The DNC, its New Chair, and The Road Ahead for the Dems to the 2018 Mid-terms

[JSSkinz]

12 minutes ago, Springfield said:

 

It didn't seem like that from the excerpt you posted but I could be wrong.  Frankly, I don't know how much all this really matters to me.  The whole DNC thing.

 

Everyone will have a differing opinion on the email, its been that way since they were leaked. Who holds the DNC chair is probably not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things but as long as the Dem party is scrambling to find their next candidate it's possible one of these two could end up a candidate in the future.  I think both are charismatic and outspoken so that plays well if they choose to go that route.

 

 

[Hersh]

1 hour ago, nonniey said:

Identity politics is the basic foundation of the Democratic party going back to their establishment. How can that be a measure of how far left they are?

Do you really think the GOP doesn't play identity politics?

 

[nonniey]

53 minutes ago, Hersh said:

Do you really think the GOP doesn't play identity politics?

 

Oh Trump definitely did/ does which is one of the reasons I detested him. But curious why are some dems on this board defensive about it? That is what that party stands for and always has.  If you think identity politics is bad you should not be a Democrat.

[Hersh]

3 minutes ago, nonniey said:

Oh Trump definitely did this year which is one of the reasons I detested him. 

I'm not talking about Trump, I'm talking about the entire GOP. I want to know if anyone actually believes that there are political parties that don't play identity politics. I ask because every single political party operates around identity politics. It's shifted to data analysis for sure, but it's always been done. 

[redskins59]

15 minutes ago, nonniey said:

Oh Trump definitely did/ does which is one of the reasons I detested him. But curious why are some dems on this board defensive about it? That is what that party stands for and always has.  If you think identity politics is bad you should not be a Democrat.

Why did Southern Whites switch from democrats to republicans?  You think it was just Trump from the Republican party who has played identity politics?

 

[SkinsHokieFan]

Let's be real. 

 

Every Muslim in America is 6 degrees of separation from Al Qaeda

 

I have met Ellison a few times. Hearing him called a radical leftist is amusing 

[DogofWar1]

Oh look at the time, it's about that time again, IDENTITY POLITICS ACCUSATIONS TIME!

 

*explosions*

 

WAIT!  I'm having a premonition from the distant future of 2020 (with a tidbit at the start from early 2017)...

 

Trump: "We need to ban muslims until we know what's going on!"

CBP: "But how will we know who is muslim?"

Darth Bannon: "Profffffileeeeee themmmmmmmm."

*Muhammad Ali Jr. is detained because of his name, among other stupid incidents that don't actually make America safer*

*Fast forward to 2020*

Democrats: "Yeah so this whole thing is kind of racist, islamophobic, and unconstitutional."

Vast Majority of Muslims (hereafter abbreviated to just Muslims): "We agree."

Democrats: "We going to not do that if we win."

Muslims: "Cool.  2020 Donald Trump and rest of GOP, what are you gonna do?"

Trump: "There are bad hombres over there and we need to be safe.  No one will make America safer than me."

Bannon: "Yesssssssssssss.  Bad Hombressssssssss"

Rest of GOP: "Uh, what he said."

Muslims: "Okay, yeah, no.  We're voting for the people who aren't gonna discriminate against us."

Rest of GOP: "OH LOOK AT THE DEMS WITH THEIR IDENTITY POLITICS!"

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

8 hours ago, jschuck12001 said:

Everyone will have a differing opinion on the email, its been that way since they were leaked.

Seems to me like most everyone has come to a consensus that it really wasn't a big deal after all. Seemed to happen just as soon as she lost the election.

[Burgold]

3 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Seems to me like most everyone has come to a consensus that it really wasn't a big deal after all. Seemed to happen just as soon as she lost the election.

Agreed. Especially not a big deal since "no one" seems to care about the President taking an unsecured cell phone into top secret briefings, meetings, or holding classified conferences on a public golf course in ear shot of civilians. 

 

The horror of this email server pales before the private email servers currently being used by Trump officials, the smart phone stuff, etc... and the deafness from conservatives who pretended to care about this stuff is... well, I'd say surprising except that it isn't. The email outrage was always a con. What Hillary did was SOP. What Trump is doing is breaking new grounds and he's practicing less safe methods than would be tolerated at a 7-11.

