When the dems make an effort to fix the state's financial situation I will vote for them. They refuse to put the gerrymandering issue or term limits on the ballot for the state to vote on. The state is broken. I think that takes priority. Once that is fixed, other issues can be dealt with.
Why Can't The Left Win?
- Thread starter Zardnaar
- Start date
Socrates99
Bottoms up!
I saw a few comments regarding sitting out an election because you find both the democrat and republican to be unpalatable. This video is a pretty good example of why democrats can suck every bit as much as republicans:
I'd even contend that they can sometimes be worse because there is no opposition when they want to do terrible things. Obama made the Bush tax cuts that were due to sunset permanent, bailed out Wall St., expanded our foreign intervention and opened the Arctic to drilling. Clinton repealed Glass-Steagall, deregulated broadcasting, signed NAFTA, did welfare reform/cuts, and signed the terrible crime bill (that Biden was an author of). I'd contend that another turbulent 4 years of Trump where democrat activists are on full alert would be BETTER than even one term of Biden, who is fine with most of the Republican platform, purely because Democrat voters, left leaning independants, etc would be complacent with "Good ol' Uncle Joe" in the White House. Do you think Robert De Niro will curse on CNN when Biden slashes social security and medicare? Will anyone?
The left loses when they roll over and play nice with the right. There's no point in voting for a Joe Biden type candidate. There just isn't.
The left loses when they roll over and play nice with the right. There's no point in voting for a Joe Biden type candidate. There just isn't.
Cloud_Strife
Deity
And you seriously think the GOP, of all parties, is going to do anything about that?
Honestly, your whole campaigning for LGBT rights strikes a bit hollow if you're then going to turn around and vote for the exact same people who are against said rights in the first place. I have no doubt you genuinely care about said rights but it worries me how quick you are to throw that away and it makes me wonder what else you are willing to compromise on.
Honestly, your whole campaigning for LGBT rights strikes a bit hollow if you're then going to turn around and vote for the exact same people who are against said rights in the first place. I have no doubt you genuinely care about said rights but it worries me how quick you are to throw that away and it makes me wonder what else you are willing to compromise on.
sophie
Break My Heart
This is a canard. Neither side of the distinction is logically valid, as both Marx and Engels explained in detail during their lifetimes. Liberals on both the left and the right will talk about the distinction because it entails an inherent and necessary component of their biggest ideological contradiction, but nobody on the true Left talks about it or views it as a possible - let alone desirable - policy goal to pursue.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
You do need SOME kind of policy goal though, and leaving that vague is bad, to put it mildly.
His point is that the left is more likely to resist obvious bad policies from Trump than it is from Biden, even in the relatively large space of bad policies where they would be doing the same things.
The dems in Illinois are doing nothing and have controlled the house for way too long. An alternative is necessary.
I find if disheartening that you can make the generalization that no Republican has ever stood up for LGBT rights. Hell, the dark lord Dick Cheney did.
You really need to start looking at individuals instead of packs when you judge.
Yes, I will agree that as a party they have not done well in that regard but certain individuals have.
You don't even know who I'm voting for and you're judging.
Think what you want, my conscious is clean on that regard.
Although I tend to think the right is wrong on virtuallyeverything I do agree they are necessary. When you have whats effectively a one-party system, democratic or not, however benign the intentions of those who set it up its vulnerable to corruption and protecting the status quo tends to become the main goal of those in power. If things had gone differently in the USSR maybe they could have avoided Stalin but Brezhnev was inevitable.
Cloud_Strife
Deity
Dick Cheney stood up for LGBT rights AFTER one of his own came out, not before.
I just don't buy your reasoning or defense, when you donate to, vote for, assist and support a group such as the GOP, who by any objective standard have done everything in their power to stymy and hold back LGBT rights then you must own the fallout that comes from enabling them.
And honestly i DON'T care who or what Republican you vote for, because they all come from the same apparatus that allows them to be chummy with people who if they had their way, would put me either to death or in a mental insitution and when the Republicans pander to these people it does nothing but remind me of the fact that they are not for me, they do not have my interests at heart and infact are actively working against them.
I just don't buy your reasoning or defense, when you donate to, vote for, assist and support a group such as the GOP, who by any objective standard have done everything in their power to stymy and hold back LGBT rights then you must own the fallout that comes from enabling them.
And honestly i DON'T care who or what Republican you vote for, because they all come from the same apparatus that allows them to be chummy with people who if they had their way, would put me either to death or in a mental insitution and when the Republicans pander to these people it does nothing but remind me of the fact that they are not for me, they do not have my interests at heart and infact are actively working against them.
Lexicus
Deity
sophie
Break My Heart
Does maybe sorta not being totally horsehockey to LGBT (mostly just the Ls and Gs) outweigh the fact that he perpetrated literal war crimes though? I think not.
It's like with Reagan: on the one hand you have granting amnesty to millions of undocumented immigrants, and on the other you have the genocide in Nicaragua, the Iran-Contra affair, refusing to acknowledge or do anything about the AIDS epidemic, gutting social programs, smashing the Air Traffic Controllers union/right to strike, the illegal invasion of Grenada, the disastrous effects his domestic policies on Black and Latino communities, etc. Do those equal out in the end?
Lexicus
Deity
You wouldn't "have to", but it would be nice if you did so that we can all judge by the individual and not by the party, like you said we should.
I mean, to me it's sort of obvious why you didn't do this right off the bat and instead invoked "not all Republicans" and Dick Cheney, but I figured I might as well observe the forms.
FWIW I took the liberty of searching out the Illinois GOP's 2016 platform (most recent one they got according to their website) and the terms "gay", "lesbian", "LGBTQ" don't appear in it. There is however a clause talking about the party's opposition to laws that "seek to compel or coerce individuals, businesses, religious institutions, or other organizations to violate their core religious beliefs," and we all know what that means.
Last edited:
Never said it didn't. I just get tired of people claiming that every republican is racist and anti gay. Not every democrat isn't a racist or pro gay
God, stop over generalizing. It just feeds the hate.
Cloud_Strife
Deity
The GOP have literally done nothing to dissuade racists or bigots of any kind from joining them, in fact they lay out the red carpet for them, they pander to them, they signal to them, they enable them, they welcome them, they preach to them.
In general I have never disagreed with that. And is the main reason why I don't consider myself one these days. But that doesn't mean every Republican is like that. As far as I'm concerned anyone that votes a straight party line ticket is lazy and didn't bother researching who they're voting for.
rah, I get you're probably feeling a bit ganged up on here, but "not every Democrat" isn't the right response to claims about Republicans that you keep making. Invoking the Democrats here is deflection. You're the one pushing the line that they (the Republicans) are standing up against bigotry (specifically, named, known Republicans - not your average voter), and then you cop out of providing more examples because "people have made up their minds".
If you know how people are going to respond, and you don't feel like backing up any of your defensive positions around the Republican party because of that, then either don't make the claims in the first place, or expect people to not believe you. You can't complain that people are refusing to believe you if you never give actual examples.
The general (well evidenced) impression is that the Republican party doesn't care about LGBTQ rights and other marginalised rights. If you feel this is unfair, specifically demonstrate why.
To me, 'moderate' is someone who can become convinced through reasonable discourse.
