Feinstein Race Alert

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 144 total)
  • Author
  • #37223

    Nazi doing very well.

    There is a progressive challenger looking to unseat di-fi. I very strongly support this. She’s terrible, not a Democrat at all.

    The choice I positioned here is modeled perfectly.

    No lefty will vote for Di-fi. She is labor toxic.

    The progressive is a vote for candidate. Got good ground game.

    The Nazi is playing on the split, and the vote against crowd, normal for the GOP.

    Issues are going to be forced. This is how it will look. The choice boils down to recognition of a majority out there not being represented economically.

    Di-fi represents a “not Nazi” essentially. Sam as the general positioning, “not Trump”, or “not GOP.”

    Lots of us will, in fact, go ahead and toss Di-fi a fucking vote, because, “not Nazi.”

    It is very high, and increasing risk to depend on that however. Di-fi wont be getting enough of the Progressive vote. She would have before party failure drove a split in the left along economic lines.

    The progressive, Allison, will also get a fair number of normally dormant voters. They will move to vote for, stay home on a straight vote against ballot.

    We either begin to recognize this and help increasingly desperate people move to help improve the party, or the advantage is extremely likely to be GOP.

    More of this coming.

    I’m gonna side with the folks who have had quite enough. Positive, vote for politics.

    A Di-fi vs Nazi ticket, would be very similar to a Clinton vs Trump ticket, with the majority motivation being vote against.

    It’s a who is worse election, not a who is better type one.

    I got my flame suit on. Befor you go shitting on me, know we all have agency here. I don’t control those people, and given the unacceptable economic policy being advanced by party leaders, to really recognize way too damn many of us simply aren’t willing to play that kind of ball.

    Does not matter what you think they should do. They don’t care. Nor do I frankly.

    What does matter is what they will do, and the choice we have in all of that.

    Party politics are a raw, hot mess. Ill aligned with the majority of the nation. And that is about wants, money. It is not about needs, people, families, lives.

    Fear, blame and shame are not meaningful here.

    They don’t care.


    Because it’s entirely obvious that kind of consideration isn’t being returned.

    And we did that. I did. I know I did, and no more. Either it makes sense to actually be a leftie, social and economic, or not.

    Which is it?

    The real lefties are going to force the question.


    I don’t care what self-righteous self-identified “real lefties” think (as if anyone who disagrees without couldn’t POSSIBLY be a “real lefty”). In fact, I tend to vote against ideologues anyway, so if someone is the choice of self-proclaimed “real lefties” I’d be more likely to vote for someone else.

    Still, Feinstein has served for a very long time and is past due for retirement. I won’t shed any tears if she is defeated, but I don’t have any ideological beef against her.

    It seems Alison Hartson isn’t the only viable challenger in the primary, either – she’s not a shoe-in to come in #2 and qualify for the fall election run-off in California’s top 2 system. We’ll see!


    Got it. You are comfy, fuck the majority of your countrymen in an unnecessary struggle.


    Romney voters Unite!


    Self righteous would carry some weight if it were not for 49 years of party failure to perform culminating in an epic over 1000 seat loss and the rise of both a real progressive and the election of a mad carnival Barker who should have been laughed off the stage.

    Needs vs wants Andrew. Real need out there.

    Desperate people unwilling to fluff your feathers.


    Never thought I would see the preference to lose to a Nazi expressed here.

    Gonna be some very ugly times coming. Or not!

    Depends on whether people can be bothered. Clearly you can’t.


    In any case, remember when I said the issues were gonna get forced?

    Get used to it. More coming.


    Missing: “Got it. You are comfy, fuck the majority of your countrymen in an unnecessary struggle.”

    This is what self-righteousness is: presuming, without a shred of real evidence, that your views are the “majority” views of the country. People who disagree with you are just out-of-step; it’s YOU who is in step with most people’s views.

    All self-righteous ideologues have this same mindset e.g the Tea Party. Just proclaiming “my views are shared by the majority” doesn’t make it so.


    Not sorry, sorry.

    Hey. If you really want to get behind yet another corporatist, don’t let me get in your way.

    Time for party economic change.

    I will laugh though. You can too, and we will see how it shakes out and then do it again, and again.

    The Tea Party was quite effective. Keep that in mind.


    Oh, and by the way Andrew, it works this way:

    I do not think you are an economic lefty. Haven’t shown even a lick. Or, you are but see things as futile. That’s real, if so.

    You can tell me anything you want about that too. It’s all good.

    Seems to me, an clear explanation as to how we are going to improve it would settle things.

    Should the Nazi win?

    Remember this discussion. It’s gonna come up a lot.

    Beyond that, it is all advocacy and votes and I mean it. Hope it all stings a little. Did for me. Truth. Still working through some of it, if you might benefit from knowing that.

    Very ugly actually. Took a few months really thinking about what is worth what, and why.

    I urge you to do that.

