CO-06: Why Jason Crow represents everything that's wrong with the DCCC and Establishment Democrats

[ttystikk]

Too early to say, but I'd support Bernie if he ran again. Kinda liking what I see from Kamala Harris as well, but need to read up more on her. Any early favorite for you?

Same. What I think is needed above all else is an organized citizen movement to build the necessary structures of what's been sorely lacking in American politics in our lifetime; accountability.

 

[st0wandgrow]

Same. What I think is needed above all else is an organized citizen movement to build the necessary structures of what's been sorely lacking in American politics in our lifetime; accountability.

They are held to account once every 4 (or 2) years, but that doesnt seem to be enough. That big campaign money is pretty addictive apparently.

Overturning Citizens United and/or campaign finance reform is a must. I won't support a candidate that isn't on board with that.

 

[Fogdog]

One lung Strawman argument.

If you ever bothered to listen your know why Bernie supporters voted they way they did.

You've been sucked into the shit post void.

You too?

I listened to Sanders. Why the fuck would I listen to entitled white men who still subscribe to the theory that a rising tide floats all boats?

 

[Fogdog]

This again?


We've been over this a couple times already. I'm not concerned about what you think of me. If you'd like to punch holes in what I've said (which you've yet to do) I'm all ears, and am open to changing my opinion. This labeling thing that you and others tend to do is just an attempt to discredit what I'm saying.

"Oh he's a racist, or bigot, or arrogant, or blah blah blah".

That's what you, and buckles, and constant conflict do every time you're backed in to a corner. Personal attacks in an attempt to discredit.

I don't imagine you see the irony in your own post either. Nothing at all arrogant about getting up on your soap box and telling others how arrogant they are. lol

Are you bi-polar btw? You went from asking me about who I like in 2020 in one post, to this rant in the next post. Completely unprovoked.

You're a weird cat

We did settle it. You and Pad and I agreed that your main problem isn't racism it's your belief that nobody except a person who voted for Sanders voted in their own best interest. This is beyond racism. Grandiose might be a good term to describe it. But really,yours is the opinion of privileged people.

I thought about your earlier punchlist (shown below) where you asked why wouldn't everybody benefit from them and I must say that everybody will. If social equality isn't addressed, then income inequality will persist. Also other residues of malignant racism too.. And so, I say that the list you put together is a good start but missing key points that make the list by itself inadequate.

- $15 minimum wage
- Medicare for all
- Free public university
- End the racist Clinton era mass incarceration
- Legalize weed

I won't defend Clinton anymore so no point in pulling her into the mix. She wasn't my first choice either.

Below is the exchange we had where you agreed that everybody who didn't vote for Sanders voted against their own interests. You still try to separate economic injustice from social injustice as if there is a difference. You are wrong about that but it doesn't change the conclusion.

What should I start calling you instead of racist? Zealot, Bigot or Delusional?

@Padawanbater2 I'm directing this post to you and St0.

You are correct in the fallacy of my logic. We did talk about Trump supporters and I do say that they voted in their own best interests. And that only they decide what factors in to their decision. Perhaps you aren't just suffering from a curable bout of racism. I'll expand the population that berners dismiss. Is it fair to say for anybody who didn't vote for Sanders, you dismiss their ability to decide what is in their own best interest?

If so, I'd say you are suffering from a monstrous case of self importance. Especially given that Sanders garnered 30% fewer votes than Clinton did in the primary. So you are much worse than just racists. Would it be accurate to call you zealots? Bigots? Delusional?

You know, I do have to agree with you here. I made a blanket statement surmising what is in people's best interest. Everyone has their own reasons for casting their votes the way they do.

What I should have said was *economic* interests. People that use any type of social assistance, can't afford to send their kids to college, work for less than $15 an hour, live at or near the poverty line, etc did indeed vote against their own ECONOMIC interests if they cast a vote for Hillary instead of Bernie, regardless of their skin color.

They may have had legitimate reasons to do so in their own mind, but that does not take away from the fact that they voted against their own economic interests.

No different than poor rural white voters that consistently vote Republican.

 

[st0wandgrow]

We did settle it. You and Pad and I agreed that your main problem isn't racism it's your belief that nobody except a person who voted for Sanders voted in their own best interest. This is beyond racism. Grandiose might be a good term to describe it. But really,yours is the opinion of privileged people.

