Forward Party

[wareyin]

They've been doing something like that for years. Unfortunately, they chose entirely hostile, negative, accusational thought-terminating clichés that push people away instead of positive, affirming/inspiring thought-terminating clichés that could bring people together.

I can't think of a single example of a Dem version of an "entirely hostile, negative, accusational thought-terminating clichés that push people away."
Can you provide an example?

(...and then they brilliantly doubled down on it when called on it, coming up with excuses for their mind-reading claims that just amounted to "why yes, we can in fact read your minds", such as the "dog-whistle" addendum.)

Um..."dog-whistle" addendum? Is that the one where the conservatives use not overt but not very subtle racist language or imagery, then tee-hee and wink, and Dems point out that it's racist?

 

[Susheel]

I can't think of a single example of a Dem version of an "entirely hostile, negative, accusational thought-terminating clichés that push people away."
Can you provide an example?

Ya know... Cliche's like universal healthcare, police reform, gun control, increased minimum wage, employment protection, student lone relief better education funding.... Because "communism".

 

[Beelzebuddy]

[ETA] **** it, not worth it.

 

[wareyin]

Ya know... Cliche's like universal healthcare, police reform, gun control, increased minimum wage, employment protection, student lone relief better education funding.... Because "communism".

Yeah, the Dem slogans tend to be bland feel good type stuff. Build Back Better, Yes We Can, Forward Together, etc.

On the Rep side, we had "Country First" from McCain, "Obama isn't working" from Romney, "Make American Great Again" and "Build the wall Crime will fall" from Trump.

Seems like the Rep slogans are a lot more likely to go negative, or be hostile, or have "accusational thought terminating" elements to them than the Dem ones. Heck, the most biting Dem slogan I could find going back two decades was "Love Trumps Hate" from Hillary, and that's got nothing on the "Say no to Joe and the Ho" signs all over here in 2020.

 

[Donal]

I mean, other than their hyper-agressive hatred towards infrastructure investment (seriously, say "build back better" and you'll get them frothing at the mouth in rage),

You walked face-first into the point and still missed it.

expanding Medicare (all tax is theft! How're we gunna pay for it??!?!?),

Medicare is extremely popular in those areas. Expanding it also polls well. Expanding Medicaid during the Obama administration also worked really well.

and justice reform (sure, defund the police polls really well up there),

Again, you're doing the very thing I said to avoid.

blue collar Pennsylvanians are really supportive of these policies.

when you get away from the slogans and specific politicians...ya.

I skipped over legalizing marijuana because that's popular even among conservatives. It seems like only GOP politicians who are against legalization currently, but if FOX/Newsmaxx/OANN ever decide to become anti-weed then so will the majority of conservatives.

Do you mean you skipped over the thing that even you can't dismiss as supporting my point?

Including those blue-collar union workers you have zero experience with but know so well.

My dad was a union carpenter and so is my brother. I grew up in a neighborhood of Irish immigrants who all worked in the trades. I even was a teamster for a short time. I hear them all the not-so-covert racism and their attitudes toward catchphrases. But I also hear what they say when you take away the catchphrases and politicians.

But, ya, I don't know anything about it.

 

[ahhell]

I can't think of a single example of a Dem version of an "entirely hostile, negative, accusational thought-terminating clichés that push people away."
Can you provide an example?

Seriously? Every major Rep Candidate in my lifetime has been called a Racist and now white supremecists. There was a great add against GW Bush attempting to link him to the lynching of a man in Texas. Biden claimed Romney would put black people back in chains.Larry Elder, the Black Face of white supremecy. Someone at the LA times wrote that with a straight face. Glenn Youngkin, governor of Virginia due to white supremacy(despite the Black republican LT Governor, and a Cuban Attorney General. Typical White supremecist voting patterns. Frankly, the Dems are just about as responsible for Trump and the GOP. Decades of being called racists, and folks just stopped listening.

Any difference of opinion is generally explained by racism, if it can't be shoehorned in to racism, misogyny, homophobia, or now transphobia.