 

 

[bearrock]

In an era where party affiliation trumps everything else (because the only thing the two major parties can work together on is the false creation and perpetuation of binary political choices), the charge of identity politics rings hollow.  Besides, not like the right hasn't been playing identity politics with Christians for ages now.  Look at all the Trump constituents in favor of ACA now, saying that it's a matter of life and death, and tell me if these people voted on the issues or their own perceived "identity".  Politicians can play identity politics because large segment of the voters are stupid and irresponsible.  They look at the R or D next to the name and treat it like the logo of your favorite sports team.  I hope the parties don't get fixed and the extremmist on both end take over, forcing fed up moderates to break off and form their own parties.  

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

8 hours ago, nonniey said:

If you think identity politics is bad you should not be a Democrat.

Or a whatever the GOP is now. In fact, I'll take it one step further. Nobody should be a republican or a democrat.

[PeterMP]

9 hours ago, jschuck12001 said:

It sounds like there was no substantial young minority vote in NV so they were spinning that as they head into South Carolina.

It depends on your background, history, and the people you surround yourself with.

 

Yes, Obama did, at least I believe he did.

 

Come on, that's not a serious question.

 

1.  The e-mail is before the NV primary.  I don't read it as saying there is no substantial young minority vote in NV (I'm not sure how much there is though either). 

 

2.  If you were Tom Perez and wanted to communicate that idea to the Clinton campaign in a way that was not practicing identity politics, how would you write the e-mail as compared to what you quoted?  Or is it impossible for Tom Perez to communicate to the Hillary campaign that they are going to do well among African Americans, including young African Americans, compared to Sanders (because of the work that her campaign had done in the African American community)?

 

3.  Good.

 

4.  Well, I'm not sure how your comment is then connected to what is in the e-mail because certainly that's how I would have read your comments.  He certainly didn't say that he didn't care or even that Hillary shouldn't care about the white vote.

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

7 minutes ago, bearrock said:

Politicians can play identity politics because large segment of the voters are stupid and irresponsible.  They look at the R or D next to the name and treat it like the logo of your favorite sports team.

I had the same thought the other day. Other than guns, gays, and abortion, I bet the parties could flip their entire platforms and a good chunk of the population wouldn't bat an eyelash.

[PeterMP]

8 hours ago, nonniey said:

Oh Trump definitely did/ does which is one of the reasons I detested him. But curious why are some dems on this board defensive about it? That is what that party stands for and always has.  If you think identity politics is bad you should not be a Democrat.

 

What is identity politics?  Can you define it for me?

 

What Republican Presidential candidate would you say did not practice identity politics?  Is there a Democratic Presidential candidate that you would say did not practice identity politics?

 

(Serious questions, but I'm not sure what you mean and why it is bad.  It seems to me that people with similar traits (not identical similar identities) are likely to have similar concerns.  I'm a middle age white man.  My primary concerns are not the same as the average African American, a young latino whose parents came here and are here illegally, or even the average young college white graduate.  There are policies that are going to affect them on average to a greater extent then me and vice versa.  That's reality.

 

Is there a way to address the concerns that more significantly affect minority populations and talk about them without practicing identity politics?)

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

15 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Or a whatever the GOP is now. In fact, I'll take it one step further. Nobody should be a republican or a democrat.

But more than anything else, nobody should be a member of this current version of the GOP. Honestly, the grand old party needs a timeout.

[redskins59]

Identity politics isn't just based on ethnicity.  It can also be based on gender (male vs female) or religion.  80% of evangelical Christians practiced gender politics by voting for the Trump.  They also voted for George W Bush overwhelmingly.  

[FanboyOf91]

 

[visionary]

If Trump likes Ellison so much, I'm sure there's many a position he could nominate him for....

 

?

[Springfield]

2 hours ago, redskins59 said:

Identity politics isn't just based on ethnicity.  It can also be based on gender (male vs female) or religion.  80% of evangelical Christians practiced gender politics by voting for the Trump.  They also voted for George W Bush overwhelmingly.  

 

As I was reading about identity politics, I couldn't help but think about the conservative right.  Especially considering that the current president doesn't make for much of a great Christian.