I thought about your earlier punchlist (shown below) where you asked why wouldn't everybody benefit from them and I must say that everybody will. If social equality isn't addressed, then income inequality will persist. Also other residues of malignant racism too.. And so, I say that the list you put together is a good start but missing key points that make the list by itself inadequate.

- $15 minimum wage
- Medicare for all
- Free public university
- End the racist Clinton era mass incarceration
- Legalize weed

I won't defend Clinton anymore so no point in pulling her into the mix. She wasn't my first choice either.

Below is the exchange we had where you agreed that everybody who didn't vote for Sanders voted against their own interests. You still try to separate economic injustice from social injustice as if there is a difference. You are wrong about that but it doesn't change the conclusion.

What should I start calling you instead of racist? Zealot, Bigot or Delusional?

So you disagree that someone making $10 an hour, without health care coverage, with children in high school would economically benefit from a raise to $15 per hour, Medicare for all, and free public university? Forget skin color for a minute, as it's really irrelevant to my point.

How is looking at a set of data points, and drawing an informed conclusion racist?

I've seen you deride poor, rural, white voters for voting Republican before for this very same reason. How is that any different than what I'm doing? The only difference is that I/we were discussing black voters, and I refrain from name calling to make my point. Aside from that the two arguments are exactly the same. Your knee-jerk racism accusations are unfounded, and silly.

 

[Fogdog]

So you disagree that someone making $10 an hour, without health care coverage, with children in high school would economically benefit from a raise to $15 per hour, Medicare for all, and free public university? Forget skin color for a minute, as it's really irrelevant to my point.

How is looking at a set of data points, and drawing an informed conclusion racist?

I've seen you deride poor, rural, white voters for voting Republican before for this very same reason. How is that any different than what I'm doing? The only difference is that I/we were discussing black voters, and I refrain from name calling to make my point. Aside from that the two arguments are exactly the same. Your knee-jerk racism accusations are unfounded, and silly.

It is true that I used sweeping statements like yours. I'm not claiming to be perfect in my wording. If confronted with the question: do I think they voted in their own self interest? I'd say yes they did. This doesn't mean I agree with their reasons. And so will be glad to heartily point out my difference with them. It's the sweeping breadth of your dismissing all non berners ability to decide that I'm pointing out to you.

Economic interests are only part of the mix. People vote for candidates on one issue, such as abortion. Also, if you listen to some, they say that things will get better for them MAGA. I'm not saying that person "wasn't able to decide correctly economically but maybe other reasons", I'm saying that person voted in their own self interest. You can only make one choice.

I'm not calling you racist, I think you have much worse problem of grandiosity. That statement would include @ttystikk and @Padawanbater2

 

[st0wandgrow]

It's the sweeping breadth of your dismissing all non berners ability to decide that I'm pointing out to you.

I admitted that I painted with a broad brush, and clarified what I meant. They voted against their economic self interest, which you seemed to agree with, but now you don't, even though you've said the same of others.

Economic interests are only part of the mix. People vote for candidates on one issue, such as abortion. Also, if you listen to some, they say that things will get better for them MAGA. I'm not saying that person "wasn't able to decide correctly economically but maybe other reasons", I'm saying that person voted in their own self interest. You can only make one choice.

And I agreed with you on this already. You then proceeded to ask me my opinion on what those issues that people voted on might be. I told you that "I'm not sure, but if I had to make a guess" and then went on to surmise what those issues may be. If someone is adamant about pro-life, or a big supporter of the 2'nd amendment, or is very opposed to gay marriage, those issues may override everything else and steer that persons vote. That still doesn't mean that they didn't vote against their own economic self interests. I'm not saying that they voted for the wrong candidate (like all of the Hillary supporters here (yourself included) tell Bernie supporters that didn't vote for Hillary). That's their decision alone to make.

It is true that I used sweeping statements like yours. I'm not claiming to be perfect in my wording.

So then you're guilty of "grandiosity" too?

 

[abandonconflict]

It is true that I used sweeping statements like yours. I'm not claiming to be perfect in my wording. If confronted with the question: do I think they voted in their own self interest? I'd say yes they did. This doesn't mean I agree with their reasons. And so will be glad to heartily point out my difference with them. It's the sweeping breadth of your dismissing all non berners ability to decide that I'm pointing out to you.