Um..."dog-whistle" addendum? Is that the one where the conservatives use not overt but not very subtle racist language or imagery, then tee-hee and wink, and Dems point out that it's racist?

Most often, the only folks that can hear the dog whistles are the supposed anti-racists.

 

[Donal]

So, they can't be racist because they have black friends?

 

[wareyin]

You walked face-first into the point and still missed it.



Medicare is extremely popular in those areas. Expanding it also polls well. Expanding Medicaid during the Obama administration also worked really well.



Again, you're doing the very thing I said to avoid.



when you get away from the slogans and specific politicians...ya.

Ok, so...even though blue-collar union guys literally hate everything you said they support, that still proves they support it? Are you sure?

Do you mean you skipped over the thing that even you can't dismiss as supporting my point?

No, I skipped over the thing you're claiming is progressive despite it being popular amongst conservatives too. As in, you've taken an example of something everyone (voters) supports, and claimed it was a progressive/far left policy. It's like saying support for waving the American flag on July 4th is overwhelming, so everybody loves conservative flag waving.

My dad was a union carpenter and so is my brother. I grew up in a neighborhood of Irish immigrants who all worked in the trades. I even was a teamster for a short time. I hear them all the not-so-covert racism and their attitudes toward catchphrases. But I also hear what they say when you take away the catchphrases and politicians.

But, ya, I don't know anything about it.

Given that you claim they support what they literally vote against and post signs in their yards/bumperstickers on their cars/t-shirt slogans all against, I'm comfortable sticking with you don't know anything about it.

 

[Delvo]

You walked face-first into the point and still missed it.



Medicare is extremely popular in those areas. Expanding it also polls well. Expanding Medicaid during the Obama administration also worked really well.



Again, you're doing the very thing I said to avoid.



when you get away from the slogans and specific politicians...ya.

It is also important, in both parties, to remember the difference between the officials and the commoners. The officials demonstrate hostility to anything that would be good for the commoners. The commoners don't. The officials just get elected anyway by manipulating their parties' internal machinery to make sure that their kind is the only kind available to vote for, and by telling the commoners of their own party that it's all the other party's fault.

Seriously? Every major Rep Candidate in my lifetime has been called a Racist and now white supremecists... Frankly, the Dems are just about as responsible for Trump and the GOP. Decades of being called racists, and folks just stopped listening.

And the real problem is that it's not just famous individuals; that accusation gets thrown at everybody in the country who isn't busy enough throwing it at others. And it's not the only one. A couple of other popular false accusation themes are sexism/misogyny and homophobia.

Most often, the only folks that can hear the dog whistles are the supposed anti-racists.

And "addendum" because it's stapled onto the false accusations as an excuse when the baselessness of the accusation gets pointed out:

•"This thing you/X just did/said proves that you/X is/are a whicheverist!"
►"But there wasn't any whicheverism in it."
•"It's a dog whistle! Saying that means I don't need to be able to point out any actual whicheverism in what you/X say(s)/do(es) because now it's all sneakily secretly whicheverist whether it has any actual whicheverist content or not!"

It's not the only such addendum the false-accusation movement has trotted out. Another one that seems to have peaked in popularity a few years ago but is still around was/is "privilege". That one's better than "dog-whistle" because, when asked what it meant, they could at least give a theoretical definition that sounded reasonable and realistic instead of paranoid-delusional. But how it was/is actually used in real life showed/shows what it really was/is to the false-accusation crowd:

•"This thing you/X just did/said proves that you/X is/are a whicheverist!"
►"But there wasn't any whicheverism in it."
•"You/X just say(s) that because you're/(s)he's so privileged! Saying that means I don't need to be able to point out any actual whicheverism in what you/X say(s)/do(es) because now it's all sneakily secretly whicheverist whether it has any actual whicheverist content or not!"

