Why did the Democrats lose the election?

[Tiassa]

Well then what do you want?

Look, it's one thing if you want to keep wasting your own life↗ on your troll job, but if you want other people to take you seriously, you're going to have to put in some manner of sincere, approximately honest effort, or, at the very least, stop going out of your way to waste their time.

And if all you have left is desperately changing the subject, really, ElectricFetus, just stop wasting other people's time.

I just had to deal with a crying grad student who is likely to be kicked out of the nation, all I could tell her is that I tried.

Like that. Understand, ElectricFetus: Nobody believes you.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Look, it's one thing if you want to keep wasting your own life↗

Yeah, I know you want me to leave, but I think I'll stay.

on your troll job,

Oh that hurt me, right in the heart.

but if you want other people to take you seriously, you're going to have to put in some manner of sincere, approximately honest effort, or, at the very least, stop going out of your way to waste their time.

How serious is trump as president?

And if all you have left is desperately changing the subject, really, ElectricFetus, just stop wasting other people's time.

So instead of answering my question, you change the subject, and than claim I'm wasting peoples time.

Like that. Understand, ElectricFetus: Nobody believes you.

Lol, ok, sure.

 

[Tiassa]

So instead of answering my question, you change the subject, and than claim I'm wasting peoples time.

That's just like you: Encouraging everyone to give over to the dishonest.

Seriously, stick around all you want. Just stop going out of your way to be dishonest.

 

[billvon]

Yes, yes, your a fatalist, you could not have stop this, nothing could, you did not choose poorly.

And you're a God, we know. If you were in charge things would have turned out perfectly, Sanders would have won, it's only all the rest of the idiots here who ruined it for everyone.

Imagine you could go back in time, that every Clinton primary voters could go back and time and tell themselves "Clinton will lose" would you change your vote just to see if Bernie would win?

I did not vote for Clinton OR Sanders. I am registered as an independent and thus cannot vote in the primaries in my state.

 

[ElectricFetus]

And you're a God, we know. If you were in charge things would have turned out perfectly, Sanders would have won, it's only all the rest of the idiots here who ruined it for everyone.

Oh please, you know me almost too well, but if I was god I would exterminate the human species, that would solve all problems, because there would be no one left to have problems.

I did not vote for Clinton OR Sanders. I am registered as an independent and thus cannot vote in the primaries in my state.

That is sad, you are sad... so is everyone going to cheat out and claim they did not vote for Clinton in the primaries?

That's just like you: Encouraging everyone to give over to the dishonest.

Seriously, stick around all you want. Just stop going out of your way to be dishonest.

So still waiting on that answer?

 

[Tiassa]

So still waiting on that answer?

Which answer?

 

[pjdude1219]

That sounds like the logic my step-mother had on raising my half-brother, now he grew up to be a high school drop out asshole narcissists that sell pot illegally for a living. Sometimes negative reinforcement is the only option.

your not trying negative reinforcement, your acting like a self absorbed asshole for the sake of you own ego. we know this by your childish chanting of how you were right( your not your just a dick for protecting racism and sexism) and how everyone else was wrong. criticism is ok and needed. you trying to prove you have the biggest dick is not.

 

[pjdude1219]

IF he had lost yes yes I would, I would accept I was wrong and change my ways, but we don't live in that world, we live in the world where I was right and anyone that voted for Clinton in the primary was wrong. There is no proof Bernie would have lost, none, there is undeniable proof though that Clinton lost.

I voted for sanders in the primary and i think your nuts and wrong

 

[pjdude1219]

And we're supposed to believe you have a clue what you're on about.

(1) #3374118/124↗

(2) #3375169/139↗

(3) #3375170/140↗​

See, the one thing is that maybe you don't like my analysis. The other thing, though, is that your pretense of ignorance does not lend well to your other pretense of knowledge, comprehension, and wisdom.

your analysis is based on your own biases and not facts. during the democratic primary you got exposed badly for some extremely partisan bullshit that made you quite frankly look like idiot. I'll be the first to say electric is well acting like an ass pretending you yourself are perfect when you got posting lies to attack sanders and are still trying to smear him and his supporters is only making the problem worse not better. but all means the most important thing is to see whose dick is the biggest right?

 

[Tiassa]

Click for something something black canvas dyed by reality.​

your analysis is based on your own biases and not facts. during the democratic primary you got exposed badly for some extremely partisan bullshit that made you quite frankly look like idiot. I'll be the first to say electric is well acting like an ass pretending you yourself are perfect when you got posting lies to attack sanders and are still trying to smear him and his supporters is only making the problem worse not better. but all means the most important thing is to see whose dick is the biggest right?

You know, PJ, once upon a time the Sanders campaign took part in an analysis of the candidate's economic platform. They then turned around and handed it out to reporters. When those reporters started talking about the problems with the numbers, you decided this analysis was a hit job from a Clinton plant.

To the other, you can't deny the fact that Sen. Sanders went and made his ridiculous Southern Excuse.

Start making sense. Your incomprehensible, desperate, seething bullshit makes you, quite frankly ... oh, never mind.

 

[iceaura]

yeah yeah sure sure. You keep trying to claim Bernie would not win verse the guarantee that Clinton did not win.

That makes no sense - there is no such opposition, and I am the last person who would be making it if there were (I quarrel with both halves: that Bernie could not have won, and that Clinton did not win).

I keep pointing out to you that your entire body of posting has become a channeling of wingnut issue frames, a collection of assumptions about other people whose source is familiar, an embodiment of Republican faction propaganda. You're in the bubble.

And that's kind of interesting, actually. Because you don't know how you got there, and part of being there is that you can't make any sense out of anyone else's telling you how it happened. The thing is self-justifying. Your amnesia is inculcated.

That is sad, you are sad... so is everyone going to cheat out and claim they did not vote for Clinton in the primaries?

Go back in the threads and the forum to the primaries, and read what people were posting. Everyone you are arguing with has been consistent in that sense. You can read there who people said they would vote for, when and why, and their current claims agree.

You have adopted a revision of history, and centrally one in which the responsibility and accountability of the Trump supporters has been set aside - occupies none of the bandwidth. Or as I put it earlier and repeatedly: the question is not how or why Clinton lost. That's essentially a deflection. The question is how Trump "won".

 

[iceaura]

You know, PJ, once upon a time the Sanders campaign took part in an analysis of the candidate's economic platform. They then turned around and handed it out to reporters. When those reporters started talking about the problems with the numbers, you decided this analysis was a hit job from a Clinton plant.

To the other, you can't deny the fact that Sen. Sanders went and made his ridiculous Southern Excuse.

Are you trying to argue that the reason Clinton won the primaries she did was that the voters in them had taken a good look at Sanders's economic platform and decided it was inferior to Clinton's for this and that reason?

 

[ElectricFetus]

Which answer?

What is your objective in defending clinton and attacking sanders, it is over, she lost, fact is we should have run sanders instead.

You have adopted a revision of history, and centrally one in which the responsibility and accountability of the Trump supporters has been set aside - occupies none of the bandwidth. Or as I put it earlier and repeatedly: the question is not how or why Clinton lost. That's essentially a deflection. The question is how Trump "won".

More conspiracy lunacy from you: I was not there, I can't reason with the trump supporter, I can reason with fellow liberals, I have already pointed out how trump won, perhaps you forgot? Here I will post it again:

In short we missed out on an anti-establishment wave, had we road that wave with Bernie we would have won. If you can manage to watch a few minutes watch timesstamp 31:00-35:05

 

[Tiassa]

What is your objective in defending clinton and attacking sanders, it is over, she lost, fact is we should have run sanders instead.

Ah, I see; so we should continue to honor your dishonesty.

No.

We're not changing the subject for you.

You still have yet to answer the question: Why should black voters back a candidate who delegitimizes black people?

We're not changing the subject for the sake of your lying cowardice.

So if you can't be honest about your attack against black people, well, it's nothing more or less than we've come to expect of the guy who advocates for racists.

 

[billvon]

Oh please, you know me almost too well, but if I was god I would exterminate the human species, that would solve all problems, because there would be no one left to have problems.

Well there ya go.

That is sad, you are sad... so is everyone going to cheat out and claim they did not vote for Clinton in the primaries

Nope.

Look, I get it. Your guy didn't win the primary and your feelings were hurt, and now you're lashing out to try to make others feel bad too. But you're really starting to look like an idiot here, with your intentional misunderstandings, attacks and accusations. If you are representative of the future of the Democratic party, then we'll have a long line of Republican presidents and legislatures.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Ah, I see; so we should continue to honor your dishonesty.