    Also know this:

    There is no nice way to get this all done. I won’t hold grudges or judge votes, but I will play hard and discuss outcomes.

    Making it actually better, not just the promise of better, or the smell, but actually better is where my alignments lie. Ideas, not people, parties.

    Play it however you want to. I would expect nothing less.


    Missing: “I do not think you are an economic lefty. Haven’t shown even a lick. Or, you are but see things as futile. That’s real, if so.”

    I don’t care what you think I am or am not. But here’s a hint: I’m not an ideologue. I think labels are kind of silly – but if you had to pick one, I’d call myself a pragmatist and a realist, not a “lefty” or “centrist” or a “righty.” if you need to think in those terms, be my guest. It doesn’t register with me.


    I know you don’t. You aren’t a bad person either.

    No worries.

    Pragmatism looks very different from different socioeconomic perspectives.

    The same goes for realism.

    A great many people see that as, “yeah, fuck the poors!”

    Don’t blame them, and frankly, that hit home with me, so I am joining them.

    Sanders rally in LA. Overflow, outside crowd. Ahem, YUGE!

    Mid terms. Unreal. Current party leaders, DCCC, and friends can’t pay people for that.

    Bet your ass I’m in. My kind of politics.

    On the rise. Been waiting and never really knew.


    You write as if you’re in the depths of serious mania.


    No, I write as one who does not believe in the current, failed party economic strategy and vision. I used to. Hard. But it just doesn’t work.

    And I am looking to support anyone about changing that state of affairs and tell others why it makes sense. That is what I thought I was doing before too.

    See, it has been a very long time since we’ve actually seen a labor movement take shape it’s almost foreign. Spoke with hundreds of people from all walks of life. One percenters all the way down to the fucked up guy on the street.

    Did this once before on religion. Got me somewhere good, real. Economically, that is happening and it needs to. I do not want to live and advocate for lies. Never have and everyone here knows that cold.

    We need one (big labor movement) too. Yesterday.

    If I were to hazard a guess, the big disconnect is related to my shift to a more ideas type focus, as well as one that includes no judgement for votes. That does mean directly criticizing the party leadership. They are not performing economically.

    Different sort of advocacy. One I believe is necessary. New, to us in these times anyway, politics are on the rise. Good!

    I don’t like what I see. Flat out. I don’t believe what we have been doing, in terms of party politics, actually works. More people are worse off than not.

    The data isn’t there to suggest otherwise. At some point, the idea of incremental change being the good thing it’s talked up to be does require there be a net good associated with all that.

    Again, the data simply is not there.

    Just like with health care, data counts.

    Lacking any, I must conclude the Dem economic vision, while not as brutal as the GOP one is, still is a net regression. The data on that is clear.

    Time for change man.

    The old guard is going to age out, and a new one will form. Now is the time.

    And a lot of what drives that centers on the trends. Not only has it gotten worse for most people, but many of the changes make the works a very different place whencompared to the one we came of age in. Those multipliers scare the fuck right out of me. Them too.

    Edit: Of all the conversations, the younger voters aging in to solid voters right now are the most moving. There is so much that was true for us, not for them.

    Got kids, grand kids. And it’s a raw mess. Unacceptable.

    2015, 2016 were very powerful times. More is possible, and indicated than we think.

    Going for it is no crime. It’s an open democracy. Gonna happen no matter what any of us say about it.

    There are a fair number of things I will not make the mistake of repeating too.

    One of those is judging votes, fear, blame and shame style. Doing that is a grave disservice to all of us.

    Makes the discussion about that, not the ideas and it’s the ideas that matter more.

    As shocked as you may be, know I am at times too.

    So what? Game on.

    As always, real, frank conversation helps. Nothing has changed in that front.


    That, and I absolutely hate Di-fi. Always have.


    One of my big problems with the so-called “reformers” is that they seem completely ignorant of the past – as if they are the first ones ever to have these ideas of changing things. Some in the past have succeeded; many have failed. Why? Do they think the past reformers who failed just weren’t as committed or as smart as they are?

    What will you do differently than they did? What mistakes will you avoid? You know the expression: doing something exactly the same way and expecting a different result is insanity.


    There is what I will do, and there is what I see happening.

    Two different things.

    For me, I’m going to support and do meaningful activism to help grow the labor movement rising right now. It’s a very solid cause, one I believe in deeply.

    Always have. That’s not changed much at all.

    So far, there are a few efforts on the rise, no different from various social issue movements we’ve seen in the past, and have seen be successful.

    One of the primary attributes of success is personification and normalization. It must be possible and OK to have a career in progressive politics. Secondly, it must be OK and possible to share economic experiences to a much greater degree than currently seen and often accepted.

    “blame them” and “blame yourself” are unacceptable. They are as wrong and harmful as “gay is a choice” was, and is, sadly.

    On that note, economic failure to perform does put our social progress at risk. Big time. Regressions are definitely on the table. Shouldn’t be, but are. To me, seeing that only adds to the idea of reform.