I believe that this kind of behavior is actually what opponents of the left who call themselves something like "centrist" mean when they claim that there's a "bonkers" "extreme" left in this country. Either that or they don't have anything specific & real in mind at all but just feel a need to claim there are extremes in both directions so they can claim to be in the middle between them. It almost certainly can't be because they think that things like livable wages and decent working conditions and access to medical care without financial destruction are "extreme" and "bonkers". But I have asked for a definition recently and gotten no answer.

 

[Donal]

Ok, so...even though blue-collar union guys literally hate everything you said they support, that still proves they support it? Are you sure?

Again, they don't hate it all. You prove my point by specifically using the catchphrases that are pinned to these policies.

No, I skipped over the thing you're claiming is progressive despite it being popular amongst conservatives too. As in, you've taken an example of something everyone (voters) supports, and claimed it was a progressive/far left policy.

So, it got popular because conservative politicians started pushing it? Or did conservative politicians start pushing it because it became popular?

It's like saying support for waving the American flag on July 4th is overwhelming, so everybody loves conservative flag waving.

No, it's like saying "this idea supported by progressives appeals to people, so more politicians jumped on board".

Given that you claim they support what they literally vote against and post signs in their yards/bumperstickers on their cars/t-shirt slogans all against, I'm comfortable sticking with you don't know anything about it.

Yes, using a strawman to support your position is pretty easy. Perhaps you can explain why things like marijuana legalization, restoring voting rights to felons, abortion rights, $15 minimum wage, etc. keep winning in these deep red states and districts on referendums? But Republican governors and legislatures overrule said referendums and still get re-elected. Could it be because it's not the policies themselves these folks hate? But rather, they get caught up in the propaganda and newspeak used by the right?

 

[wareyin]

Seriously? Every major Rep Candidate in my lifetime has been called a Racist and now white supremecists.

Yeah, conservatives love to whine about being called racists and/or white supremacists. Let's just ignore the speaking at Klan rallies or having Klan members speak at your rally. Oh, and the reverence for the Confederacy, whether flags, statues, street names, or even military bases.

There was a great add against GW Bush attempting to link him to the lynching of a man in Texas. Biden claimed Romney would put black people back in chains.Larry Elder, the Black Face of white supremecy. Someone at the LA times wrote that with a straight face. Glenn Youngkin, governor of Virginia due to white supremacy(despite the Black republican LT Governor, and a Cuban Attorney General. Typical White supremecist voting patterns. Frankly, the Dems are just about as responsible for Trump and the GOP. Decades of being called racists, and folks just stopped listening.

It's amazing how conservatives can't seem to remember the Southern Strategy, and go straight to whining about having been called racist for decades. The Willie Horton ad (not add), welfare queens in Cadillacs, Mexico is sending us their rapists, none of that is evidence of racist rhetoric, it's just the left calling you all names.

Any difference of opinion is generally explained by racism, if it can't be shoehorned in to racism, misogyny, homophobia, or now transphobia.

When the differences of opinion are whether or not black people should be able to vote, or women being qualified to hold jobs, or how gay people shouldn't be allowed to get married, or how trans people are all mentally disabled, then those "differences of opinion" are best explained by racism, misogyny, homophobia, or transphobia.

Most often, the only folks that can hear the dog whistles are the supposed anti-racists.

Yeah, no. Those who employ the dog-whistling aren't fooling anyone else. They aren't constantly dog-whistling unintentionally, and the often literal winking while they say that stuff does give the game away.

 

[wareyin]

Again, they don't hate it all. You prove my point by specifically using the catchphrases that are pinned to these policies.

Ok, you're going to have to explain how your point is being proven by the obvious antagonism to what you say people secretly support.

So, it got popular because conservative politicians started pushing it? Or did conservative politicians start pushing it because it became popular?

As I already stated, conservative politicians aren't pushing it, despite its popularity. So you seem to be a bit confused here, as well. That said, the conservative politicians who are openly against marijuana legalization do seem to be pretty popular in their states, so apparently despite most people being for legalization, they don't support it enough to actually do anything to make it happen.

