Recent Forum Topics › Forums › The Public House › Bill Maher unloads
- This topic has 22 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 7 months ago by
nittany ram.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 7, 2017 at 2:03 pm #68466
waterfieldParticipantMay 7, 2017 at 6:46 pm #68469
nittany ramModeratorWell, I voted for Clinton only because she was the lesser of two evils.
But blaming those on the left that didn’t vote for her for Trump’s victory misses the mark.
It’s like blaming a tough loss on kicker for missing a 60 yard FG as time expires.
There are a myriad of things outside Clinton’s control that contributed to her loss. However, her past and her own mistakes during the campaign also contributed.
I mean, if you need the paltry 1 million votes that Stein mustered to beat Donald Trump then you’re doing something wrong.
She was a horrible candidate and ultimately, any blame should fall on her.
Or you could blame the establishment dems that chose to back Clinton over Sanders from the beginning. If Sanders had been the democratic nominee, Trump would be playing golf in Mar-a-Lago on his own dime.
May 7, 2017 at 10:13 pm #68471
PA RamParticipantThe country is very divided.
The Republicans are not only divided between themselves. The Democrats are also divided.
The problem with the Democratic establishment is that they believe the leftist wing is crazy and radical for wanting to pull the party back to the left–where it belongs(in my opinion)because it has drifted right, in terms of corporate love for years.
The Clinton’s have established a cult within the party. The Clinton cult is not necessarily by nature corporate(at least the regular folks)but the cult is so strong it is like gravity, pulling those people toward corporate friendly positions by following the logic of incrementalism and fear of the extreme Republican agenda.
There is a reality to that.
And yes–because Trump was such a disaster waiting to happen I voted for Clinton. If Romney had been running I may or may not have voted for her. I think that margin of difference would have been much smaller. The problem is that the Clinton wing and “cult” projects the “cult” thing on the Bernie people and fails to recognize it in themselves.
But that wing also fails to realize how deep this split actually is–how fed-up people are with this corporate drift.
They still don’t get it and the powers that be are still keeping their thumbs on the scale. They will never give this up easy. Frankly, compromise will be a challenge. But Perez and Pelosi(who STILL won’t begin to support single payer)are in charge.
Still, I get most of Maher’s point. It’s WHY I ultimately voted for her. I think if the election was held again that probably more people would hold their nose and vote for her allowing her to eek out a victory. And they’d feel miserable watching her do the exact things they know she’d do–but at least the planet would not be destroyed by climate change sooner than alter, and health care would not be blown apart.
But this division within the party is real. If the Dems fail to find a way to address it they will keep losing elections. Right now they seem clueless about it beyond attacking something called “Bernie Bros”.
Good luck with that.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. " Philip K. Dick
May 7, 2017 at 10:17 pm #68472
wvParticipantWell I blame the Democrats and Republicans for the fact that
Jill didnt get elected.w
vMay 7, 2017 at 11:30 pm #68474waterfieldParticipantThe country is very divided.
The Republicans are not only divided between themselves. The Democrats are also divided.
The problem with the Democratic establishment is that they believe the leftist wing is crazy and radical for wanting to pull the party back to the left–where it belongs(in my opinion)because it has drifted right, in terms of corporate love for years.
The Clinton’s have established a cult within the party. The Clinton cult is not necessarily by nature corporate(at least the regular folks)but the cult is so strong it is like gravity, pulling those people toward corporate friendly positions by following the logic of incrementalism and fear of the extreme Republican agenda.
There is a reality to that.
And yes–because Trump was such a disaster waiting to happen I voted for Clinton. If Romney had been running I may or may not have voted for her. I think that margin of difference would have been much smaller. The problem is that the Clinton wing and “cult” projects the “cult” thing on the Bernie people and fails to recognize it in themselves.
But that wing also fails to realize how deep this split actually is–how fed-up people are with this corporate drift.
They still don’t get it and the powers that be are still keeping their thumbs on the scale. They will never give this up easy. Frankly, compromise will be a challenge. But Perez and Pelosi(who STILL won’t begin to support single payer)are in charge.
Still, I get most of Maher’s point. It’s WHY I ultimately voted for her. I think if the election was held again that probably more people would hold their nose and vote for her allowing her to eek out a victory. And they’d feel miserable watching her do the exact things they know she’d do–but at least the planet would not be destroyed by climate change sooner than alter, and health care would not be blown apart.
But this division within the party is real. If the Dems fail to find a way to address it they will keep losing elections. Right now they seem clueless about it beyond attacking something called “Bernie Bros”.
Good luck with that.
Well I do agree with you on one point. And that is the anoitment of Clinton by the Democratic machine long before the campaign was in step. ( I still feel she was the most qualified person to ever run for President)By so doing they failed to take the pulse of the American people in that half of them are pissed at stuff they don’t understand and wanted simple answers to complicated issues-which is why both Sanders and Trump did far better than anyone ever expected. They both-IMO-suffer from the same malady -simple answers to complicated problems. But alas-that appears to be where a huge part of where the voting public’s needs are. Issues that require true analysis simply run counter to what we are accustomed to seeing on tv. It seems like people actually do not want to think “critically” -let alone take the time to do actual research much like you see on this board? (here I am being the cynic I’m always complaining about) Rather than blaming corporations-that’s easy too-I think for many it’s a matter of simply being “thought lazy”. I don’t think we were always that way. I recall growing up listening to my uneducated mom discuss the New Deal, FDR, Truman, Ike, etc. Today it’s about sports and television programs. And when did people become so afraid and distrustful of intellectuals (now their called elites). We certainly put no credence to debate (Trump proved that as he -from all accounts-lost every debate with Clinton). Sorry to be so cynical (LOL).
May 8, 2017 at 12:14 am #68475
znModeratorand wanted simple answers to complicated issues-which is why both Sanders and Trump did far better than anyone ever expected.
Although I voted for Clinton in an effort to stave off the Trump invasion, I prefer Sanders and voted for him in the primaries.
And it is nowhere near because I want simple answers to complicated issues.
Nor did anyone I know who voted for Sanders in the primaries, and also wished he were the nominee–all like me—do so because they want simple answers. This is colleagues, friends, family.
To me it is always about policies and of all the candidates, primaries through to the final election, I was always on the side of Sanders’s policies.
I still think if he had cracked through the dem party machine and won the nomination he would have beaten Trump AND I think his policies were immensely preferable to Clinton’s.
May 8, 2017 at 1:48 am #68477
Eternal RamnationParticipantMaher’s just another hypocritical establishment dem. I voted Stein HRC won MN. To me that indicates the establishments and corpocrats willingness to back the most hated candidate in history bears the blame. If they weren’t such crooks they’d be shouting from the rooftops Interstate Crosscheck and Trump and Kobach would be behind bars.
May 8, 2017 at 2:01 am #68478waterfieldParticipantAnd I have another theory. But before I write about that I just want to say I don’t want to get into the whole Sanders v Clinton debate. We’ve been through all that.
Here’s my other thought: I think that as we depend more and more on “social media” for our “socialization” we become more and more isolated and unable to comprehend fully the views of those we disagree with. With true face to face interaction I believe we view people in a different frame of reference. Nothing beats looking into the eyes of someone who is offering a differing viewpoint than yours. To me there is a remarkable difference between reading what one says and listening to what they say. I’m sure that if I met some of the progressives on this board it would be far easier to re-examine some of my views. However, for some reason, message boards, face book, etc. become either debate forums which mandates argument or it becomes a clique where you can choose who you want “to be around”. It is so easy to simply “unfriend” someone, etc. So-IMO- as we become less and less interactive with people on a personal level we tend to become more isolated in our own belief system and thus less and less willing to examine the beliefs of others. As a result we see a “polarization” of belief systems and the correspondingly unwillingness to re-examine our own beliefs.
So my question is (rhetorical) when did we become so unwilling to listen to people who view an issue different than we do. My answer is above which may be why our political spectrum is as polarized as it is today. More so than it ever has been.
May 8, 2017 at 2:14 am #68479waterfieldParticipant“Although I voted for Clinton in an effort to stave off the Trump invasion, I prefer Sanders and voted for him in the primaries.
And it is nowhere near because I want simple answers to complicated issues.
Nor did anyone I know who voted for Sanders in the primaries, and also wished he were the nominee–all like me—do so because they want simple answers. This is colleagues, friends, family.”
I’m not saying that’s what you or your people wanted. (That is not a personal attack.)I’m saying that is what he unequivocally did and he did remarkably well. To me there is a connection and almost a symbiotic relation with Trump in that regard.
