TV Tropes Org

Forums

search forum titles
google site search
Total posts: [102]
1
 2  3  4 5

Democratic Party blunders (no bashing):

We have a pretty heavy liberal bias here at T Vtropes. I have no problem with that, especially on the social end of things. It does mean, however, that more than a few threads turn into Republican-bashing.

But the thing is, the Democrats aren't really much better. Some of our European tropers have pointed out that in most other countries, Obama would be considered so far right to be unelectable.

So, in the interest of trying to get a balanced viewpoint, I thought making a thread dedicated to the stupid things the Democrats and other liberal parties do. One of Obama's aides implies stay-at-home moms aren't doing real work? Post it here. A prominent gay rights activist makes a racist remark? This is the thread for it.

No bashing, please. We're just aiming to get both sides.
 2 They Call Me Tomu, Fri, 8th Jun '12 12:50:19 AM Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Sureeeeendaaaa
Obama was a dumbass to push through such a small stimulus. It utterly hurt his credibility, and it hurt the credibility of stimulus as a whole, because they overpromised (even though it wasn't a promise promise, but still-credibility wise, it's similar).

In short: they ruined it for everybody.

 3 Hilarity Ensues, Fri, 8th Jun '12 1:13:56 AM from Standing between Sho'Nuff and total supremacy.
"That's the problem with you progressives. You see the glass as half empty."

Hearing this from a Democrat, let alone Obama is baffling. The way he phrased it is practically a candid admission that he's not even trying to seem like a progressive.

He knew that Republicans would've opposed anyone he appointed, and he still tried to bend over and appease them. He had a chance to stand up to the GOP and he blew it. Why? Because he knows the Left has no other choice, he knows the lesser of two evils paradigm works all too well, and he revels in it. Very disappointing to see from the president.

edited 8th Jun '12 1:14:31 AM by HilarityEnsues

 4 Aceof Spades, Fri, 8th Jun '12 1:21:11 AM from The Wild Blue Yonder Relationship Status: I wanna know about these strangers like me
I think "revels in it" isn't exactly the correct phrase there. Somehow I doubt any president that faces this much opposition to everything revels in... well, much of anything.
 5 Hilarity Ensues, Fri, 8th Jun '12 1:37:13 AM from Standing between Sho'Nuff and total supremacy.
Perhaps that wasn't the best choice of words.

All I'm saying is that it's disappointing to hear this considering that this is the MOST liberal choice we have (excluding nonviable third parties, of course).

Raven Wilder
What is meant by that statement depends on your definition of "progressive". Generally speaking, most people believe themselves to be fairly close to the center of the political spectrum, and use that as a reference point for determining where other people stand on it.
"It takes an idiot to do cool things, that's why it's cool" - Haruhara Haruko
 7 storyyeller, Fri, 8th Jun '12 6:07:29 PM from Appleloosa Relationship Status: RelationshipOutOfBoundsException: 1
More like giant cherries
The 100 years thing was pretty stupid.
Life is simple: it has no nontrivial normal subgroups.
Flying Dutchman
@Tomu,

He reads all columnists at The New York Times, and thinks that liberal firebrand Paul Krugman is "one of the smartest economic reporters out there." He also reads some conservative columnists "to get a sense of where those arguments are going."

Source.

Also, for those of us who are liberal enough to have to self-justify why one would vote for Obama.

edited 8th Jun '12 6:34:17 PM by DerelictVessel

"Can ye fathom the ocean, dark and deep, where the mighty waves and the grandeur sweep?"

 9 They Call Me Tomu, Fri, 8th Jun '12 6:45:46 PM Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Sureeeeendaaaa
Well, what evidence or argument is there that Krugman is not the smartest Economist out there? If we go on the basis of record-that is, people who use economic models to predict what's going to happen in the economy-Krugman has the best record, as far as I'm aware :P

What I don't understand is if Obama is supposedly such a fan of Krugman, why his administration tends to ignore him.

edited 8th Jun '12 6:46:41 PM by TheyCallMeTomu

 10 Hilarity Ensues, Fri, 8th Jun '12 6:47:29 PM from Standing between Sho'Nuff and total supremacy.
"If you're looking at the first-two-year legislative record, " says Ornstein, "you really don't have any rivals since Lyndon Johnson and that includes Ronald Reagan."