No, it's like saying "this idea supported by progressives appeals to people, so more politicians jumped on board".

Ok, specifically which conservative politicians are on board with legalization?

Yes, using a strawman to support your position is pretty easy. Perhaps you can explain why things like marijuana legalization, restoring voting rights to felons, abortion rights, $15 minimum wage, etc. keep winning in these deep red states and districts on referendums? But Republican governors and legislatures overrule said referendums and still get re-elected. Could it be because it's not the policies themselves these folks hate? But rather, they get caught up in the propaganda and newspeak used by the right?

I live in a deep red state. I didn't know any one of those things was passed here. In fact, to my knowledge only 2 of those things have been passed in any red state (abortion rights not being removed in Kansas, and restoring voting rights to felons in Florida). Enlighten me please which red states I missed that are on the progressive bandwagon?

eta: well, technically my state (GA) is now reddish-purple, despite the deep red area of the state I live in. As previously stated, MTG is my representative in the House.

 

[Donal]

Seriously? Every major Rep Candidate in my lifetime has been called a Racist and now white supremecists.

Are you older than Reagan's use of the Southern Strategy? How about Nixon starting the War on Drugs?

There was a great add against GW Bush attempting to link him to the lynching of a man in Texas.

The same George W Bush that put together the Willie Horton add for his dad's campaign in 1988?

Biden claimed Romney would put black people back in chains.

To be fair, I'm pretty sure Romeny's private equity firm would have tried to leverage all of us into servitude if they could.

Larry Elder, the Black Face of white supremacy.

If the tap show fits...

Someone at the LA times wrote that with a straight face. Glenn Youngkin, governor of Virginia due to white supremacy(despite the Black republican LT Governor, and a Cuban Attorney General. Typical White supremecist voting patterns.

If you think running with (Lt Governor is elected in Virginia, not appointed) a black person means you aren't promoting white supremacy, you really don't understand the topic.

Frankly, the Dems are just about as responsible for Trump and the GOP.

You mean by pushing a lot for eh same policies that disproportionately affect minorities and not doing enough to address inequality?

Decades of being called racists, and folks just stopped listening.

Oh, you mean hurting racists' feelings.

Any difference of opinion is generally explained by racism, if it can't be shoehorned in to racism, misogyny, homophobia, or now transphobia.

Has it occurred to you that some of these differences are due to entrenched bigotry? That while the person in question may not be actively trying to beat bigot, the position they are supporting itself has a dark history.

Think of a certain word commonly used to convey you feel you were swindled out of money that is derived from a slur to Romani people. If you grew up in a area where you didn't have a lot of Romani people, you may have never heard what the word actually refers to. You could be forgiven for using it. But once you were informed what it means, is it too much to expect that you make an effort to stop using it?

Most often, the only folks that can hear the dog whistles are the supposed anti-racists.

"The real racists are the people pointing out the racism"

 

[Donal]

Ok, you're going to have to explain how your point is being proven by the obvious antagonism to what you say people secretly support.



As I already stated, conservative politicians aren't pushing it, despite its popularity. So you seem to be a bit confused here, as well. That said, the conservative politicians who are openly against marijuana legalization do seem to be pretty popular in their states, so apparently despite most people being for legalization, they don't support it enough to actually do anything to make it happen.




Ok, specifically which conservative politicians are on board with legalization?





I live in a deep red state. I didn't know any one of those things was passed here. In fact, to my knowledge only 2 of those things have been passed in any red state (abortion rights not being removed in Kansas, and restoring voting rights to felons in Florida). Enlighten me please which red states I missed that are on the progressive bandwagon?

eta: well, technically my state (GA) is now reddish-purple, despite the deep red area of the state I live in. As previously stated, MTG is my representative in the House.

Florida also voted for a $15 minimum wage in 2020, Missouri voted to legalize marijuana, and a few states have voted to expand Medicare and/or Medicaid.

