The un-civil war in July was painful the first time, and you know what, it only gets worse each time we re-litigate it.
Democrats lost the election, so both sides of Biden-not Biden debate lost our chance for a Democratic president.
And now we are stuck with a fucking monster as the incoming President – who is choosing monsters for his cabinet.
It’s gonna take all of us to work against what’s coming. Together.
Can we please stop fighting the last war and start fighting the next one?
Who’s with me on this?
*No blaming Dems for the past, no re-litigating, no alternate realities, no random music links. Please.
The Audacity of Krope
Definite way to cool the flames is to start a dedicated post. What can go wrong?
Also, no, I don’t agree. Too many prominent elected Democrats showed a clear lack of both character and judgment. My commitment to blue no matter who is irrevocably broken.
WaterGirl
@The Audacity of Krope:
I guess you missed this part of the post?
You can talk about those things in a hundred other posts, but not this one. I even said please.
Fair Economist
Oh, I’m totally in. I’ve said multiple times when you’re fighting fascists (and we are) you have to work with all potential allies, even unsavory ones. On top of that, preferring a different excellent potential President doesn’t make anybody unsavory. Both Biden and Harris would have been great, and there was a reasonable case to go with either.
I think the fact that Biden and Harris obviously like each other should act as a guide.
JMG
Bravo, WaterGirl! Bravo! My sentiments exactly.
The Audacity of Krope
This post is provocative. That’s all.
I’ll keep the rest of this to where we already started the conversation.
Baud
Agreed. Which Dem should I fight? Any suggestions?
The Audacity of Krope
Hypothetically, could we have a discussion about the merits of anti-Muslim and age bigotry in a way that doesn’t explicitly mention Democrats but may allude to them?
WTFGhost
Here’s an idea: be like folks in relationship counseling, where you realize you are being deliberately needling of your partner – not your enemy – and stop, because, geez, why are you being deliberately cruel?
You hurt me, I hurt you, we realize the hurt loop just keeps the pain going, so we stop.
No last statement of positions. We heard you last time. And, you heard us last time. “Last statements” are the ultimate way of trying to keep the hurt burning.
Want to say something? “I wish Biden had kicked Trump’s ass,” but only if you were on the “replace,” side, and “Harris deserved the W!” if you were not. Does it hurt a bit? It *shouldn’t*. Seriously: why should it, especially now? So, if it still hurts, there’s a wound – a wound you must carefully treat, because ignoring it hasn’t caused it to go away. A wound can mean a grudge being nursed, or not dealing with the emotions tied up in the wound, either of which that cause them to hurt so much more than they should.
Ergo the test. If you can’t say “I wish Biden won,” when that would have been *glorious*, why can’t you celebrate that potential? If you can’t say “I wish Harris won,” why is that potential hard to celebrate?
Figure that out, you can stop the circular firing squad.
The Audacity of Krope
@WTFGhost: Problem is I genuinely wish Harris had won and she was even one of my preferred choices in 2020.
That doesn’t change anything for me. The issue goes so, so far beyond winning and losing. I think the whole discussion is crass.
ETA: Only decided to respond because I thought your comment actually constructive, if not necessarily helpful to my case. Just letting you know where I’m coming from.
A Ghost to Most
I no longer believe that we can talk our way out of this. YMMV.
Old Man Shadow
Pretty sure I’ve moved on… at least until primary season for my senator elect happens in six years… but I’m pretty sure I’ve moved on since I’m now pissed off at the Democrats for being all “WE HAVE TO STOP FASCISM!” in the election and now being all cordial and bullshit.
We need a leader or more than one of the fight to restore the Republic, not a conciliator.
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
@WaterGirl: It’s pointless to ask people to stop. It’s long gone beyond just venting. It was a uniquely weird situation that is unlikely to arise again, but somehow these people think raging in a infinite loop is productive. So, they won’t stop. At this point, I skim posts. I only take the time to read if it isn’t one of those. There is nothing of value to be gained by reading the same arguments over and over again for even more months.
trollhattan
“No fighting in the War Room” rule: deploy.
TBone
@Baud: I’m right here *waves hand
Omnes Omnibus
@A Ghost to Most: You never did.
TaMara
LOL, good luck with that.
There is a reason there are fewer and fewer FP posters, and some favorite commenters have gone away. Pleas for keeping respite posts as respite, for common courtesy and no respect for the work that actually goes into a front page post are all ignored, scoffed at (see comment #1), or, in my case, basically told to fuck off when asking for some kindness toward those who are fragile right now.
Fun times.
The Audacity of Krope
For future reference, this sort of thing might work better if the OP is something like “Shiny object! Please discuss only shiny object.”
Layer8Problem
“We shall double our efforts.”
I had to grit my teeth to say that; I’m a Star Trek person.
Baud
@TBone:
You’ve ruined everything!
WereBear
Don’t fight the last war. We’re in a new one.
Civil War II: Internet Boogaloo
The South is trying to rise again and it is as mean as ever.
jefft452
“Can we please stop fighting the last war and start fighting the next one?”
Killjoy
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
I’ll put on my Adam hat and add that if there was a psy-op designed to neutralize ground roots fundraising and organizing, it would look a lot like the repeated effort to insert this divisive issue into every conversation.
Baud
SiubhanDuinne
Thank you, WG. You’d be staggered (maybe you wouldn’t) at the numbers and names of commenters currently residing in the pie safe. I’ve got to the point where the SECOND somebody begins re-re-re-re-relitigating the events of July and what they meant in November, I just pie ‘em for a few days. There are times where threads look like fucking patisseries. So bloody sick of that non-productive topic.
eemom
Ah, saying please is nice, but totally the wrong approach. You need Cole to post that he will personally beat the (virtual) shit out of anybody who has this argument again.
Baud
@eemom: 👍
Chris
@Baud:
Holy shit.
WTFGhost
@The Audacity of Krope: *That* is the point. I can’t tell you what those issues are – but, if you were to re-fight the “replace/retain”, that would be a proxy for what really does matter.