...What.

Did a liberal seriously just say that? Maybe I'm missing the point, but I think he could've picked a better example if he's trying to appeal to the left.

 11 Derelict Vessel, Fri, 8th Jun '12 6:48:14 PM from the Ocean Blue
Flying Dutchman
What I don't understand is if Obama is supposedly such a fan of Krugman, why his administration tends to ignore him.

The ever-present disconnect between what is right and proper and what politicians will allow to happen.

[up] Perhaps they assume Right-wingers read these things as well, and as I understand it Ronald Reagan operated with a relatively liberal Congress in place. He may also be talking about simple volume of legislation, rather than quality and value judgements.

edited 8th Jun '12 6:49:20 PM by DerelictVessel

"Can ye fathom the ocean, dark and deep, where the mighty waves and the grandeur sweep?"

 12 Hilarity Ensues, Fri, 8th Jun '12 7:04:20 PM from Standing between Sho'Nuff and total supremacy.
That might be it.

Reagan would, ironically, probably qualify as a "blue dog" Democrat in today's absurdly far right political environment. It's likely that most of the actions he did that didn't fit his ideology where done because of prodding from Congress, though. ...Oh wait a minute...

 13 Derelict Vessel, Fri, 8th Jun '12 7:07:53 PM from the Ocean Blue
Flying Dutchman
I imagine they'd call him a "Rockefeller Republican, " or whatever. After all, he (and Rick Perry) was a Democrat for most of his life. And look at Barry Goldwater...

Oh here we've gone and derailed into making fun of the Republican Party. Darn.

As to making fun of Democrats, I can't remember her name, but there was one Democratic Representative (I think; I don't know that she made it to the Senate) that was an out-and-out 9/11 Truther and got into a spat with a Capitol security guard because she didn't wear her Congressperson tag and he didn't recognize her right away, and she was way too mean-spirited about the whole event. I believe she ran as the Green Party nominee for President in '08, though.

I don't want to know what it says about the Green Party that they'd run a Truther for President.
"Can ye fathom the ocean, dark and deep, where the mighty waves and the grandeur sweep?"

 14 Hilarity Ensues, Fri, 8th Jun '12 7:34:59 PM from Standing between Sho'Nuff and total supremacy.
Oh, you're talking Cynthia Mc Kinney. She's from Georgia too, so anyone says that we only have crazy right wingers is clearly underestimating our bi-partisan brand of ridiculousness.

edited 8th Jun '12 7:35:32 PM by HilarityEnsues

From a purely political standpoint, the Democratic Party is absolutely terrible about circling the wagons, so to speak. When somebody in the Republican party is in a precarious spot or makes a stand, they have absolute backup (unless they go WAY over the edge, in which case they will be abandoned). By contrast, Dems pretty much shrug their shoulders and think that having the right policy is enough to get them through at the end of the day. When Nancy Pelosi brought up some perfectly valid criticism of the procedures followed by the CIA back in 2009, she was jumped on by the media, pseudo-nonpartisan think-tank experts, and conservatives on the whole. The rest of the Dems just sat on their asses and let her get demolished. Very few Dems really have all that much political backbone anymore.

And yeah, I bashed a little bit, but I think being a stalwart Democrat gives me a pass on the criticism. tongue

edited 8th Jun '12 9:18:07 PM by ForlornDreamer

 16 Hilarity Ensues, Fri, 8th Jun '12 9:30:15 PM from Standing between Sho'Nuff and total supremacy.
You're absolutely right. This is one of the few things the Right has picked up on and criticized that's actually quite true.

It's almost ironic, considering that the Right is supposed to be anti-collectivism, but it's much better at acting as a group.