May 8, 2017 at 12:48 pm #68494
ZooeyModeratorYou know what.
I am tired of Clinton apologists blaming the left for her loss.
She lost. It was her fault she lost. Completely her fault.
The left supported her in larger numbers than they supported Obama, precisely for all the reasons Maher states, and are echoed by Nittany, PA, and zn. Yet Obama won, twice. With less support from the left than Hillary got. She lost because she didn’t win votes from the MIDDLE. Because in this election, the MIDDLE wanted progressive policies that tilted jobs/money in their direction. Trump promised it to them. Hillary hedged on it. She lost because she didn’t go to the Rust Belt and tell them something they could believe about the future. That. Is. Why. She. Lost.
And all this constant ragging on the left accomplishes NOTHING except to reinforce the losing strategy the democrat party seem unable to let go of.
If the Democrats want to win…they have to move to the left. That is the reality. And that isn’t me just throwing a tantrum and demanding that I get my way (because I will always place my vote where I think it will have the most practical benefit, and I would have voted for Hillary if California was in any way up for grabs). No, I say they have to move to the left because the left is where the energy, youth, and future demographics lie. That is the unfolding political reality. The votes available to the DNC to tilt the power back into their hands are to their Left, and nowhere else. And no amount of condescending lecturing is going to change that.
May 8, 2017 at 6:13 pm #68496znModeratorI’m saying that is what he unequivocally did
And that is precisely what I am saying you are wrong about.
You said it yourself. You have a kind of tin ear for left positions. You hear your own scoffing and not the actual position. Which truthfully is fine in the end…we’re all partisan. So that’s not personal either.
May 8, 2017 at 6:44 pm #68501wvParticipantYou know what.
I am tired of Clinton apologists blaming the left for her loss.
===================
I’m tired of
Corporate-Capitalism,
Corporate-Media,
Corporate-Democrats,
Corporate-Republicans,
and Corporate-Personhood.Hitler did not threaten to destroy the entire biosphere.
Corporations are well on their way to destroying the biosphere.I’m tired of that.
w
vMay 8, 2017 at 7:22 pm #68504ZooeyModeratorYou know what.
I am tired of Clinton apologists blaming the left for her loss.
===================
I’m tired of
Corporate-Capitalism,
Corporate-Media,
Corporate-Democrats,
Corporate-Republicans,
and Corporate-Personhood.Hitler did not threaten to destroy the entire biosphere.
Corporations are well on their way to destroying the biosphere.I’m tired of that.
w
vOh, don’t worry. It will be fine. We will get a sensible Democrat in the White House in 2020, and he or she will reduce greenhouse emissions 12% by 2030.
May 8, 2017 at 7:44 pm #68505PA RamParticipantOne problem that the Democratic party is that there just are not enough progressives to run.
Who carries the progressive flag next time?
Bernie would be 80 years old by the time he took office.
Elizabeth Warren? Maybe. But I’m not sure she connects the way Bernie does–and she isn’t as forceful about the progressive positions as Bernie is and in fact sat out endorsing anyone this time. yes–I like her and she may be the best bet–but she isn’t quite Bernie.
Tulsi Gabbard? I’m not really sure what she is. Sometimes I see her more as a political opportunist.
Sherrod Brown? He’s rated pretty liberal but how progressive he actually is–I’m not sure.
Anyone else on a list most people wouldn’t even know. They’d be less known than Bernie Sanders.
So who wins the primary next time? My guess is that the Dems–after seeing 4 years of Trump–believe they can just drop another corporate shill into the mix and win with it. Mark Warner–Kristian Gillibrand. Hillary again?
I kind of expect that’s how it will go.
And yes–they may lose again. Even to Trump.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. " Philip K. Dick
May 8, 2017 at 8:57 pm #68508ZooeyModeratorOne problem that the Democratic party is that there just are not enough progressives to run.
Yeah, I see it the same way. Bernie will be too old, and there is nobody else.
Mind you…2 years ago I would have said you were crazy if you thought Sanders would run and break 10% of the vote.