No.

We're not changing the subject for you.

You still have yet to answer the question: Why should black voters back a candidate who delegitimizes black people?

Yeah strange that you are being dishonest and not answering my question and then project that on me.

But to answer your question: I believe your baised and contrived interpretation of what bernie said and then extrapolation that all the black voters interpreted it as "delegitimizing" them and hence they did not voter for him is a fantasy of your hateful imagination that easily takes anything anyone that you don't like said and re-interprets it to mean they are pure evil. Hence why you ignore how Hillary called black youth "super predators" and approved of sending hundreds of thousands of blacks to prison on draconian and 13th amendment loophole slavery crime laws, yet then interpret bernie making excuses for his southern loses as "delegitimizes black people".

We're not changing the subject for the sake of your lying cowardice.

I will laugh at this slander and raise you one for being blinded by bias and hate and part of the reason we now have president trump.

So if you can't be honest about your attack against black people, well, it's nothing more or less than we've come to expect of the guy who advocates for racists.

Oh so now it is my attack against black people! and I'm the racist! This is how you operate:
1. Someone disagrees with you.
2. You call them a racist, sexist, homophobe, etc, what ever.
3. the conversation ends.

Tiassa a pig boar is now president, a bad joke nightmare is now reality, I no long give any fucks what you think. You behavior is part of what cost us the election. Take a moment and imagine we were talking IRL and you were trying to convince me to vote for Hillary, do you think calling me a racist would get that done?

 

[ElectricFetus]

Look, I get it. Your guy didn't win the primary and your feelings were hurt, and now you're lashing out to try to make others feel bad too. But you're really starting to look like an idiot here, with your intentional misunderstandings, attacks and accusations. If you are representative of the future of the Democratic party, then we'll have a long line of Republican presidents and legislatures.

No we lost everything and a pig boar is now president and the republicans are going to rape this nation to death, that why I hurt. All I'm saying is we should have gone with Bernie, and if Clinton voting democrats can't go with the most electable candidate next time than yes we will have a long line of republican president and legislators to come.

 

[iceaura]

I have already pointed out how trump won, perhaps you forgot?

You deny central matters that guy asserts, such as the role of racism (and "gender coding" ). You also overlook the demographic analysis he is careful to include: such as economics is not simple income, but history and change over time.
And of course the research he quotes is "race blind", which is easily misleading in the US - and has misled you.
And being a foreigner, he repeats the Fox canard (in passing, not as a committed point) - which you also repeat, with less excuse and more commitment - that in the US the people who are pointing at racism are thereby excluding economics.

Because right in the center of what most impressed you, he points out that America lacks a Left alternative - and he points directly to Sanders, the closest thing, getting beat.

Sanders got beat by the black vote.
Then Clinton got beat by the white vote.

In other words, racial division in the US killed the Left alternative, and that gave us Trump.

So when he suggests that Trumpism is probably a flash in the pan, and if he gets elected he can't do much economically, he's betting not only on racism not being a structural factor in the US (he lumps it with prejudice against immigrants), and the Republican Party not being already Trumpist, but the Trumpism not being itself essentially - structurally - racist. Dependent on a despised race. If he's wrong, or not right enough anyway, Trump becomes potentially not a flash in the pan but a figurehead for the culmination of the Reagan Revolution.

I can reason with fellow liberals,

Uh, no, actually, you can't. Your worldview is framed by Fox and 4chan and the like, and so its assumptions - the basis of any reasoning - are incompatible with liberal reasoning.

 

[ElectricFetus]

You deny central matters that guy asserts, such as the role of racism (and "gender coding" ).

Which is a product of the economic strife of the developed worlds middle class. When people suffering, they regress, the right can take advantage of that "your problem are because of the dirty X, they are talking your jobs, we need to kick them out, build a wall, vote for me". If these people had stable well paying jobs, kids without debt, home loans paid of, no credit card debt, retirement accounts saved up, do you think they would be screaming about the Mexicans?

You also overlook the demographic analysis he is careful to include: such as economics is not simple income, but history and change over time.

I did not overlook that, when did I say this is simple income?

And of course the research he quotes is "race blind", which is easily misleading in the US - and has misled you.

Yes of course if I don't follow your narrative, I must be misled.