 17 Jhimmibhob, Sat, 9th Jun '12 5:42:11 AM from Arm's reach of the julep machine Relationship Status: My own grandpa
I'm not fishing here, Hilarity, I'm sincerely curious: what is it about Cynthia McKinney's stances that you consider crazy or out of line? We've got trutherism, so far ... anything else?

And Tomu & Derelict: if y'all have anything to share on this point, feel free.
"She was the kind of dame they write similes about." —Pterodactyl Jones
 18 They Call Me Tomu, Sat, 9th Jun '12 9:49:36 AM Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Sureeeeendaaaa
I'm pretty forgiving on points as long as people aren't being trolls of the political arena. I'll face palm at truthers but I don't really keep up with it.

Anyone remember the last time a Democrat publicly accused the Republican party of being a bunch of Nazis? If I'm going to go after West in Florida for accusing the progressive caucus of being socialist, I suppose it's only fair to go after Dems for Godwinning (though, let's face it-everyone does that).

 19 Hilarity Ensues, Sat, 9th Jun '12 10:34:40 AM from Standing between Sho'Nuff and total supremacy.
@Jhim: She also believes that Jeb Bush ran a drug ring when he was governor of Florida, and that the military killed 5, 000 prisoners during Hurricane Katrina and dumped their bodies into a bayou.

Flying Dutchman
@Jhimmibhob,

Well, she's a 9/11 Truther, so her credibility immediately sinks through the basement for me.

She also thinks the CIA assassinated or assisted in the assassinations of MLK Jr. (plausible) and Tupac (rather doubtful). I think the incident with the Capitol Police reflects poorly on her sense of professionalism, as well.

My overall impression of McKinney is a reasonably liberal Democrat who has wonky positions that undermine her otherwise workable platform.

For example, her on Al Gore:

"Why don't you support native peoples in Colombia opposing oil drilling on and near their traditional lands?

Also, you're a racist, because your campaign doesn't involve enough black people!"

- Al Gore turns and looks confusedly at his black campaign manager, who shrugs -

She also apparently hangs out with the New Black Panther Party, which is vaguely troubling in a "who would think that's a good idea?" kind of way.

But really, it all comes down to her being a 9/11 Truther. I certainly can't say she hasn't done anything good—she definitely has—but being a Truther is such an outrageous proposition for a high-level government official that it boggles my mind.
"Can ye fathom the ocean, dark and deep, where the mighty waves and the grandeur sweep?"

 21 They Call Me Tomu, Sat, 9th Jun '12 10:55:21 AM Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Sureeeeendaaaa
If the Democratic party had any sense, they'd have someone primary challenge her.

Flying Dutchman
They did. Hence why she is no longer a Congresswoman.
"Can ye fathom the ocean, dark and deep, where the mighty waves and the grandeur sweep?"

 23 They Call Me Tomu, Sat, 9th Jun '12 11:05:06 AM Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Sureeeeendaaaa
Well there you go.

 24 Inhopelessguy, Sat, 9th Jun '12 11:08:01 AM from Birmingham, Greater Europe Relationship Status: Gonna take a lot to drag me away from you
Psych Lad
Hence why she is no longer a Congresswoman.

She has been... eliminated...

...

... from her role.

But on a serious note; why hasn't the Democrats capitalised on the widly-spinning-out-of-control (or at least, by European standards) actions of the GOP?

And I'm not trying to stop you love.

If we're gonna do anything we might as well just— ("Sex" - The 1975)

Flying Dutchman
Because the Democrats are center-Right themselves in practice, and thus have to balance what their actual base wants against what their monetary backers want. Most of the time, the latter win. Because of that, they can't actually attack what the Republicans do a lot of the time, because they'd like to do the same thing but less extremely themselves.

That, and those of the Democratic Party that actually are progressive are neither radical nor aggressive enough. Leftists seem to have this complex in general about democracy and fair play and sit there fretting over whether they're following the rules properly while the Right demolishes them because hey, what does the Right care about rules when it has a billion dollars to spend on demand?
"Can ye fathom the ocean, dark and deep, where the mighty waves and the grandeur sweep?"

Total posts: 102
1
 2  3  4 5


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy