I removed the personal back-and-forth. What remains is your tendency to label anything you don't like "woke" while constantly moving the goalposts. So, no, the "trolling stuff" is not baseless.
Is acceptance and support for transgender people extremist? Is support for people fleeing cartel violence extremist? Is a corporate income tax extremist? Is community placement of people with disabilities with their support staff being paid 20$ an hour extremist?
Figure out who's reasonable, figure out who's not, and go from there. If that means primarying some of them, so be it. But they exactly haven't been a big help in the last nine years.
Support has to be hidden from a party whose very existence is all about rooting out the ways that Dems are helping oppressed minorities and putting an end to them. These jacklegged centrists either think they can sneak goodwill past a conservative, or they know they can't and don't care what happens to those they once tried to save.
Hillary Clinton wasn't popular enough to win. Funnily enough she had the same problem that Corbyn had... she'd been maligned and abused in the media for a couple of decades. It's hard to reverse than in one cycle although Corbyn almost did in 2017. The one after that, 2019 was the brexit election when people just vote for the guy who promised to make it all go away. It's not a great idea to try and draw comparisons between two different elections in completely different circumstances and in different countries. As has already been explained now, (numerous times), it was unlikely the democrats were going to win any more than other incumbents. That was the case then and will remain the case no matter how many times people say 'woke', 'bernie-bros' or similar rubbish.
it is though. just because people on the left don't want to hear about the wokiness stuff as an absolute killer for our election chances, raising the subject is not trolling. all the "yeah, well what is woke you horrible troll? stuff is a red herring and completely stupid, much of our conversation in recent weeks has been spent discussing "what is woke?" for me, for you...how is the ambiguity of woke a problem for democrats, the kooky birth of wokism (from my experience, 10 years ago), various facets of woke that have absolutely sent the electorate fleeing away from the Democrats and how woke should be a part of our master plan for coming back from the dead. so I'm sorry, for me its baseless and exactly what Barack Obama was talking about.
Repeat your question. How do you get people to vote for support for transgender people - such as explicit hate crime laws, public funding of transgender surgery and therapy,banning of "conversion therapy" with no religious exemption,and enforcement of equal employment laws? I mean,that's what you think support is right?Correct me if I'm wrong.
You've laid out your far-left vision for America. Something about capitalism, and the White people in charge, must be crushed. We all need to embrace the "s" word, and then (and only then) fascism can be defeated. I've been asking you to (a) tell us how this kind of thinking looks like a winner for Democrats, and (b) please give us an example of where exactly, over say the past 100 years, capitalism has been successfully replaced by a socialist utopia...just one.
and it really wasn't a personal back-and-forth, just for the record (since his random rantings have been disappeared). it was a reasonable conversation that got derailed by a completely uncalled for string of attacks by @superdave who was maybe on a hairy one of his own, I'm not sure.
That's not my vision.I hope it doesn't come to that. You,I presume, understand that Stalinism and Maoism are not in fact exemplars of socialism,but another flavor of authoritarianism. I already pointed out that most European countries have attained a balance between state and market control while ensuring human rights. Do you believe the current disparity in wealth between the top 5% and everyone else is acceptable and sustainable? Are you willing to concede my point regarding what support for transgender people entails with regard to policy?
Now you're trying to pivot away from your own vision, I get that. But I'm responding to your own words...that was specifically what you said and now you're backpedaling so it's hard to have a good faith conversation with you.
Do we still talk about actual things happening with the Dem party, or just that words not in use except by GQP are the reason fascism exists, and if we want to vote our way out of it we need to acquiesce to fascist tendencies? Just checking. Anyways. Enjoy! https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/n...ement-minneapolis-mayor-candidate-omar-fateh/ This doesn't pass the sniff test.
See, at least you admitted that you're all good with antifa and the more extreme wing of our party. And you resisted the temptation to pile on when this place became a circular firing squad. I can respect that.
You're saying it was my vision and it isn't. Since you seem to have difficulty understanding that,let me make it more clear by looking at personal belief and policy choice that leads from that. How do you personally support the transgender and gay people that you know? What policies should government enact to protect them from violent bigots?
If Captain America says it's ok to stand up to Nazi violence, who am I to argue? Hell, my grandfather and his entire generation did just that way more violently than Antifa ever has (or planned on doing). And socialism is responsible for the biggest economic boom our country has ever enjoyed and it's dismantling is one of the reasons were in this mess. Even from day 1, fascists, Nazis, and oligarchs tried to coup the president for it. Many of the social leaders were fascists and went into hiding during the war but crawled back from the shadows after and began their work. So no...scary words are not why we are here and changing them fixes nothing. Like a cancer, it has to be excised.