My barely-a-game’s point isn’t to get you saying something nice, but to ask why it’s easy, or not, and where the pain point is, if you’re still snapping at others. (generic-you, not “you, TAoK”), because until you can speak to that, to yourself, at least, you won’t understand the emotions that well up and make you re-engage.
Look: People like to think they’re a lot more rational than they are, but, if you’ve just gotten chewed out, and someone then gives you grief, you might blow up at them, then apologize, and they’ll understand. Here, though, you have fights that aren’t “I’m sorry, my response was out of proportion BECAUSE I GOT CHEWED OUT!”
Here, the fights are because “I’m sorry, my response was out of proportion AND I MIGHT NOT EVEN BE ENTIRELY SURE WHY.”
The first scenario ends, because you identify the stressor, and acknowledge you over-reacted. The second continues.
Again: this is for relationship counseling – it’s all inward looking, so you can own your shit, and keep it under control. If enough people start doing this, the people who aren’t stick out more and more, and, eventually, it helps right the boat, if the boat can be righted.
If all people in a relationship are working to own their own shit and their relationship shit, then things can work out. If not, they will only work out while there’s smooth sailing ahead – you could break up over an ad about pina coladas.
Shalimar
@eemom: Can we have Cole not bother with the warning and just have a shit-beating thread each evening for everyone who deserves it?
Ohio Mom
Not only is it wrong to torment our fellow Juicers, this entire discussion is getting extremely boring.
What’s that AA expression, that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?
twbrandt
I read the FP posts, but don’t venture into the comments much anymore for the reasons TaMara lists at #16.
I used to enjoy this community. Not so much anymore.
Urza
@The Audacity of Krope: Its fine to not vote for those who clearly don’t know whats going on. But also need to get enough Dems in office to mean something even if its the bad ones. Manchin may have sucked but at least he got judges in. And wouldn’t have even that without him.
The Audacity of Krope
Well I say let them do their shitty shit, just over there. People need to learn that trying to save everyone through the Federal government isn’t going to happen. Now we’re buckled into a careening vehicle we can’t control.
We need to rediscover local power bases. Most of us here know that most policy that affects you is state and local. But elections are all about feelings on the President, even in midterms.
So we should participate in real efforts to devolve more autonomy to the states. Let the responsible states build and cooperate and the rest can grift their greedy hearts out until the see the consequences or find oblivion.
But there’s no reason why industrious, successful states should subsidize or yield decision making to these petty dictatorships.
NotMax
Jeeze Louise, how many times we hafta chew this same cabbage?
Phylllis
@SiubhanDuinne: Same here. Also, do some people have Google alerts for the blog wired into their brains or something? It’s like they can sniff out a new post is in the offing and be poised to be the first to comment with their bullshit before the thing even finishes becoming pixels.
Baud
Some positive red state news, via Blue sky
Progress happens even when we don’t see it.
hrprogressive
By and large, this place doesn’t seem like the place that wants to take any action, at least short of the fundraising that’s happened during election season.
Even then, people can’t even seem to agree on any basic truths about what needs to change, or be done.
The modern Democratic Party – the last 25 years or so – has failed the working class, with perhaps a few Obama-Era wins such as the ACA, which even then, was a corporate-friendly win, more or less.
When I keep saying “The Democratic Party needs to be completely rebuilt”, the only responses I ever seem to get are snide non-sequiturs.
I appear to be a good 20-25 years younger than the vast majority of the commentariat here, and I feel like that generational difference is a big, big part of why the country is where it is.
I keep coming here because I appreciate the news stories and such, but even then, I really wish Adam hadn’t been railroaded into only giving Ukraine updates when we desperately need to hear the hard truths about the position this country finds itself in.
And yeah, before you tell me “So why don’t you go do something?” Believe me, I have given it consideration. But I am not independently wealthy and cannot snap my fingers to make the things I want happen, happen.
A place like this could marshal resources to build up a more robust Party apparatus and/or hyper local races, and/or other sort of “What do we even do now?” Kinds of things.
But there genuinely isn’t even a basic agreement on that premise.
So.
I struggle to see how it happens if that’s the baseline.
The Audacity of Krope
@Urza: Really what this means is I’m no longer shunning third parties. I’m voting for my preferred candidate, no matter who.
And the practicalities will still have some weight, mind you, but “stands up for people in a weak position” will have a lot more weight than “likely to win.”
Layer8Problem
Well, pie still works. Bye-bye hard-truther.
kindness
But, but can’t we just all agree this is Boomer’s fault(s)? /s
comrade scotts agenda of rage
@A Ghost to Most:
Thunderdome?
TBone
@Baud: my dastardly plan has worked? Whaddyaknow!
comrade scotts agenda of rage
@eemom:
Only if he beats the (virtual) shit out of people using emojis and emoticons!
Joy in FL
@Baud: Thank you for this info. This Floridian did not know that.
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
@comrade scotts agenda of rage:
🤨
I rarely post emojis, but I could not resist.
lowtechcyclist
@The Audacity of Krope:
How would you like some pie?
TBone
@NotMax: blech!
The Audacity of Krope
I like the way you’re communicating this.
I suppose to me the pain point, and this is pretty consistent in pretty much any situation where I find myself engaging angrily, is that what I’m saying is actually being disregarded.
In this particular case, I’m making a moral argument and, without fail, getting responses about scorecards and gamesmanship.
Longtime commenters will know I get similarly titchy when confronted with the arguments of random internet leftists in lieu of my own.
WereBear
I’m checking with Indivisible about the Blue State plan to protect people and try to keep us from jumping the rails.
On BkueSky, I’m finding there’s a lot of people who don’t know pertinent details. Which I often get here, and share there. People need focus to get started, especially if they are new at it understanding a complex issue.
This is a big tent Democrat place. Which means it’s also a circus.
But circuses know how to pull together, and I’m proud of being even a small part of what goes on here.
Lobo
WG, I am with you on this. Here are some steps I am taking.
Not taking certain people and groups seriously, see PM Democrats, Evangelicals, Certain Media, etc. Not worth the time to argue. All I hear from them is Charlie Brown’s adult’s wah, wah, wah. I give them the whatever look.
Supporting and amplifying New Democrats like AOC
Being nice in small and big ways.
Taking care of those close to me and if I have the energy Trump people who no longer have a face.
Supporting the idea that Democrats are not for you or they, but for all of us, they, you, me everyone.
Supporting TPM’s request to call reps and see where they stand on SS and Medicare cuts proposed by Weirdo Creep Repubs
As a whole, where we can we should work to end gerrymandering and voter suppression. State initiatives to either ban gerrymandering or encourage proportional voting.
Does that help?
Geminid
@The Audacity of Krope: Speaking of third parties: I realized while following two close California House elections that one effect of their all-comer, “jungle” primary system is to marginalize third parties.
I’d seen a libertarian candidate affect Rep. Marcy Kaptur’s race in Northwest Ohio and a Green Party candidate possibly impact Republican Rep. Juan Ciscomani’s race in Arizona’s 6th CD. Democrat Janelle Bynum had an Independent and a Liberterian gather substantial votes in the Oregon 5th CD race.
All three candidatestes won with less than 49% of the vote, whereas the California winners neccesarily won with over 50% because no Independents or third party candidates advanced pfrom the jungle primaries.
I’m not saying this a good thing or a bad thing. It’s just a feature of the jungle primary systems that California and Washington state have adopted in this century that I had thought of before. I think Louisiana has a similar electoral system.
Gloria DryGarden
@WTFGhost: I like what you said. Useful angle. Introspection has such value. This election result is hitting people deeply, it’s a frightening loss. Where it hits me is my learned helplessness growing up with some narcissist bullies, who appeared outwardly as nice people. And many people are reacting from early hurts, and the echoes of other times when we experienced or witnessed people being treated badly. Layers and layers of it. This situation touches so many losses, grief and fear. Nothing special here, I’m sure nearly everyone has some of this
thinking about nursing grudges, I enjoyed your two scenarios, and I’m looking at other possibilities. Sometimes the needling continues, and one doesn’t feel safe. Or a relationship isn’t righted. Or there is contempt, and judgement and writing people off, shunning.
I tried to write something about all the internal hostility exchanges on here, but got told it’s just probably venting. So I said it “wrong”. Because here today people are saying something similar in different ways. It’s such a relief to see others are speaking up about the divisiveness that’s the opposite of working TOGETHER.
TBone
@WereBear: nicely done!
kindness
@hrprogressive: ”
??? Oh Really? You thinks you can sell that here in this space? Yea, no. The Democratic Party has done lots of wonderful things for Ma & Pa middle & lower class. It’s just that you can’t get the MSM to discuss those things. Instead they prefer to talk about how Democrats are in dis-array. Democrats don’t have a Fox News equivalent, and that hurts us every time. Don’t dare say that Democrats didn’t work for the common folk just because you never saw much about it in the media.
bbleh
Concur, with the proviso that there’s a material and useful difference between civil-war-fighting and distilling and sharing “lessons learned.”
One possibly helpful rule of thumb is, don’t say “x did bad thing y” (or worse, “you” did bad thing y) but rather “y seems to have been not-good, and maybe z would be better next time.”
We don’t want to be blind to the past, just not to allow it to consume us or take our focus off the future.
TBone
@Lobo: yes very much
Layer8Problem
In the spirit of gentle humor toward a probable editing glitch, is the post title one of those Marvel Comic Book Movie™ quotes? Or maybe you meant “A Duplicate Bridge”, like the ones the Army keeps in its back pocket for when the bad guys blow up the original bridge they want to use? Or did you mean Duplicate Bridge, which turns out to be an actual game?
Prescott Cactus
@eemom:
Auntie Watergirl is good enough for me. . . No sense waking up Grampa Cole
hotshoe
@Old Man Shadow:
“Restore the Republic”. Interesting that you phrase it that way. Sounds like the problem which Lincoln’s govt faced in the first/second year of the Civil War. In spite of seeing that the Rebels were within reasonable distance of capturing Washington DC, and in spite of general consensus at the time that the war was to keep the nation intact (rather than the specific question of emancipation of slaves) — the Union govt just could not get it together to take the fight to the South and restore the Republic.
I’m not saying anything against Lincoln; it’s against his fractious cabinet, the divided Senators of his own party, the namby-pamby generals … fighting amongst each other for status and future electability and newspaper inches … sound familiar?
I’ve been listening to Team of Rivals and it’s a bit scary how much the Republicans then resemble the Dems of today.
Except, we don’t have a Lincoln to take the lead against the traitors.
Layer8Problem
@kindness: That one’s been like IHateChristianity guy, whose nym I will not utter, but for the Democratic Party.
New Deal democrat
@hrprogressive:
How do you square this comment with Biden, who was probably the most working class friendly President since LBJ? I get that (and have written about) how much housing costs have hurt younger would-be buyers, but much if not most of that is on the Fed, not Biden.
Or how about Elizabeth Warren’s CFPB?
You need to have at least 50 worker-friendly Senators, plus a willingness to nuke the filibuster, to enact a really pro-worker agenda. Biden had 49. And as thanks for bailing out the Teamsters’ insolvent pension fund, their effing President went and endorsed Trump! Not exactly rewarding him, did they?
—-
on an off-topic, what do you think happened in VA-2? I saw where Harris won all of those counties, but Smasal still came up short. Where do you think the shortfall was?
Gloria DryGarden
@Lobo: exactly. Beautiful.
Old School
@hrprogressive:
I guess I see that as a project that would take decades and leave Republicans in control for the foreseeable future. Or do you see that as a quick project?
Your other goals sounds like you are describing “Run for Something” (which already exists, obviously.)
The Audacity of Krope
@Geminid: Even given a space where more electoral possibilities are theoretically possible, third parties don’t have the money or infrastructure of the big two.