    Without better economic politics, we are very likely to escalate all of this into a dark, authoritarian, dangerous time. May happen anyway. Nobody knows.

    Another thing I’m doing is dedicating some time to activism. In the past, I’ve been opportunistic. Right now, given the higher level of overall difficulty, a percentage of time makes a lot of sense, and I’ve met so damn many great people!

    Not judging votes is important too. Really important. Truth is, doing that closes more doors than it opens, and on the economic fronts, that majority out there is largely independent, trends young, and is largely left, some extreme, most reasonable, and a nice slice is what I would call curious right.

    Conversations matter. I’ve had a ton of them. There has been some impact. Good. More needed. Can’t have those by closing doors straight away. This is the primary driver behind rejecting fear, blame and shame as productive. They aren’t, unless one believes the status quo is optimal somehow, or the only option somehow.

    Some people do believe exactly that too. What I’ve learned about that scenario is they won’t step out, but will toss in should it look favorable, or moderate risk to do so. I’ll take it. I’m in the moderate risk camp, myself. Will cast protective or defensive vote if forced, but definitely support primary challengers.

    Movement wise, a few things are bubbling up:

    One is largely ignoring big money. That’s pretty damn important and is widely seen as a root cause for lack of party performance economically. There are times when Democrats are labor hostile, for example. That shouldn’t be happening, and money drives an awful lot of that.

    Another is focusing on new media, machinery that can stand on it’s own, apart from the stuff we are used to today. That’s a fine idea, and one I’m excited to see take shape.

    A big one centers on a few basic, reasonable, just ideas. The slogans we see a lot are:

    Economic Justice
    Environmental Justice
    Social Justice
    People before Profits
    Health care as a right
    Living wages


    From a movement perspective, what I am seeing is people believe in one or more of those things, and they are willing to work with most anyone also about those things, but not to a point of blocking, or marginalizing those things.

    “Supports health care as a right” is Lucy and the Football politicking. As Franken would put it, a weasel.

    “I will fight to make health care a right for every American” is a much stronger, and somewhat different statement.

    The difference can be boiled down to “what I think I might be able to sell” as opposed to “what I think I can help make happen.” The former is somewhat indirect, and clearly not a primary consideration, the latter is a statement of more direct representation. But all that is just my observation. There is a lot going on.

    The biggest thing, money aside, is a people to people focus. In pro terms, “ground game” work. It’s hard to deal with the money, and harder still when we’ve got most mainstream media, owned by a few big companies, openly toxic to meaningful economic change.

    Can’t tell them what to do, so the next best thing is to get a competing vision out there and take it right to the people old school.

    Will it be a success?

    Here’s what I Know:

    Doing what we are, as a party right now, isn’t the answer. Been more than a few cycles now, and the best I’ve seen managed is to move the problems around some, very tepid gains for ordinary people at best, often offset with ugly catches of various kinds. It’s not really moving the needle.

    The fucking GOP isn’t any help, nor will it be. Easy peasy.

    Tea Party was mentioned!

    Yeah, with a twist. We all know the Tea Party was some grassroots activity, but was rapidly escalated in to a thing. There was, and remains significant money behind those people.

    But, the model was very effective. Take enough seats to deny things, and that earns a place at the policy table.

    Progressives seek the same thing, but aren’t going to take the money, and can’t really, because conflict of interest.

    No way will big money fund the kind of change needed. It’s gonna cost them, and they don’t see returns, nor should they in the shorter term. Flat out, more is needed to fund a more equitable society. Way too many people aren’t able to get to a place that makes sense for them, and most of them don’t need too much.

    However, a reasonable caucus, or bloc with teeth, unlike the current progressive caucus, which isn’t bad, just hobbled by the same money everyone is, could be very effective in taking the discussion to a more labor aligned place.

    That’s what I can tell you I see right now. As it grows, there will be more to say, both good and bad.

    But a whole lot of us are chasing some good ideas and momentum we’ve not seen in a very long time, if ever.


    Blah blah blah. Straight up mania. You used to bring some good points but lately you are off your rocker.


    And that leaves, “good as it gets” type arguments, let’s say the pragmatic sort.

    Here’s the thing:

    Maybe! I’m definitely open to that idea. It may be real.

    But, this also needs a solid go too. Let’s say that idea must be tested, because “good as it gets” isn’t all that attractive to most Americans, and the numbers appear to be growing, and have grown fairly consistently.

    But, that’s just me. Truth is, voters all have agency, politics.

    If a sizable number of us simply won’t hold to that, then it’s either gonna get ugly, or more of us reconsider, or something new happens too.

    Say we want to call that spoilers. OK, so then what if they just spoil and keep it up?

    We all end up in an ugly place, most likely. Not a good scenario there, is it?

    I don’t think it’s all that easy to resolve these dynamics personally. Given that ambiguity, I’m tossing in with the movement, politics, ideas best aligned with me, mine, and a majority of my peers.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 144 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.