All you are doing is pointing out that these folks aren't voting based on actual policy or ideas. Am I supposed to believe anyone is enamored with Margie Green's take on healthcare? Does she even know what her position is?

The problem isn't that Democrats have been taken over by far-left socialists. It's not that people hate Democratic policies. It's that Democrats have let the GQP control the narrative and set the tone of every conversation. And the media is more than happy to play along. And having diet Republicans running harder against the Squad than their actual opponent in elections doesn't help.

 

[wareyin]

Florida also voted for a $15 minimum wage in 2020, Missouri voted to legalize marijuana, and a few states have voted to expand Medicare and/or Medicaid.

Ok, so literally only one red state even did 2 things out the the group of things you said "keep winning in red states".

All you are doing is pointing out that these folks aren't voting based on actual policy or ideas. Am I supposed to believe anyone is enamored with Margie Green's take on healthcare? Does she even know what her position is?

Her position, like a lot of those on the right, is "against anything the left does." Which doesn't really inspire a lot of confidence that they're all secretly progressive or in favor of progressive policies if you just explain them more.

The problem isn't that Democrats have been taken over by far-left socialists. It's not that people hate Democratic policies. It's that Democrats have let the GQP control the narrative and set the tone of every conversation. And the media is more than happy to play along. And having diet Republicans running harder against the Squad than their actual opponent in elections doesn't help.

The GOP is definitely more savvy with creating and maintaining the narrative. It probably helps them that the far right doesn't attack the mainstream GOP the way that the far left demonizes the mainstream Dems. The fact that the GOP literally has an entire media empire working as its propaganda arm while Dems don't has a whole lot to do with it, too. And yeah, the weak "bothsides" crap that supposedly unbiased media outlets do really does play along with the GOP plans.

 

[Donal]

Ok, so literally only one red state even did 2 things out the the group of things you said "keep winning in red states".

Is your back OK? Goal posts can be heavy.

Her position, like a lot of those on the right, is "against anything the left does." Which doesn't really inspire a lot of confidence that they're all secretly progressive or in favor of progressive policies if you just explain them more.

They don't need the policies explained, really. The trick is cooling the rhetoric down and putting the actual policy in front. Yes, a monumental task in our society of sound bites and tweets, but no one said t would be easy.

The GOP is definitely more savvy with creating and maintaining the narrative. It probably helps them that the far right doesn't attack the mainstream GOP the way that the far left demonizes the mainstream Dems.

Should I post the campaign videos of Democrats who brag about "standing up to the radical left"?

The fact that the GOP literally has an entire media empire working as its propaganda arm while Dems don't has a whole lot to do with it, too. And yeah, the weak "bothsides" crap that supposedly unbiased media outlets do really does play along with the GOP plans.

They need to build up their "farm system" and get younger folks who can speak to their neighbors in these areas. Follow the lead of the grassroots movements instead of swallowing them up and marginalizing them. They are too damn top-down to reach anyone outside the people already in their camp.

 

[wareyin]

Is your back OK? Goal posts can be heavy.

No, I've been letting you do all the goalpost moving here. You claimed that "marijuana legalization, restoring voting rights to felons, abortion rights, $15 minimum wage, etc. keep winning in these deep red states" and to prove that you have: 1 example of marijuana legislation in any red state, 1 example of restoring voting rights to felons in any red state, 1 example of abortion rights being upheld in any red state, and 1 example of a $15 minimum wage in any red state. This is evidence of a whole slew of things that only happened once, not evidence that all of those things keep winning.

They don't need the policies explained, really. The trick is cooling the rhetoric down and putting the actual policy in front. Yes, a monumental task in our society of sound bites and tweets, but no one said t would be easy.

If the average voter didn't need the policies explained, then the average voter wouldn't be falling for the smear campaign against those policies.

Should I post the campaign videos of Democrats who brag about "standing up to the radical left"?

Um, yes. Absolutely. I have not heard one politician who wasn't a conservative use the phrase "radical left" in decades.