Third parties have a lot of work to do and it starts not with big statewide elections, but smaller ones and even basic community service. If it will happen, it will take time.
The Green Party’s descent into anti-vax woo and Libertarians’ lack of actionable goals can’t be helping.
ETA: I tend to prefer a form of ranked choice. I don’t have a problem with jungle primaries per se, but it should be to set up a ranking in the general, not a 1v1.
TBone
Another old saw rule of thumb: we needn’t attend every argument we are invited to. Like throwing a war where no one shows up.
comrade scotts agenda of rage
@Geminid:
We see that here in Denver…and most people have grown to hate it mainly because candidates that emerge from the ‘jungle’, suck.
Okay, it’s designed so that candidates (nominally) from both parties (we’re technically non-partisan here but that’s nothing but nudgenudgewinkwink crapola) will always be the ones emerging from the jungle. It’s probably a coincidence that the last two electoral cycles have produced craptastic candidates out of the ‘jungle’ but it underscores what it’s goal actually is: keep things one-on-one.
Ranked choice comes up as an alternative and the big-monied interests in this state, led by our glibertarian, techbro governor, tried a ballot initiative that said “ranked-choice” but actually being a jungle primary on steroids, the steroids being money. It underscored how important they saw how the current system, with a seemingly minor tweak, would entrench money in the system like nobody’s bidness.
I see that the effort to kill AK’s ranked-choice system was so close, it’s going to a recount. To be honest, I don’t necessarily see forms of ranked-choice being “better” per se than the craptastic jungle primary system we have now but given the unhappiness most of us have who operate in that system, we’re willing to try something else and see what wierdness it creates.
The Audacity of Krope
Do it now. Republicans are in charge now? Who cares? Make elections count again.
WaterGirl
@WTFGhost:
I don’t understand why we’re not all able to say:
We can’t do a thing to change the past but we can have an impact on the future.
hotshoe
@Layer8Problem: I had to look that quote up. Good one!
WaterGirl
People left Daily Kos years ago over fights like this. Surely Balloon Juice peeps are smart enough not to want that result?
glc
Personally, I prefer to try to learn from history – not that it’s particularly easy to do so.
A cartoon, very popular lately I’ve noticed (probably sparked by the election but there are certainly a few hundred other things to which it applies at the moment):
https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/2358pj/this_was_outside_my_history_professors_office/#lightbox
Another Scott
Meanwhile, … GovExec.com:
(Emphasis added.)
The Biden administration keeps doing the work.
Eyes on the prizes.
Hang in there, everyone.
Best wishes,
Scott.
Omnes Omnibus
I do think that July exposed some genuine fault lines in our coalition. These fault lines can result in people seeing a different way forward. We do need to recognize that even if we aren’t able to resolve it.
WereBear
@Gloria DryGarden:
I certainly do. For days I couldn’t sleep because everything reminded me of great things I feared would be lost.
But now it reminds me of things to fight for. And that can make a difference.
Prescott Cactus
I believe you. The road to Cleveland is paved with consideration.
The Audacity of Krope
I thought this said “paved with construction.” I said to myself “obviously…”
schrodingers_cat
@Omnes Omnibus: STFU and follow my lead is the message from the frontpage of this blog
Gloria DryGarden
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony:
well said!
comrade scotts agenda of rage
@Another Scott:
That’s great, don’t get me wrong, but, the incoming (mal)administration could simply yank the union back to the table and and demand to renegotiate the agreement. And when the union says “up yours” and the administration does something anyway, the union then has to sue.
Ramaswamy said that this was done by “executive fiat” and can be undone the same way so just watch what they do.
The incoming admin will look at SSA’s declining staffing levels as a feature to be accelerated, hence, they’ll play hardball. Moreover, it’s not as if Federal Unions (the two main ones, I can’t speak for any of the blue-collar ones) typically have a lot of leverage. Okay, in this case the negotiated collective bargaining agreement runs thru 2029 but I have a feeling that these kkklowns coming in won’t give a crap, attempt to do what they want and put on the unions to punch back.
Again, good on Joe for doing this but I don’t expect it to last long.
lowtechcyclist
@kindness:
They certainly have, and if the Democratic Party hasn’t done more, it’s because of what David Anderson used to remind us of during and after the time the ACA was being negotiated in Congress. You need 218-51-5-1, and the times we’ve had all of those have been few and far between. And in the most recent instance (2021-2022), two of those 51 were Manchin and Sinema, and the time before that (2009-2010), we had a shitload of Blue Dogs. We’d officially have >250 D reps, and progressive legislation would squeak by on a 220-215 vote, with every bit of Pelosi’s skill needed to round up the last dozen votes of that 220. And the time before that was all the way back in 1993-1994, and that was the first time since 1980.
Steve LaBonne
@Omnes Omnibus: The Democratic Party is of necessity an extremely broad coalition of everyone who isn’t an insane reactionary. It’s a wonder it functions at all, let alone manages to compete against a disciplined parliamentary style insane reactionary party. The people shitting on it would not be happier in a multiparty parliamentary system because their just-right party voting for which gives them the warm fuzzies could only participate in government by making the same compromises with other parties in a majority coalition that have to be made within the Democratic Party. Not understanding this is simply a refusal to have an adult relationship to politics.
Layer8Problem
And I would like to keep this place moving. I like this crowd and don’t much like thinking I’ve driven people off. I don’t believe we’re going to know what really happened those few months ago until after January and people on the inside start talking. We’re big on working with tea leaves, Magic 8-Balls, “many people are saying” and “unnamed sources” journalism, and bush-league Kremlinology. We can do better toward each other. And we can still call out dumb takes and shoddy thinking. But yeah, maybe that particular subject needs at least a few months hiatus. Anything not to be Daily Kos, or worse LGM.
The Audacity of Krope
I’m willing to bring down the heat. I don’t mind disagreements. I disagree without being disagreeable as long as I’m engaged with honestly.