Economic interests are only part of the mix. People vote for candidates on one issue, such as abortion. Also, if you listen to some, they say that things will get better for them MAGA. I'm not saying that person "wasn't able to decide correctly economically but maybe other reasons", I'm saying that person voted in their own self interest. You can only make one choice.

I'm not calling you racist, I think you have much worse problem of grandiosity. That statement would include @ttystikk and @Padawanbater2

He's pretty racist. Those sweeping statements about how black people are unable to know what is in their interests, or that they're too bigoted to choose Bernard. Pretty fucking racist.

 

[Fogdog]

I admitted that I painted with a broad brush, and clarified what I meant. They voted against their economic self interest, which you seemed to agree with, but now you don't, even though you've said the same of others.



And I agreed with you on this already. You then proceeded to ask me my opinion on what those issues that people voted on might be. I told you that "I'm not sure, but if I had to make a guess" and then went on to surmise what those issues may be. If someone is adamant about pro-life, or a big supporter of the 2'nd amendment, or is very opposed to gay marriage, those issues may override everything else and steer that persons vote. That still doesn't mean that they didn't vote against their own economic self interests. I'm not saying that they voted for the wrong candidate (like all of the Hillary supporters here (yourself included) tell Bernie supporters that didn't vote for Hillary). That's their decision alone to make.



So then you're guilty of "grandiosity" too?

You keep missing that I don't distinguish social injustice from economic injustice. I'm not saying your list is bad, just inadequate. If the list also included position such as equal pay, ending gerrymandering, ending voter suppression, a policy regarding day care for working parents, it might begin to be acceptable. I'm not saying those specifically, but something like it.

I changed the subject in that other thread because I was bored with your repeated denial that you are racist. You are. AC reminds you daily of your racist diatribe. You still deny it, which is also common among your kind. From there we can go back and forth -- are, aren't, are, aren't. boring

 

[Fogdog]

So then you're guilty of "grandiosity" too?

The grandiosity of thinking, saying and defending the idea that people who didn't vote my way aren't able to correctly decide for themselves what's in their own best interest? I am not guilty of that.

 

[st0wandgrow]

The grandiosity of thinking, saying and defending the idea that people who didn't vote my way aren't able to correctly decide for themselves what's in their own best interest? I am not guilty of that.

lol

Right. You've already admitted that you have belittled Republicans for voting against their own best interests. Does it only count in your mind when it's black voters that we're discussing?

Also...

You've never participated in the "Bernie supporters are retards for not voting for Hillary" shtick that takes place here daily?? I bet you have. I've certainly never seen you jump down bucks throat when he trots that out.

It's ok though. I know massaging his balls is part of the membership dues

 

[abandonconflict]

The grandiosity of thinking, saying and defending the idea that people who didn't vote my way aren't able to correctly decide for themselves what's in their own best interest? I am not guilty of that.

But he thinks he voted against his own interests just because he's such a swell guy...

 

[abandonconflict]

lol

Right. You've already admitted that you have belittled Republicans for voting against their own best interests. Does it only count in your mind when it's black voters that we're discussing?

Also...

You've never participated in the "Bernie supporters are retards for not voting for Hillary" shtick that takes place here daily?? I bet you have. I've certainly never seen you jump down bucks throat when he trots that out.

It's ok though. I know massaging his balls is part of the membership dues

Please find me any post where someone says that. Take a screen shot. I want to know who has said that and it doesn't even have to be verbatim but it does have to be that same message worded in some way. Who has ever criticized Berners just because they didn't vote for Hillary Clinton?

 

[st0wandgrow]

I changed the subject in that other thread because I was bored with your repeated denial that you are racist. You are.

And I've already told you that I don't care about your opinion on such things. You guys have 90% of the members here pegged as "racist". It's a tactic you and others use to discredit someones argument. You have no factual rebuttal, so you trot out the racist card. I agree, that is boring, and weak sauce.

AC reminds you daily of your racist diatribe. You still deny it, which is also common among your kind.