[nonniey]

11 hours ago, Hersh said:

I'm not talking about Trump, I'm talking about the entire GOP. I want to know if anyone actually believes that there are political parties that don't play identity politics. I ask because every single political party operates around identity politics. It's shifted to data analysis for sure, but it's always been done. 

Identity politics is about policy. The GOP traditionally does not implement or propose policies that directly differentiate between people according to their situations and generally oppose those type of policies  Not saying Republicans always oppose those policies but generally they do. The Democrats have always championed those type of policies (Affirmative Action, the Great Society's distribution of government largess, and yes Jim Crow and slavery too). 

[Springfield]

3 hours ago, bearrock said:

In an era where party affiliation trumps everything else (because the only thing the two major parties can work together on is the false creation and perpetuation of binary political choices), the charge of identity politics rings hollow.  Besides, not like the right hasn't been playing identity politics with Christians for ages now.  Look at all the Trump constituents in favor of ACA now, saying that it's a matter of life and death, and tell me if these people voted on the issues or their own perceived "identity".  Politicians can play identity politics because large segment of the voters are stupid and irresponsible.  They look at the R or D next to the name and treat it like the logo of your favorite sports team.  I hope the parties don't get fixed and the extremmist on both end take over, forcing fed up moderates to break off and form their own parties.  

 

I think both side play identity politics because generalizing a topic is the easiest and most commonplace way to convey your stance on a subject.  It's easier for the masses to swallow a general statement (such as:  "We are going to build a wall along the southern border to make us safer.") than it is to follow a long, drawn out, poignant details on intricate matters.

 

Therefore they generalize socioeconomic classes as well.

[nonniey]

11 hours ago, redskins59 said:

Why did Southern Whites switch from democrats to republicans?  You think it was just Trump from the Republican party who has played identity politics?

 

Because the Civil Rights Bill of 1965 (which was passed over Democratic opposition I might add) essentially outlawed the policies Democrats had passed that specifically favored whites and or disadvantaged Blacks. They didn't flow to the Republicans because Republicans proposed policies that specifically would favor them they switched because the Republicans stood in opposition to policies that they perceived would disadvantage them.

[Kilmer17]

Both sides play identity politics.  

 

One side is just SO much better at it than the other. 

 

Why does the Dem party continue to try and beat the GOP at this game.  They can't.  

 

In an era where voters loathe both parties and all govt entities, when they get in the polling booth, they pull the GOP levers.  Why?  That's the question that Dems need to answer.  Because they just lost to Donald ****ing Trump.  And their response has been to throw a temper tantrum **** fit.  

 

Not electing Ellison is a good first move.  We will see if they figure out the next move. 

[Springfield]

6 minutes ago, nonniey said:

Because the Civil Rights Bill of 1965 (which was passed over Democratic opposition I might add) essentially outlawed the policies Democrats had passed that specifically favored whites and or disadvantaged Blacks. They didn't flow to the Republicans because Republicans proposed policies that specifically would favor them they switched because the Republicans stood in opposition to policies that they perceived would disadvantage them.

 

I read an article a few days ago that was interesting.  Short read, different take on the party switch that doesn't rely on racial issues. (Can't speak to the political leanings of the site)

 

 

Quote

From a business perspective, Rauchway pointed out, the loyalties of the parties did not really switch. "Although the rhetoric and to a degree the policies of the parties do switch places," he wrote, "their core supporters don't — which is to say, the Republicans remain, throughout, the party of bigger businesses; it's just that in the earlier era bigger businesses want bigger government and in the later era they don't."

 

http://www.livescience.com/34241-democratic-republican-parties-switch-platforms.html

 

 

[TradeTheBeal!]

12 minutes ago, nonniey said:

Because the Civil Rights Bill of 1965 (which was passed over Democratic opposition I might add) essentially outlawed the policies Democrats had passed that specifically favored whites and or disadvantaged Blacks. They didn't flow to the Republicans because Republicans proposed policies that specifically would favor them they switched because the Republicans stood in opposition to policies that they perceived would disadvantage them.

 

1964.  And Democrat Senators voted 46-21 in favor of it...45-1 if you take out Southern states.

 

Just trying to help you out, knowing what a stickler you are for accuracy.