My broader issues here are Democrats need to address their own bigotries and, personally, people need to engage the argument presented to them rather than the argument they’d prefer to have.
WaterGirl
@bbleh: The thing is, some people are re-litigating a thing that we will likely never face again, ever.
So what lesson is to be learned there?
Four months have passed and a lifetime of stuff has happened since the middle of July – the house is on fire and people want to fight about which smoke alarm we should have bought and whose fault it is that we never installed one.
It’s mind-boggling.
WaterGirl
@Layer8Problem: The game.
zhena gogolia
@WaterGirl: How do you know we will never face it again?
Layer8Problem
@WaterGirl: Thank you. I had not even known that existed.
WereBear
i also appreciate the commenters who shared how were searching for community. Political, spiritual, or just sharing a beloved passion or hobby.
I wanted to find a like-minded group. I couldn’t imagine having a problem with Quakers. And indeed I do not. This summer I joined a local writing group, too, and their library is a great place to hang.
These little trips to places, where we all have the same things to talk about, really helps reset my head.
WaterGirl
@comrade scotts agenda of rage: Surely there would be a contract in place.
trollhattan
@Baud: “Florida solar panels, now with hurricane clips!” Sun, they got, use that sucker while it’s giving you skin cancer.
The Audacity of Krope
@WaterGirl: It did come up again, this very year.
Biden was vulnerable. Democrats didn’t stand up for him.
Palestinians were and are vulnerable. Democrats didn’t stand up for them.
University students were and are vulnerable. Democrats didn’t stand up for them.
Trans people were and are vulnerable, Democrats publicly debated whether supporting them was worth it.
I love you. You do good work here. But please get out of the particulars of a situation and consider principle for a moment.
Another Scott
@SiubhanDuinne: 👍
Cleek and is elves deserve a medal, parade, and a pension for their work on the pie filter. We really don’t know how good it is we have it here with it. Everyone should reacquaint themselves with it.
Best wishes,
Scott.
WTFGhost
Here’s another relationship counseling trick. You’re right, they shouldn’t all be so snide. They are being rude, and really, pointlessly cruel. Why not just *pie*, right?
(Um: transparency. I just told you where they were wrong to win your trust.)
But people in relationships get into patterns, and you might – not saying you *are*, but *other* people in *similar* situations have seen these patterns – you might be in one of those.
If I felt as you did (see, spotlight’s off “you”, for the demo), I might get to snapping out THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY MUST BE REBUILT!!! so I could get a prickly, but satisfying bit of “told you they’d be snide,” feeling. I’d rather have gotten a firm handshake, if not a warm hug, but a bit of “told you that’s what they’d do” will do in a pinch.
Transparency again: I *do* get this, because I’ve seen it in myself. And yes, it is irrational, and that’s what’s so hard for us to accept about it. “Why did I say the whole REBUILT line, I know it pisses off people for some reason I don’t understand?”
The day I realized that, sometimes, I, yes me, my own sorry self, had just done something deliberately mean, for no reason, just because it was the pattern I’d fallen into, well – ow. I’m not a mean person. But I’d *been* a mean person. Ergo: I had to work to be less mean.
I probably had had a darn good reason to be mean, mind you. But if you care about not being mean, you can’t let mean just happen by accident. I think that’s a tautology somehow.
WaterGirl
@zhena gogolia: you really think that we’re likely to have a situation again where people want to change horses 3 months before an election? Highly unlikely.
WereBear
@Steve LaBonne: I explain that parliamentary is arguments after the election, ours is before. 😁
geg6
@WTFGhost:
I had no problem with Harris and was perfectly happy to work to elect and vote for her. My problem with what happened in July is totally unrelated to her. My problem is with the Party, at all levels. For the first time in my almost fifty years of voting, I no longer trust my party. I’m still a Dem and will most certainly always will be, but I have no faith in our leaders. Zero. Zilch. And few have done anything in the aftermath of the election to try to give me any faith in them.
lowtechcyclist
@TBone:
That’s actually one of the reasons a bulletin board (remember those?) used to be my main Internet hangout. If you didn’t feel like discussing politics, there were a plethora of other threads going on at the same time. You want to discuss football or cooking instead? There’d be live threads about those going on simultaneously.
I think you could do that in blogworld if it weren’t for the tendency for there to often be just a single live thread, or maybe two or three at the most. If it were more the norm to keep a thread going for days if there was still plenty to say in that discussion, it would be easier (for me, at least) to not get drawn into the thread at the top of the blog that had turned into another shitshow. But when it’s either the shitshow conversation or no conversation at all, that’s a harder choice.
Layer8Problem
@Prescott Cactus: I have it on good authority from Buffy that Cleveland is a hotbed of demonic activity.
Another Scott
@Layer8Problem: (Good you didn’t mention him, because mentioning a banned commenter’s ‘nym throws your comment in the dungeon.)
Best wishes,
Scott.
comrade scotts agenda of rage
@WaterGirl:
There’s an agreement, now, in place. It specifically has a timeline that runs into 2029 before it expires.
But we all know Hair Furor, like any sociopathic real estate person, sees contracts/agreements as either a) something to be renegotiated anytime you feel it’s in your best interest to do that, or b) broken and let the other guy try to bring you around via the courts.
When one side doesn’t care about those pesky “norms”, this is the kind of thing to expect.
Let’s say on Day 2, they bring in the union reps involved with the SSA agreement and say “we’re abrogating this so start calling your lazy-ass people into the office”. The union says hell no and files suit. They then go thru the machinations of the federal system, the unions hoping to get a judge to file a stay on the Admin’s order, the Admin looking for one to uphold it.
All the while, morale plummets in SSA, people leave…MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
I’m really hoping some Feds here have more experience with this than I do.
Prescott Cactus
@The Audacity of Krope:
My spelling is bad, but not this time.
dnfree
I agree we shouldn’t “re-litigate” this, whether we’re referring to the overall reasons we lost this presidential election, or the timing of the switch, or what Biden should have done.
