I'm honestly not sure what false conclusions you feel that I jumped to.Dragon Angel wrote: ↑2018-03-17 11:08pmYou know, a problem I have with you (and I'm sure others experience this) is that you jump to conclusions so fucking often that it is very difficult to discuss something with you without having to also discuss whatever Interpretation Of The Day you have of my posts. I already have to deal with that shit from someone terminally prone to it in real life and if you start that here, I'm not going to bother with this.
Both Soontir C'boath and to a lesser extent you are making what I feel are overly-broad attacks on the Democrats, and in Soontir's case going so far as to say that he'll register as a Republican, and posting an article advocating splitting the vote between numerous small, narrow third parties (any criticisms of those points are directed at him specifically, and not at you). I made no presumption so far as I recall as to your motives for doing so.
If it is simply my accusation that you were implying a "both sides" narrative, I'll address that momentarily.
Well, you kind of are. That you evidently feel justified in doing so does not change that.Before you say that I'm attacking your character, because dear god I already know you're going to,
And if I am quick to pounce on that sort of thing, it is because I have a very long history on this board of people trying to make the topics I post in about me, rather than about the topic. I could cite examples, but I suppose that would be treading into vendetta/thread derailment territory. Suffice to say, I would probably be less touchy on this point if people did not keep forcing me to defend myself, rather than the topic of the thread- then blaming me when I do so.
Which is something we absolutely need to discuss, but my point is that they are already being branded as that sort of caricature, regardless of the reality of the situation. And that has real consequences.please note that from the start I've been suggesting a way for the Democrats to avoid becoming that exact kind of caricature.
I was responding to this:In your first reply to me, you accused me of having no nuance and calling them just like Republicans when you and Simon were, guess what, discussing the possibility of more Republican deserters joining the Democrats.
And I just go ?
Perhaps it was not your intent, but I do not think it is unreasonable to interpret that as basically saying that Democrats who are conservative, who compromise, or who aren't sufficiently pure in their adherence to whatever one defines as Democratic values are no different from Republicans.This is why they are running as Democrat. This is why they don't have (R) next to their names. Ostensibly they are supposed to hold onto what makes a Democrat a Democrat and not a Republican.
Err, what?I don't know whether you're aware of this or not, but the worst interpretation has me seeing you arguing in bad faith. So, I recommend that you stop forcing me to shadowbox a strawman. If every possible discussion about the Democrats from me may lead to you accusing me of acting like a mindless moderate, then you in essence make discussion of them impossible.
I certainly never accused you of acting like a mindless moderate. If I was going to accuse you of anything, it would be of being part of the "no compromise" segment of the Left (ie, the opposite of a moderate), but I didn't even do that, and I wouldn't feel justified in doing so based on your arguments in this thread.
That is a good question. And I don't think we have any disagreement here.I already implied that if I was unfortunate enough to live in Alabama, I would've voted for Jones anyway, simply because his opponent was a literal puppy-kicking cartoon villain. However, I want you to consider this: Why was Jones the candidate? Why couldn't someone who would truly support Democratic principles run instead? Why did Jones have to take that space?
It shouldn't be, but I also wonder how many Democrats are willing to invest their time, resources, and reputation to run in a district that, until the child-groping came out, was largely considered a write-off?Since Moore was that bad, in theory, any other candidate could have also beat him. Yet, somehow Jones was the one who ended up there. Could the Democrats not have scrounged up someone else who won't just go with two thirds of what the Republicans propose anyway? Is that such a high bar to pass?
I think that in either case, the main problem here is that a lot of the Dems have a defeatist mentality. A belief that they cannot win in red states, and can only compete in swing states by nominating moderates/conservatives.
I think the string of successes this year, in the face of Trumpism, may be starting to cure the party of that- but I think its a problem that will likely only really be fixed by a string of victories and the retirement/death of most of the old guard. And even then, it will only be solved if younger progressives remain active in the party, rather than writing it off and going third party/independent/Trump/not voting (Please note that I am not accusing you of advocating any of those things, only referring to the larger context in which this discussion is taking place).
The reason I would criticize such statements is because they come off as treating specific candidates run in specific districts or states as somehow representing the entire party. The Democrats do not only run "Republican-lites"- they run a spectrum of candidates from the likes of Doug Jones to the likes of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. That's the nature of a big tent party, which is the only way that a party can be consistently viable at the national level in a democratic or semi-democratic system.It does not have to end with Republican-lites taking up valuable Democrat positions. If the only possible oppositions Democrats can give to puppy-kicking cartoon villains are Republican-lites, then the Democrats are fucked. That is not a statement without nuance. That is just mathematical fact. They will have lost their claim toward promoting liberal values.
Would I like to see the party shift more to the Left? Yes. Am I going to accuse the entire party of betraying liberal values if some Blue Dogs are run in conservative states or districts? No.
Yeah, progressives in Alabama had a shit choice. That's a problem that we need to work on as a party. If a progressive challenges Jones in the next primary, I'd probably back them. I'm just worried about people painting the party with too broad a brush, and the way that that (intentionally or otherwise) feeds into efforts to divide the vote.
Because when we have a party that increasingly embraces and is backed by literal fascists controlling our government, that ought to take precedence to fighting our internal battles. I'm no friend of the Wall Street wing of the Democratic Party, or the "Blue Dogs", and I would hope that my posting record speaks to that clearly. But when we are in imminent danger of being overrun by literal Nazis, well... I won't go so far as to say that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, but I will at least try to pull my punches against people who are also opposing the Nazis, whatever other disagreements we may have. I'm sick of fighting other Leftists, I'm sick of fighting Centrists, and the only reason I ever do so is because I see someone else stirring up those divisions.
Everything I have argued in this thread has been ultimately motivated by my opposition to neo-fascism, and my belief that we need to unite as many people as possible in common cause against it.
Can you quote where exactly you feel that Simon and I implied that anyone supporting a third party was falling for Russian propaganda?Just to make sure I wasn't hallucinating, I searched for "Kremlin" and found in your posts responses to me and Soontir where you implied that either of us was falling for Russian propaganda by even hinting at third parties. Can I take this as you withdrawing that implication?
If I did somehow imply that, I retract it entirely, and apologize. It would be unfair to make that presumption about the motives of everyone who goes third party.
I do not retract my conclusions about the practical consequences of going third party under the current circumstances, which are based in simple math and the realities of the American political system.