But as I have previously stated, I think 2016 was basically our last chance to avoid disaster to civilization anyway. I think even if Sanders got elected in 2020 with both the Senate and the House, it would basically be too late to get anything done in time to avert the destabilization of society from climate change anyway. We just aren’t even seriously taking on climate change, overpopulation, or dwindling resources in any way, so … goodbye. It’s not going to be pretty.
May 9, 2017 at 10:06 am #68523PA RamParticipantBut as I have previously stated, I think 2016 was basically our last chance to avoid disaster to civilization anyway. I think even if Sanders got elected in 2020 with both the Senate and the House, it would basically be too late to get anything done in time to avert the destabilization of society from climate change anyway. We just aren’t even seriously taking on climate change, overpopulation, or dwindling resources in any way, so … goodbye. It’s not going to be pretty.
I hear you, Zooey. I just don’t have the mental energy for this anymore. I can’t invest in it emotionally. I have to step back–focus on personal things and just let this go. And like everyone else–I will have to just deal with the consequences. You can’t fight the ignorance of half the American people. What’s the point to it anymore? Screaming into the internet solves nothing. It only stresses me out and solves nothing. Yes–I’ll still donate to candidates and causes I believe in. I’ll still vote. But I’ve been sapped of all other political motivation. Good luck America. The future of this country looks very dim. And people will be waving flags and cheering the very people who are destroying them all the way into the abyss. I accept that now.
There will be no sudden realization by the masses about the train running off the tracks. It won’t happen.
So for me it’s going to be trying to laugh at something every day, read good books, practice my sleight-of-hand with cards in a very meditative way, help my wife get through her lymphoma crises, see my kids as often as I can and just live more in the moment. I hate being angry all the time. And it’s pointless. I will leave the angry resistance to others and wish them the best of luck.
I just don’t care anymore. No–I do. But I just don’t feel like being angry and hopeless forever. So I will do my best(other than an occasional angry rant) to leave it go.
That’s where I am today.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. " Philip K. Dick
May 9, 2017 at 12:00 pm #68528wvParticipant<
I hear you, Zooey. I just don’t have the mental energy for this anymore. I can’t invest in it emotionally. I have to step back–focus on personal things and just let this go..============
“life is a shipwreck, but we have to sing in the lifeboats.”
VoltaireMay 9, 2017 at 3:38 pm #68539waterfieldParticipantPA: I’m sorry to hear about you wife’s lymphoma. My wife was diagnosed with multiple myeloma a few years back. Hopefully your wife is in good care. We make the trip to Stanford-from So Cal-at least 4 times a year. Life always seems to give us enough to struggle with independent of politics. Wishing the best for you guys.
Tony
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 7 months ago by
waterfield.
May 9, 2017 at 4:06 pm #68541PA RamParticipantPA: I’m sorry to hear about you wife’s lymphoma. My wife was diagnosed with multiple myeloma a few years back. Hopefully your wife is in good care. We make the trip to Stanford-from So Cal-at least 4 times a year. Life always seems to give us enough to struggle with independent of politics. Wishing the best for you guys.
Tony
Thank you. She’s going to be seeing some specialists in Lymphoma at Penn University. She has a rare non-hodgkins called peripheral t-cell lymphoma. But we’re hoping that we got on top of it early. My best to you and your wife as well
Barry
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. " Philip K. Dick
May 9, 2017 at 4:19 pm #68542znModeratorhelp my wife get through her lymphoma crises
Sincerely sorry to hear that PA. Keep us updated. Here at my house, our hearts go out to you.
May 9, 2017 at 6:08 pm #68546ZooeyModeratorPA, my thoughts are with you. We will all be hoping for the best.
May 9, 2017 at 7:23 pm #68550PA RamParticipantThanks guys. I appreciate it.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. " Philip K. Dick
May 9, 2017 at 9:52 pm #68555nittany ramModeratorPA: I’m sorry to hear about you wife’s lymphoma. My wife was diagnosed with multiple myeloma a few years back. Hopefully your wife is in good care. We make the trip to Stanford-from So Cal-at least 4 times a year. Life always seems to give us enough to struggle with independent of politics. Wishing the best for you guys.
Tony
Thank you. She’s going to be seeing some specialists in Lymphoma at Penn University. She has a rare non-hodgkins called peripheral t-cell lymphoma. But we’re hoping that we got on top of it early. My best to you and your wife as well
Barry
My thoughts are with you and your wife, Barry.
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 7 months ago by
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