But also–how about giving a little grace to your fellow commenters here? None of us (as far as I know) had anything whatever to do with what transpired, and back in July our reactions were based on our individual perceptions of the situation. It doesn’t help to try to tar and feather those of us who disagreed with one position or the other. You have your opinion of how it was handled, I have mine, and neither of us has a time machine that will change a single thing.
To say in response that “My commitment to blue no matter who is irrevocably broken” seems counterproductive, kind of like the people who voted “red” in support of Palestinians.
Another Scott
@WereBear: [ levity ] But Nixon was a Quaker! [ /levity ]
I’m glad you’re posting much more frequently. I missed you when you were away.
Best wishes,
Scott.
Ksmiami
@A Ghost to Most: nope. Time for fighting and sabotage
Steve LaBonne
@WaterGirl: Someone is wrong on the Internet, dammit!
WereBear
@Another Scott: Aww, thanks. That was the first thing Mr WereBear asked me too!
My response: “Nixon was no Quaker.”
Any more than my SBC upbringing made me a MAGA.😎
The Audacity of Krope
Tell that to the Democrats who underbussed Palestinians and any American who was sympathetic toward them.
I stood for the Democrats this year, voted a straight D ballot as usual, despite several egregious bad choices.
Now that the result of those bad choices is manifest, time for accountability.
schrodingers_cat
@geg6: Cosigned. My trust in the Democratic party has been betrayed.
tam1MI
I’m not so sure about that. It’s not like Joe Biden was the first Dem president to have low approval ratings, and he won’t be the last.
Have you considered that many people are relitigating this because they don’t want it to become a precedent?
rb
@The Audacity of Krope:
As a sympathetic observer, I think the name calling and personalization of this undercuts your stance. Comes across like a moral judgment rather than an argument, and an indulgence rather than a necessity.
The Audacity of Krope
Or are considering the ramifications beyond Presidential races?
zhena gogolia
@tam1MI: Right.
But I’m afraid it is now a precedent.
We had the roaring rallies with Beyonce and Springsteen. They had a demented criminal who was fellating a microphone. But they kept their mouths shut, never criticized him, and went to the polls and fucking voted for him.
The Audacity of Krope
By now? Sure. The fact that this is a months’ old issue is relevant here. I was finding the same lack of honest engagement before I got pissed. One might even say that’s the reason.
rb
@The Audacity of Krope:
That’s progress then. Maybe take the next step to see it’s unproductive.
You want to vent? By all means. But own that that’s what you’re doing, instead of pounding yourself on the back for being the last honest man or whatever. It’s tired.
bbleh
@WaterGirl: yeah, not much point in distilling lessons about situations that will never recur.
But I think there are SOME useful lessons to be learned, both positive and negative. F’r example, there was a LOT of effort made to boost Dem turnout, and in some places it worked well and in some apparently our turnout actually FELL, which suggests either we missed something or we just didn’t manage to do enough. Can we do more of the good stuff? And which did not pan out, and why? I think answers would be useful, and no “blame” needs to be laid.
This was a VERY close election — again — and ain’t no reason to suppose next time necessarily will be less so. Optimizing GOTV should remain a focus.
Sister Golden Bear
If only a fraction of the energy spent fighting the last war could be used towards trying to stop Republicans from legislating us trans people out of existence….
schrodingers_cat
@zhena gogolia: The precedent has been set. Our primary votes were invalidated by the media, and the elected Ds who aided them. My trust in the party is broken.
The Audacity of Krope
See? You tell me not to be provocative, then this.
Perhaps you might consider this works both ways and that, no, I don’t consider myself the last honest man. I just view rooting out dishonesty as a priority.
See how on this very thread I thanked someone for engaging on this in a useful way.
It was said here it this incident is so unlikely and won’t happen again. I say it happened four times this very year with different targets each time. I wouldn’t have to be doing this, yet again, but for strawman arguments.
rb
@geg6:
Yeah, I feel this.
And yet, Harris is one of those leaders, no? That she handled this cluster with what seems like almost supernatural grace and professionalism is a thing too.
Now that the truly awful has come to pass, it seems to me there’s almost an eagerness to forget that in July it still might have been prevented, and that the situation was broken in a fundamental way.
Look at us now: POTUS is contemplating issuing blanket pardons to dozens of people, making them above punishment for literally any crimes they may have committed, and doing so with good reason.
I’m not saying abandonment of Biden was not a betrayal and did not make us look weak. I think it was and it did. But I also think it’s easier to say things like “you’ve got to stick with your guy” in normal times, that these times are not normal, that the stakes were and are existential. For people who thought our guy was looking like he was overmatched, it was imperative that a move be made. (That this panic was in agreement with a hostile press in love with the drama of the thing leaves a bad taste in the mouth, but that is irrelevant.)
Shorter: their job was to win, no more and no less. They failed. But it was correct to view everything else as subsidiary to that goal, including deference to the principle of dancing with who brung ya.
Martin
@tam1MI: Right. But my position before Biden dropped out stands – the way you solve this problem is you don’t turn the incumbent primary into a fait accompli. I appreciate that it’s a cost and it potentially beats up the candidates, but that’s got to be something we figure out. The solution to better democracy isn’t less democracy. If Democrats didn’t want Biden, there was a process by which to express that which was cut off, and Democrats instead invented a new, pretty damaging solution. I think had Biden won a properly competitive primary, Dems would have respected that process and rallied around him. But a lot didn’t want him and didn’t feel any particularly loyalty there. That’s on the party.
Martin
@schrodingers_cat: Most Dems didn’t bother to vote because there was no choice to be made. You can’t just gloss over that part.
schrodingers_cat
@Martin: He won a competitive primary. He had opponents who didn’t get any traction. You are rewriting history.
rb
@The Audacity of Krope:
I’m not trying to tell you that (sincerely), though I acknowledge that my preference would be for things to be a bit less personal. As to argument itself, it’s part of the point, no? To me, calls to simmer down are the purview of those running the place, and I try to follow their lead however imperfectly. How that goes is for each of us to determine for ourselves.
