here’s another

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/23/eliz...eed-rules.html

i just made your plastic smile obvious.

you should feel good about it



you can’t handle the truth of the maga terrorists so you peddle bullshit three amigos panic

what does that even have to do with anything lol

pure distraction

let’s get back to your colleagues



now you will spew some bullcaca about how that is not terrorism bla bla bla

lololol

tragic

In just three days, we’ve seen:

1) A hate crime against black people in Louisville
2) The arrest of the #MAGABomber, who targeted prominent Democrats
3) A mass shooting at a synagogue

And the media talks about “both sides” because some Republicans got yelled at in a restaurant

When did this happen?! First I've heard of it

I think I will not have to cough up:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...-running-again

Anyway, nice to step in for a bit. I'll fuck off now. :)

(VOTE!!!)

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/...ky-kroger.html

“frankly”

https://www.newyorker.com/news/curre...e-word-frankly

here’s link #3 (2 more above)

this is a better conversation:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...talism/568573/

—

another, from the source:

https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsro...capitalism-act

Interesting stuff.

I like that she's mainly focused on the economy and infrastructure. Beyond that I suppose it's just a case of whether her concept of 'accountable capitalism' convinces enough so-called 'Trump Democrats' to switch back. It'd be pointless her targeting Trump's character at this point as those who voted for him last time were fully aware of it then and he hasn't exactly changed since then. To keep up the misogyny line, the racist line would no doubt please her Liberal base but they were never gonna switch to Trump in the 1st place. And I know from other articles that sections of the GOP absolutely relish the thought of Trump going up against her. Even some Democrats admit she has an image problem when it comes to trying to win back working class voters:

'Not all Democrats believe Warren can appeal to working-class voters outside of true-blue coastal bastions and among urban and campus elites. Former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell, a Democrat, said Warren’s words on their own would resonate with Trump Democrats, but she herself is seen as too liberal and too associated with the type of identity politics that turns off white, working-class voters.“Her message is a good one, there’s no question about it, she’s very good at attacking and stripping back the hypocrisy,” he said. “I’m not sure she’s the best messenger for that type of voter.” ' - Boston Globe article. (Full article: https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nat...6ZO/story.html)

Admittedly, that article's over a year old now.

i’m a bit overloaded today, and your post is packed with questions (good ones), so i’m gonna have to break down the responses if you don’t mind.

please be patient and i hope we don’t get sidetracked by trolls or dumbfuckery (hard to tell which is which sometimes in this thread)

gonna have to start by reading that article and will come back after.

—

eta: i cant open the damn thing. apparently i already enjoyed “a free article” from these ppl. hahahahaha. k... will sort

first thing is let’s get ed rendell out of the way. looks like he and warren have a history, and i am not sure when it started, but rendell is a clintonista who supported hillary in 2008 against obama, and in 2016 said warren was “not ready” to be commander in chief. not sure if he wanted the job or what.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Mso0LMIqa8Y
maybe he didnt and he was shilling for someone else
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...-in-chief.html

but if he had anything to do with picking hillary’s running mate... what was his name lol... i’d say he needs to go away with the clintons

here he was undercutting her potential primary run a year earlier
https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/20...lar-to-obamas/

i cleared cookies and read the article, but i gotta repeat quoting this part cuz i have something else to unpack here:


again i just want to clarify the notion of “identity politics” that irks working class whites per rendell’s analysis.

i’m afraid that label is an unfair one, but it’s also revealing. white supremacy or dog-whistle politics are also identity politics, they are just not recognized as such because they have been practiced by a demographic majority. to cater to the white working class is also identity politics. it’s not just class politics.

see here article on dog whistle politics. some illuminating discussion by that evil mastermind, lee atwater, best remembered for his “willie horton” campaign

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics

the interesting bit i that article comes after the atwater quote though:

However, others like U.S. law professor and author of the 2014 book Dog Whistle Politics Ian Haney-López described Reagan as "blowing a dog whistle" when the candidate told stories about "Cadillac-driving 'welfare queens' and 'strapping young bucks' buying T-bone steaks with food stamps" while he was campaigning for the presidency.[27][28][29] He argues that such rhetoric pushes middle-class white Americans to vote against their economic self-interest in order to punish "undeserving minorities" who, they believe, are receiving too much public assistance at their expense. According to López, conservative middle-class whites, convinced by powerful economic interests that minorities are the enemy, supported politicians who promised to curb illegal immigration and crack down on crime but inadvertently also voted for policies that favor the extremely rich, such as slashing taxes for top income brackets, giving corporations more regulatory control over industry and financial markets, union busting, cutting pensions for future public employees, reducing funding for public schools, and retrenching the social welfare state. He argues that these same voters cannot link rising inequality which has impacted their lives to the policy agendas they support, which resulted in a massive transfer of wealth to the top 1% of the population since the 1980s.[30]


anyway, not saying one can’t cater to that particular ethnic group, just a reminder that “white working class” is an ethnic group here in contemporary america, and that today everyone is doing identity politics in one way or another. white supremacists, black lives matter, feminists, “working class whites”, nativists, nationalists, separatists, evangelicals, black baptists, hockey moms, gun righters, all politics has become identity politics with the loss of 20th century utopianism. everyone wants their identity and is fighting for it, ESPECIALLY those who pretend they are not.

not trying to go off on a theoretical tangent, but the rendell’s point of view is... well, very privileged, ha ha ha ha. or realpolitik. either way. he’s also pushing identity politics.

and yeah warren right now has an image problem but more about that in another post later.

so, briefly, i don’t believe that warren acts in the service of ethnicity but of equality. however that drive towards equality, whichh must address racial and gender disparities, is being cast as “identity politics” by those who would oppose her

does it count as “identity politics” to oppose jeff sessions as attorney general based on his atrocious civil rights record? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...uote-sparking/

only if it’s convenient to your cause to call it so

who really hates her and wants her head on a pike is wall street. she wants to muzzle them, and they don’t like it.

the rest of the haters are just white voters heeding the dog whistle to act (again and again and again) against their own economic interests

e.g., the antiintellectuals and uneducated will resent her for being a harvard professor.

the misogynists, for being a woman

the evangelicals, for her defense of reproductive freedom

the gun righters, for her wanting to limit magazine capacities to 10

the racist goobers, for her daring to read a letter about jeff sessions in the senate

other racists because she said (correctly) that the american justice system is racist front to back

etc.etc.,

see. the right also practices intersectional politics

they just call it something else

I live how republicans attack democrats for being too rich, too elitist, too much of a washington insider, or too beholden to special interests. Pot Kettle.


To quote FRank Reynolds - "It takes a real piece of shit to go into politics."


hbahahahha

haha frank reynolds. yes

to finish my answer to demonyo & illustrate what roberto said

https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/...tial-campaign/

warren’s harvard salary questioned by a group paid by billionaire robert mercer. lol! the gumption...

anyway yeah that is all from me for now

not the ones I know, they're actually in it to help people

some are, some are in it for thjeir own agendas, but once in, the shit covers EVERYONE.


It is like joining a party fraternity, you may look away while they gang rape drunk freshmen, but you are stained by the association, and by the need to join such a repulsive group.

this is not the time for cynicisms and relativisms though

sure democrats have their rotten apples but nowhere near like the repukes who are an orgy of ignorance, science denial, hate, racism, and sheer rapacity

worry about purges AFTER the election

fuck ted cruz. the worst creeper. vote him out of office NOW. eh? ;)

—

eta: http://firetedcruz.org/

" ...ignorance is nearly the opposite of naivety in being a kind of cynicism..." Rebecca Solnit.