Constant Conflict? You mean the great defender of all things social justice....that supported Rawn Pawl? lol

I have him on ignore, so I was unaware that he's still following me around like a lost puppy.

 

[abandonconflict]

@Fogdog he didn't even acknowledge what you said about his racist rant. That's why he has me on ignore, because he has nothing to say. He's afraid to face it.

It is not at all like the way I acknowledge the criticism I receive. Such as when they allude to my having tentatively supported Rawn Pawl in 2010-2011, of which I was the one to have made them aware. See, I don't mind responding to it. I did in fact, though I voted for Obama in 2008. However, when I learned more, I no longer supported him, yet became the biggest critic of him and his die-hard followers that I know of.

 

[Fogdog]

lol

Right. You've already admitted that you have belittled Republicans for voting against their own best interests. Does it only count in your mind when it's black voters that we're discussing?

Also...

You've never participated in the "Bernie supporters are retards for not voting for Hillary" shtick that takes place here daily?? I bet you have. I've certainly never seen you jump down bucks throat when he trots that out.

It's ok though. I know massaging his balls is part of the membership dues

I'm happy to argue ideas and especially the facts or fake facts behind them. I enjoy popping bubbles and have no remorse about hurting feelings. That's different from a sweeping dismissal of practically the entire electorate. Feel free to embarrass me by calling up an old post that conflicts with my sense of this. If not all, most of the time I'm focused on facts and pricking holes in people's statements that are based on falsehoods or a puffed up ego. Such as, your claim people aren't able to decide what's best for them.

I think UB most often calls Bernie supporters are retards because they are naive and unable to deal with complexity -- "never compromise" and "litmus tests to establish fitness to run for office". I don't think his posts are centered on the "you voted wrong" theory like yours is. Your childlike confidence in knowing what's best for everybody draws fire from both of us. UB and I agree on most issues. We disagree on a few. But I'm not the morality police. I'm here to learn and for entertainment. I certainly don't think UB is racist like you.

 

[st0wandgrow]

I'm happy to argue ideas......That's different from a sweeping dismissal of practically the entire electorate.

Bernie supporters are retards because they are naive and unable to deal with complexity.

Jesus Fuck. This is like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

[Fogdog]

@Fogdog he didn't even acknowledge what you said about his racist rant. That's why he has me on ignore, because he has nothing to say. He's afraid to face it.

It is not at all like the way I acknowledge the criticism I receive. Such as when they allude to my having tentatively supported Rawn Pawl in 2010-2011, of which I was the one to have made them aware. See, I don't mind responding to it. I did in fact, though I voted for Obama in 2008. However, when I learned more, I no longer supported him, yet became the biggest critic of him and his die-hard followers that I know of.

I know. I refer to his posts just made just yesterday and he refers to your posts made years ago. It's a bit CS. I didn't miss your post where you say you learned and changed your mind about Paul. Of course st0 didn't see it.

Regardless he knows exactly what racist diatribe I refer to. Not that he accepts it was racist. Then again, he's confused about the difference between racism and prejudice.

Jesus Fuck. This is like shooting fish in a barrel.

What is "like shooting fish in a barrel"? Miscasting a sentence about UB as though I were saying it about you? Well, yeah. I can cut and paste your words to mean whatever I like too.

i like shooting Jesus.

In any case, I also think that Bernie supporters who by their words and comments demonstrate they are naive and unable to deal with complexity are still able make decisions in their own best interest. I'll be glad to talk with you about my opinion that Bernie supporters are naive and unable to deal with complexity if you like.

 

[Fogdog]

They are held to account once every 4 (or 2) years, but that doesnt seem to be enough. That big campaign money is pretty addictive apparently.

Overturning Citizens United and/or campaign finance reform is a must. I won't support a candidate that isn't on board with that.

Did you know that there is not one Democratic Party Caucus senator in the US Senate who opposed the repeal of Citizen's United in 2014? This isn't a new issue and I'm glad to hear you are on board with it. Along with the leadership of the Democratic Party.

 

[ttystikk]

They are held to account once every 4 (or 2) years, but that doesnt seem to be enough. That big campaign money is pretty addictive apparently.

Overturning Citizens United and/or campaign finance reform is a must. I won't support a candidate that isn't on board with that.

That's just the tip of the accountability iceberg. But those would do for a start.