I am saying, though, that professing to want an honest conversation while preemptively calling everyone but yourself a liar (among other things) and styling yourself the only one who tells it straight is unpersuasive. It seems unproductive to your goal.
If it’s all ax grinding at this point, then have at it. There’s definitely enough to be angry about.
schrodingers_cat
@Sister Golden Bear: Joe Biden was not exciting enough for many people so those people decided to gamble away our lives (immigrants, trans people, other marginalized groups) for their excitment.
PJ
@Martin:
We had a competitive primary – any Democrat could have run for President along with Biden, but only one of note did. There is no shortage of ambition among Democratic politicians, so if they didn’t run, it’s either because they thought they couldn’t beat Biden, or that even if they could, the process would be so divisive that it would only help the Republicans in the end.
The “competitive” primary you are imagining is one where Biden doesn’t run. He ran against a crowded field in 2020 and won. If, for some insane reason, he said he wasn’t running this year, and then once everyone else had entered, decided to throw his hat in again, I bet he still would have won, for the same reasons that he won in 2020.
The Audacity of Krope
@Sister Golden Bear: I think the Democrats’ malleability on principle based on polls and media coverage is of great concern to the trans community; granted, that’s just my view as a cis gay man who is concerned about the malleability of Democrats based on polls and media coverage and how it will affect gay people.
Odie Hugh Manatee
We’ve got a few years to let this all soak in. I think spending some time in ‘reflection’ might be beneficial for us so that maybe next time we don’t take out a strong candidate just as we approach the finish line. I’m not doing shit about shit for some time. Nearly two thirds of our voters either stayed home or voted for Trump. The people have decided so let mayhem and destruction begin.
Protect those you can and fuck the rest of them, especially the Tonya’s.
tam1MI
I agree with you 99 percent here. If I read your post right, the area where we diverge is who we hold responsible for the non-competitive primary. I place the responsibility on the Dems who didn’t step up to challenge Biden, because there is no rule out there that says they couldn’t. And to approach your argument another way, I think of a Dem had challenged Biden in a primary and beaten him, I think that even the most ardent of Biden supporters would have accepted the outcome since it had been democratically arrived at.
TBone
@Another Scott: YAY!
The Audacity of Krope
But this is not at all what I did.
I’m calling a very particular group of people dishonest based on a pattern of conversations I’ve had with them. That’s not everyone. You aren’t demanding the same introspection out of these others that you are out of me.
And I called the argument they are making dishonest. If you persist on this line of thought without proper amendment to, not necessarily agree, but address what I’m saying; I may make the same declaration about this argument. But I dont necessarily mean that to say anything about a person as a whole.
Holding tight to one particular dishonest attitude, however sincerely felt, does not make someone wholly dishonest and more than one latent racist attitude makes someone wholly racist.
Balloon Juice has never been a place for the linguistically delicate. Most of us here can distinguish between a criticism of an argument and the person as a whole. They might just be stuck.
Now when they show a commitment to the attitudes being criticized, well, that may just be unreconcilable.
dnfree
@schrodingers_cat: IN MY OPINION (emphasis on my opinion), our primary votes (yours and mine both) were not “invalidated by the media, and the elected Ds who aided them”. Our primary votes were for the ticket. At the debate, I expected to see Biden hold his own and appear competent. That is not what happened. I was personally horrified by what I saw–your perception clearly was different. We’re allowed to have different perceptions of the impact of his performance. What I react to negatively is the implication that I as an observer was responding to “the media” or some other outside force was deceiving or misleading me.
If Biden had suddenly died at that point, or had an incapacitating stroke, the result would have been the same. July was too late to go running a quick primary.
It’s my opinion (again, opinion) that there was no way for Biden to recover at that point. Yes, Republican lies and exaggerations, and media concern focused more on his mental state than Trump’s, was unfair–but it’s where we were.
I respect your right to perceive the situation as having been unfair to Biden and a betrayal of him.
dnfree
@The Audacity of Krope:
I don’t know if I am in the group you consider “dishonest” or not, but I do not consider you dishonest. Nor do I consider most of the other people who have been involved in this conversation dishonest.
Martin
@schrodingers_cat: Oh the fuck we did. He had one absolute goddamn backbencher that nobody wanted and turnout was a quarter of what it was in 2020. The 2nd vote getter was ‘uncommitted’. A choice has to be a real choice. You can’t ask someone what they want for lunch and then give them a choice of a sandwich, a rotten banana, or nothing and then be shocked when they complain they were disappointed with their options.
Everyone knew that launching a challenge was a suicide mission with the party because Biden runs the party. Even with the limited field the party still opposed challengers getting on ballots because Biden runs the party (as is normal, I’m saying that’s part of the problem).
You are left with Dems that were clearly unhappy with no alternative (hence the strong uncommitted vote, low small dollar donations and very low volunteer staff right up to his dropping out), plus Dems that were unhappy with how Biden was ousted (understandable), plus Dems that were unhappy that Harris was just anointed into the position (also understandable). That’s a lot of unhappy people in the end.
But primaries have the effect, when you have people who respect the process, of validating the result. A lot of us didn’t have Biden as our preference in 2020, but when primary voters said he was the preference, most Dems said ‘okay, fair enough, I’m with him’. That should have gotten validated again this cycle because I bet if he’d have won, he wouldn’t have been able to be pushed out because a competitive primary would have cemented that he’s the rightful choice. For a lot of us the uncompetitive primary left me not particularly compelled to defend him. I wasn’t eager to push him out either because of all of the associated problems with doing so. Mostly I just shrugged because I saw this a self-inflicted problem – we were kind of fucked either way. The solution was a year behind us and we didn’t have a time machine.
dnfree
@Martin:
I think this is a good statement of the reasons different groups of Democrats were ambivalent. I think the focus on the necessity of winning the fall election led to people not wanting to rock the boat or antagonize other factions by holding a true primary election.
