Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

74 - Postgame ft. Crew (Patreon)

Published:
2019-01-23 02:11:26
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

thanks for the support, patrons.

Files

Previews only

Postgame - 74 - ft. Crew

Thanks for being patrons!

Comments

J P 3

As far as "anti-establishment" cred goes, big business aligned groups like the Third Way have stated that there are only two candidates in the 2020 field that they they view as unacceptable -- Warren and Sanders. In terms of policies, Gabbard is one of a kind -- a personally socially conservative, socially liberal voting, environmentally conscious, economically progressive, anti-interventionist, Likudnik. I don't know how long she lasts in the contest, but I wouldn't be surprised if she did better than 2% thanks to votes from Pepe's and a segment of the 2016 Sanders base. From a left perspective no one can touch Sanders on policy, but even in that clip from MLK, Jr. day, there's the occassional mangling of words. Age is an issue. It's an even bigger issue for Biden -- on top of his crappy politics -- but the strongest argument for Sanders is around movement building in 2020. Will a campaign in 2020 be the best means to build on the 2016 foundation even if he does not win the nomination?

Zen Ben

Good analysis.

Jeff Prillaman

I never liked the drone strikes but have no answer as to the question of how to address ISIS and their violent brutality. Should we send troops and helicopters and Humvees and artillery and all the rest? Should we just say it isn't our problem? Which opponents to drone strikes will sign up to be the "boots on the ground"? Not me.

Bijou Smith
>>19170584

Read some proper experts on insurgency and terrorism (which is a twisted way ISIS see themselves). I think Peter Bergman was one, I forget the other. The gist of it is you "defeat" ISIS by removing their support in the population sustaining them, which are poor and oppressed Muslims. So give the poor a decent means of living, a good standard of life, and remove your military bases from their countries and they will have little to complain about, and groups like ISIS and AL Qaeda will be starved of oxygen and will get snuffed out with almost no bloodshed. Also, ask yourself, were drones needed to find peace with the IRA? Were drones and humvees needed to liberate the ANC? Were drones needed to turn the PLO into the PA? I could go on and on. All subtly different cases, but peace was never won at the point of a gun. Guns and bombs have in modern times only ever been needed (to put it only slightly simplistically) to defeat entire nations acting as aggressors whose ambitions were not insurgency but genocide.

Bijou Smith

Eric the Half-A-Jimmy-Dore fan perhaps surprisingly nailed a crucial point: Gabbard has a military buddy comrade brainwashed mindset, and underneath a fairly (seemingly legit) leftist outlook. She is the type of person if you get her on your team she will fight to the death for you (or at least volunteer her comrades to fight to the death for her team --hard to tell which type of gunslinger she really is --- sacrifice herself or sacrifice only her team?). So, if theoretically, she woke up from the miasma of militaristic thinking she is spellbound by, she would fight for a team like Bernie's all the way, and fight fascism and fight xenophobia. She is like a more polite Richard Ojeda before he woke up. The tragi-irony of Tulsi is she did not vote for Trump, so she did not suffer the severe cognitive dissonance Ojeda has, and so she is still asleep on the humanitarian issues that matter globally.

Bijou Smith
>>19162912

I'd be fascinated by any polls showing the Pepe's will vote for Gabbard, it'd perhaps give Gabbard a bit of Jordan Peterson/Dave Rubin fan reality shock --- "whyr arrre my farns all neo-narzi sympathyzers? It's clearrley thee feemale insarnity mehssing up theyre psychic rrooms." But seriously, age and mangling of words is a close second to the requirement of "square jaw full head of hair Gillette model looks" criteria for male candidates in US politics, which I would hope Trump at least has partially broken the mold for, and which Bernie came close to breaking in 2016. So I'd answer "yes" to your question @JP whether Sanders runs or not, the policy platform (braod non-delusional social democracy with grit) is what needs to be the winner, not any particular a candidate. I think Bernie should run for at least one good reasons, which is that the young Dems who champion these policies are not senior enough yet to run in his place, and apart from Sherrod Brown perhaps, none of the other leftists POTUS candidates have half the nous to pull off and push through a win for these policies. So I'd reframe the question: "Who among the Dem front-runners can best champion a true pragmatic social democracy platform?"