And being a foreigner, he repeats the Fox canard (in passing, not as a committed point) - which you also repeat, with less excuse and more commitment - that in the US the people who are pointing at racism are thereby excluding economics.

yes yes if fox said it ever, it must be wrong, or worse a lie made by the republicnami!

Because right in the center of what most impressed you, he points out that America lacks a Left alternative - and he points directly to Sanders, the closest thing, getting beat.

So you missed the line were he said Bernie was it, right there 34:52

Sanders got beat by the black vote.
Then Clinton got beat by the white vote.

In other words, racial division in the US killed the Left alternative, and that gave us Trump.

You know in a way I agree with this assessment, the left so obsessed with racial identity has destroyed its self, but considering you could not even watch my link for 4 fucking minutes I'm going to assume you missed out on far too much details to make such a simplistic theory accurate.

So when he suggests that Trumpism is probably a flash in the pan, and if he gets elected he can't do much economically, he's betting not only on racism not being a structural factor in the US (he lumps it with prejudice against immigrants), and the Republican Party not being already Trumpist, but the Trumpism not being itself essentially - structurally - racist. Dependent on a despised race. If he's wrong, or not right enough anyway, Trump becomes potentially not a flash in the pan but a figurehead for the culmination of the Reagan Revolution.

Hey maybe, I guess we will see, but if in 4 years the middle class is doing better then now he will get re-elected for sure, if in 4 years the economy gets only more unstable and top heavy, he will lose, then again that depends on if we run Hillary again.

Uh, no, actually, you can't. Your worldview is framed by Fox and 4chan and the like, and so its assumptions - the basis of any reasoning - are incompatible with liberal reasoning.

Touched by the pod people am I? People like you and Tiassa mock me for not being serious, but come on how the fuck can I take you seriously?

 

[iceaura]

Which is a product of the economic strife of the developed worlds middle class.

Not in the US. In the US, the economic strife is as much a product of the racism as vice versa.

If these people had stable well paying jobs, kids without debt, home loans paid of, no credit card debt, retirement accounts saved up, do you think they would be screaming about the Mexicans

Or the blacks, more likely. And not screaming - just bigoted, and voting accordingly.
They always did before, why would they change?

yes yes if fox said it ever, it must be wrong, or worse a lie made by the republicnami

The notion that people talking about racism in the US are thereby excluding economics is obviously nonsense, regardless of where it comes from - in this case, we know where it comes from. And I don't mean to disparage the video guy - he was obviously making a passing comment, and one could take his later remarks as qualifications and context. But he does equate racism in the US with immigrant bias elsewhere - a tricky and dangerous comparison to make.

"Because right in the center of what most impressed you, he points out that America lacks a Left alternative - and he points directly to Sanders, the closest thing, getting beat."
So you missed the line were he said Bernie was it, right there 34:52

Nope. I referred to it, right there.

You know in a way I agree with this assessment, the left so obsessed with racial identity has destroyed its self, but considering you could not even watch my link for 4 fucking minutes I'm going to assume you missed out on far too much details to make such a simplistic theory accurate.

So when I make a direct reference to a passing comment in the first ten minutes of the video, and suggest a comparison with matters addressed ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, sixty minutes in, and a direct reference to something the guy said in your suggested window, you interpret your own unfamiliarity with my references as evidence that I - not you - have missed something.

As far as I can recall, every single factual assertion you have made about anything I ever said or did has been wrong - simply and factually inaccurate. And you've made a lot of them. That's another one. At some point, you might take a look at how and why you come to make these bizarre claims about me and how I spend my time - they can't possibly be in response to my actual posting, or directed at me in any sensible way. You can't possibly think I am going to be persuaded of something as goofy as people like me, or the US left otherwise, being obsessed with racial identity, or that I did not watch the very interesting and not at all idiotic video you linked. So what are they for?

Touched by the pod people am I?

Completely suckered by an obvious and blatant propaganda operation familiar to actual lefties in the US for twenty or thirty years now. Hook, line, and sinker. For example: Everything you've posted about the "left", the "regressive left", and so forth, has been framed by the same media operations that feed Fox and 4chan and Breitbart their claims du jour - including such boneheaded stuff as identification of the "regressive left" with people like me and Clinton's campaign strategists both. Where did you get the idea that Clinton was a lefty? Not from the actual Left, in the US - that's for sure.