yes yes harm reduction.  But mild harm reduction in the short term at the expense of any effort to break the cycle just ensures the same or greater harm in the long term.  Thus anything other than breaking the cycle is equal loss in my opinion.

If nothing else, getting the dems in power and making sure they stick to the voting reform promises would be a friggin' coup for the next few election cycles (with an added bonus of it being at least as much of one for them, so it's pretty damn win-win), nevermind even biden's publicly putting himself behind a lot of shit that's in the right direction. Blow out down ballot on top of getting the executive out of GOP hands and enough of congress to force something and this next cycle might be something other than fucking abysmal for the american left (and it's population in general, for that matter). Don't and we get to spend the next four years pretty omnifucked.

I don't have any faith in Democrats actually doing anything they promise.  Record and funding matters more than platform.  But I haven't heard of any voting reform promises?  I'd like to know where you've seen this?  Only thing coming up on a search is old news regarding DNC primary reforms prior to 2020.

[Doomblade187]

Frumple, I think the problem is that the progressives are *always* the scapegoat, even when a moderate candidate loses. Yes, progressive engagement is lower without a progressive candidate, but as shown, ~70% of Bernie's supporters voted Clinton in 2016. This would imply that the main problem isn't that the progressives didn't show up, it was Clinton's campaign. The party loves to blame progressives for failure, but never takes responsibility when a moderate loses.

A good example is that many progressives will agree that Bernie could have run a better campaign this primary, but if Biden loses in the general, I fully expect people to say "oh, but the Bernie bros didn't show up in the general".

[Frumple]

But I haven't heard of any voting reform promises?  I'd like to know where you've seen this?  Only thing coming up on a search is old news regarding DNC primary reforms prior to 2020.

HR1, mate. It's been sitting in the Senate for like the last goddamn year, and we've had biden('s campaign) speak out in more or less support of it just this month. It would basically straight up fucking disembowel the GOP, leaving actual ground for left-progressive/third party runs without screwing everyone quite so hard in a losing situation. It's already passed the house once, it seems. It's literally something the dems are actively trying to get passed, right now. They just can't, because, y'know. Senate, president. Biden would rubberstamp that shit if it got through senate, and it would stick a fork right in the GOP.

Frumple, I think the problem is that the progressives are *always* the scapegoat, even when a moderate candidate loses.

Everyone that can be scapegoated gets scapegoated by folks looking to blame anyone except themselves for whatever portion of the failure is their due, though. Progressives get scapegoated, moderates get scapegoated, minorities, the majority, bloody anything to paint this shit as anything except all of us left of the goddamn fash collectively fucking up and going down together. Progressives probably seem like they get hit with it more, but that's because they're friggin' outnumbered in this country.

But yeah, Clinton's campaign wasn't exactly great. It just beat out bernie's, just like biden's did, and went on to win the popular vote despite all the horseshit going on in the country. Which suggests the problem wasn't necessarily even her campaign, just the specifically located horseshit

[wierd]

Local news-- A local state pen had prison riots today.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/kansas/articles/2020-04-09/inmates-out-of-cells-destroying-property-at-lansing-prison

It is my understanding that despite the reticence of the press to state it, the reason for the riot is the lack of medical care for inmates with COVID-19.

HOORAY privatized prisons. Save the taxpayer that money. Gotta keep costs down yo. /s

[delphonso]

Articles today said Chicago area's Cook County Jail is rife with Covid19

[MrRoboto75]

If only felons were considered real citizens.

[wierd]

In the news today--

Organge DIPSHIT suffers from systemic innumeracy.  Thinks we have reached peak covid, and thinks that means everyone can go to fucking work by the end of the month.

Aids tell him this is fucking stupid.

He wants to ignore them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/10/us/politics/coronavirus-trump-economy.html

Brace for impact ladies and gentlemen.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

There's going to be a lot of dipshit capitalists pushing for a "no more nonsense, we work in June" narrative at this point. There's got to be a lot of them hurting on their rent checks by this point, and nothing quite appeals to conservatives like harsh, foolish, one-word solutions to complex problems.

[Reelya]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/pedrodacosta/2020/04/03/pandemic-economics-lessons-from-the-spanish-flu-in-1918/#7a335974797a

“Areas that were more severely affected by the 1918 Flu Pandemic saw a sharp and persistent decline in real economic activity,” wrote Fed board economist Sergio Correa, New York Fed researcher Stephan Luck and Emil Verner of the MIT Sloan School of Management, in a blog about their findings. Their conclusion:

“Cities that implemented early and extensive non-pharmaceutical interventions (like physical distancing and forbidding large gatherings) suffered no adverse economic effects over the medium term. On the contrary, cities that intervened earlier and more aggressively experienced a relative increase in real economic activity after the pandemic subsided.

https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-covid-pandemic-1918-spanish-flu-economic-impact-mit-study-20200402.html

Philadelphia put social distancing measures in place slowly — 8 days after deaths started to rise dramatically — and for a limited duration —51 days compared to an average of 88 days. In response, the city experienced a high mortality rate (about 900 deaths per 100,000 residents) and a weak economy after the pandemic was over. In comparison, Cleveland acted quickly — 2 days before deaths started accelerating — and aggressively — putting measures in place for 99 days. Cleveland’s mortality rate was lower (600 deaths per 100,000 residents) and the economy in 1919 was about average.

Not doing the lockdowns is extremely bad for the long-term economy. However Trump doesn't give the first shit about the longterm economy, he only cares that things look good on paper in November.

[ZBridges]

The expected death toll is much less than the Spanish Flu, however.

[wierd]

Not if people go back to work...

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Also depends on what covid's recurrence ends up being - if it's consistently like this then the flu has just gone out of business, only producing a couple horrid pandemics a century.

[Trolldefender99]

Seems Bernie put in his support (endorsement) for Biden. Not much else to say about it.