Idiotic Third Party Bid in the US hopes people don't notice they are idiots.
- Thread starter Valcazar
- Start date
So in your world, a celebrity newbie politician who is polite, but has no policy positions is a good thing?... Good to know.
While we're on the topic, most of the attacks come from Fox and the right wing internet echo chamber. And the leading luminaries of the GOP like Marge and Boebert. I'm seeing very limited pushback from the Dems, especially Biden.
You appear to be playing one of your endless little games here. You simply present the two sides as equally offensive in order to set up your little role play dialogue. I'm calling it out.
Please explain this post.
How does Frankie understand US politics in terms of 1965?... I have not noticed him doing so. I defer to you as "TERB's intellectual presence" and ask you to explain.
It's very simple. The party might look for a strong Democratic Senator or Governor with moderate credentials particularly from a purple state. This is what the Democratic party did in 1992.
You and I know the Democratic party is very different* now and a Moderate in the primary will be running a gauntlet. If the party can coalesce around an aging Biden who was faltering until the power blocs came together to crush Sanders, they can also rally around a Moderate.
The problem is that it takes more than one election cycle for the Democrats to unify around moderation. I think it's pretty clear that their current agenda is not that popular. They really need the Republicans to trip up bad on renominating Trump or extreme abortion bans in less than vibrant red states.
* Contrary to Val mocking LaRue's meme, the Democratic party is different. Which leads to the usual political, "No, your party is different. Your party changed!". Is Joe Biden the same politician as his 1992 version?
This is kind of the Valcazar "I will disagree with your points for the sake of disagreeing" strategy. You have been on this kick where you are trying to put me on the defensive. The problem mandrill is that you are not as gifted as Valcazar in rhetorical debate. First Valcazar lesson, don't show your emotion.
So let's put it this way you tell me when Schumer and Pelosi worked with Trump before the COVID crisis.
You know you don't have to lurk around TERB waiting to challenge my every word.
Frankie's a big boy. He doesn't need you to be his big brother. You can still click on "like" every time he posts.
There's a little tactic that we're starting to call out on TERB now. When a user says something provocative and is called on it and simply replies by insulting the challenger and refusing to make a substantive responsive on the issues.
It's happening too much and we're fed up with it.
Give me a real answer please?
Christian Nationalism is certainly a thing. The racist thing is not a strong identification for this group as you believe.
Give me an example of this?
How is - say - Fetterman in PA an extremist? Let's deal in specifics and not just try and manipulate and set up the discussions with vague generalizations.
mandrill, how bout trying conversing instead of emotional and aggressive posts? And yes, Frank can respond for himself and I can respond to him. While I don't agree with him much, you can learn from Frank's tone. He's never overly aggressive.
I'm not being aggressive.
You made statements which were very general and - IMO - inaccurate. You did this in order to set your own parameters to the discussion, as you often do. I asked you to provide specifics and challenged your statements. You insulted me and called me aggressive to avoid a debate.
That's pretty much what is happening, right? You will continue to call me aggressive and inappropriate to avoid a substantive debate.
So far in this thread, you've attached Valcazar for refusing to agree with you, Frankie for not appreciating nuance and me for being aggressive. You think the actual problem here might be... you?
I didn't say anything about Fetterman. Actually as I was referencing, Fetterman could be the type of Democrat from a large purple state who could be successful on the national level.
mandrill,
if you weren't so obsessed with challenging me, you would have understood my post regarding moderate Democrats. It wasn't really all that provocative.
Yes, mandrill calling out someone as aggressive is a major, major insult. Let me rephrase. You are being too forceful in your committed pursuit of challenging my opinions, Let the conversation flow please. Let the offended (if offended) respond for themselves.
Well, your thesis is - as it often is - that the Democratic party has become extremist and cannot tolerate moderates. It's a position which I think is unfounded. The Democratic party is in fact a centre-right party in Canada or any other Western democracy.
And Fetterman - or any number of other Dem candidates - probably have quite moderate policies and appears to be well-tolerated and supported by the party as a whole. So I am having difficulty with your attempt to impose a view that the Dems are extremist or intolerant. A more left-wing candidate like AOC would have far more trouble in garnering wide support than a moderate, right?
Now perhaps we can just concentrate on this topic and debate it?
mandrill, are you sure you are responding to my post? You seem to be reading things into my posts that aren't there.
Again, my post about "celebrity" politicians often not gaining support was not remotely provocative. If you are reading the thread, this follows Valcazar's statements that third party candidates need to offer more than just vague good government pronouncements and competency.
I didn't say anything resembling "a celebrity newbie politician who is polite, but has no policy positions is a good thing....". Please let the conversation flow without trying to troll.
The racist thing is part of Christian Nationalism, part of the Great Replacement nonsense pushed by Tucker C et al.
It was part of the mob there on Jan 6, with proud boys and oath keepers.
It was there throughout rump's campaign and supported through commentary on Fox.
You can claim ignorance of this, but its seen here as willful ignorance.
As an evil you're willing to accept, like banning abortion, to get the goals you want, more 'freedom' or whatever it really is.
Clearly the meme posted by LaRue earlier and mocked by Valcazar is nothing more than conservative rhetoric.
The meme however makes some sense in that progressives generally have a view of politics as a march down a continuum that favors their politics. Certainly, the U.S. populace changes over time. But certainly, some voters will not follow the path along with the liberal party.
The meme however makes some sense in that progressives generally have a view of politics as a march down a continuum that favors their politics. Certainly, the U.S. populace changes over time. But certainly, some voters will not follow the path along with the liberal party.