They need to build up their "farm system" and get younger folks who can speak to their neighbors in these areas. Follow the lead of the grassroots movements instead of swallowing them up and marginalizing them. They are too damn top-down to reach anyone outside the people already in their camp.

That's rather confusing advice. Were the grassroots movements already in the Dem camps before being swallowed up and marginalized?

 

[Donal]

No, I've been letting you do all the goalpost moving here. You claimed that "marijuana legalization, restoring voting rights to felons, abortion rights, $15 minimum wage, etc. keep winning in these deep red states" and to prove that you have: 1 example of marijuana legislation in any red state, 1 example of restoring voting rights to felons in any red state, 1 example of abortion rights being upheld in any red state, and 1 example of a $15 minimum wage in any red state. This is evidence of a whole slew of things that only happened once, not evidence that all of those things keep winning.

Alaska, Montana, Maine all legalized recreational use. And so did Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Virginia, and New MExico.

Mississippi, Florida, and South Dakota all voted to legalize but were refuted by their state legislature and governors, even for medical use.

That's more than 1, right?

There are at least 5 more state ballots that will have abortion-related initiatives. Kentucky's will be the one most like what was shot down in Kansas, so we'll see.

If the average voter didn't need the policies explained, then the average voter wouldn't be falling for the smear campaign against those policies.

The problem is that the average voter is a human who can get pulled in by smear campaigns.

Um, yes. Absolutely. I have not heard one politician who wasn't a conservative use the phrase "radical left" in decades.

Here you go. I'm trying to get some of the nonsense Claire McCaskill has spouted after getting bounced by Josh Hawley, but it's all paywalled.

That's rather confusing advice. Were the grassroots movements already in the Dem camps before being swallowed up and marginalized?

They tend to be overlooked by the party at large until they get real momentum. Then, they get swallowed up until the party leadership (or one of the major donors) can get whatever credibility they have and marginalizes them.

 

[Delvo]

The problem is that the average voter is a human who can get pulled in by smear campaigns.

Also, voting for the farthest-left available option doesn't prevent the parties from making sure that the available options to pick from are as far right as they can get.

 

[wareyin]

Alaska, Montana, Maine all legalized recreational use. And so did Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Virginia, and New MExico.

Maine and Nevada have been reliably blue since Bill Clinton, Michigan has been blue since Bill Clinton except for once in 2016, Colorado, New Mexico, and Virginia have been blue states since 2008.

Mississippi, Florida, and South Dakota all voted to legalize but were refuted by their state legislature and governors, even for medical use.

That's more than 1, right?

Yes, for Mary Jane you're up to a whopping 6, and for good measure you listed 6 blue states.

There are at least 5 more state ballots that will have abortion-related initiatives. Kentucky's will be the one most like what was shot down in Kansas, so we'll see.

You can't count upcoming elections as wins until you actually win.

So, we're up to 6 red states that voted for mj but only 3 that actually then legalized it, and still 1 red state for every other item on your claimed "keeps winning in red states" list. This is evidence that legalization is popular across the political spectrum, and the fact that all but 2 Dems in the House recently voted for it shows broad support among Dem politicians rather than this being a strictly progressive plank.

The problem is that the average voter is a human who can get pulled in by smear campaigns.

This is true. This does not negate the fact that being pulled into a smear campaign indicates that the person pulled in doesn't understand the issues.

Here you go. I'm trying to get some of the nonsense Claire McCaskill has spouted after getting bounced by Josh Hawley, but it's all paywalled.

Did you read your own link? Here you are acting like this is commonplace, yet the title of the article calls it an "unlikely ad for Democrat" and points out how unusual it is in the second sentence.

They tend to be overlooked by the party at large until they get real momentum. Then, they get swallowed up until the party leadership (or one of the major donors) can get whatever credibility they have and marginalizes them.

This still seems contradictory. Should the party at large wholeheartedly embrace every fringe position, no matter how popular? Should the party at large not align with popular grassroots movements amongst its constituents? And what popular grassroots movements have been "swallowed up" and then "marginalized", anyway?