WaterGirl
@zhena gogolia: The end result in the election was not a good one. Why would people want to emulate the thing that ended with the election going badly for the good guys?
RevRick
@hrprogressive: I hear you saying that the Democratic Party needs to be completely rebuilt, but the voice inside my head keeps asking the question, “How?”
Implicit in your complaint is the notion that the Democratic Party is a solid entity, but that’s not what I see. I’m old enough to remember the time when party bosses like John Bailey(CT) and Mayor Daley(IL) ran their state parties with a tight fist. Where you seem to see a thing called the Democratic Party, I see weakness and fragmentation. FDR won the nomination in 1932 by convincing a few key party bosses that he was their guy, and rewarded John Nance Garner with the VP nod for delivering the Texas and several western delegations. Do you want a return to those days?
The Democratic Party has been remade. Twice in the late 1960s. The first was the passage of the Civil Rights Act, which guaranteed that Southern whites would abandon the Party, and the second was the McGovern Commission that created our present system of primaries to select a candidate. And the latter meant party bosses were no longer in charge, but rather candidates self-nominated themselves and voters chose between the field of self nominees. And the ones that the voters choose are the ones who set the agenda for the party.
Oh, we recently had a third reconstruction of the party during the Obama Presidency when our blue dogs and yellow dogs were obliterated in the elections of 2010 and 2014. We used to have Senators in Arkansas and Louisiana and the Dakotas, but not anymore.
Democrats face a real structural disadvantage in the Senate where our ceiling is maybe 52, but we’ll be lucky to hit 49. And we face real challenges with the general public where people who self identify as conservative are considerably more than those who identify as liberal, so much so, that we have to rack up two to one majorities with those who identify as moderate to win.
I get your frustration with what is and that you want far more. I feel that too. I want that too. But I don’t think the problem lies with the Democratic Party, but with the very structure of our government.
Martin
@tam1MI: If there was no retribution from the party for stepping up, I’d agree with you. But there was. Much of the problem is that the party doesn’t work for us, the party works for Biden. He’s the leader. And the party at every turn didn’t help fellow Dems get on the ballot, it always fought them. The party wasn’t about to share resources either.
And that’s the fundamental problem. Once you have an incumbent, there is no material difference between the party running the election and the incumbent who is running in the election. It’s a massive conflict of interest because of how it’s set up (RNC is no different). So any serious challenger isn’t competing against Biden with the DNC as a neutral arbiter but against Biden and the DNC, while the DNC runs the election.
It is a ludicrous arrangement and about as democratic as Russian elections.
I’m amenable to practical arguments about this (there are loads), but anyone defending it as ‘fair’ for challengers is simply dishonest.
Nelson
@Lobo: Forgive my ignorance; what’s a PM Democrat?
The Audacity of Krope
@dnfree: No, I can’t point to any specific problem with you at all. No clear instances of me saying X and you replying to Y, for example.
There are only two people I deemed irretrievably dishonest, both are in my pie filter now with a handful of popup trolls.
WaterGirl
@Nelson: I don’t know, either.
Baud
@WaterGirl:
Our goal of speaking more plainly is going swimmingly!
Subsole
@Baud:
“Turn thee, Baudvolio, and look upon thy death-
Wh-…
…
Where are your pants?!!
Good Lord is…is that an EYEPATCH?!?!”
Subsole
@WTFGhost:
This is solid.
glc
@Nelson: “Pick-me” I assume. I only know that because it was mentioned here lately. (And it will most likely be forgotten in short order.)
Subsole
@WTFGhost:
This…actually hit me hard.
I have been in…a bad place, the last few weeks. Let’s just leave it there.
Out of all my rumination came a realization:
I do not want the Liberals’ Resistance.
I do not want the Left’s Revolution.
I definitely do not want the Pukes’ Return to Tradition.
I want, more than anything, Responsibility.
A lot of my trauma these days stems from the fact that Democrats are forced to be the adults, and absolutely brutalized for it by everyone who relies on us. Like a battered wife whose children resent her for holding the family together, while demanding she hold the family together, because the security of that family gives them license, leisure and luxury to abuse her heart.
So the tools you are laying out, where people own their shit and stop letting it poison them…it speaks to me.
Emily B.
Someday we’ll know more—maybe not the whole truth, but more—about what happened last summer. Former White House/Capitol Hill/Dem establishment sources will eventually spill the tea about how Biden had been a vegetable since Hunter was convicted OR they will shine a light on the far-reaching plot by the MSM/Wall Street/Wall Street donors to get rid of Biden because he was getting too progressive (those tax cuts expire in 2025, you know). OR something else entirely. Until then, I don’t care to re-litigate all the post-debate agony. I’m with you, WG. We’re in a real fight now, and it’s not the fight we would have chosen, but I think there are grounds for hope if we are thoughtful, strategic, and united.
hitchhiker
I am.
The issue is characterizing the next battle. This moment, imho, is about nothing but the strength of our communication networks. I watched the rise of Limbaugh in the mid-90s. I watched the advent of Fox News. People’s minds have been marinating in lies and nonsense for decades now.
When the Post and the LA Times both refused to endorse a candidate, I should have known what was coming. I didn’t see it because I’m not part of the giant vat of toxic noise we call right win media.
Anyway, that’s what I want to talk about. The next battle is about building out something that can counter three decades of 24/7 propaganda. What exactly does that look like?
schrodingers_cat
@dnfree: It was a betrayal of the voters who voted in the primary. And it made the Democrats look weak and unprincipled. And we paid for it in November.
Gvg
Martin
@dnfree: Yeah, I agree. And there are real issues with having such a contest, but to a party of people who really believe in democracy, performing that process can be a strengthening exercise, particularly if everyone participating keeps their eyes on the ultimate prize of winning in November and not in shitting on each other. But that’s no different than the risk in an open primary, no?
And I think part of the problem is that we assume there is an incumbency advantage, and I’m not sure that’s true in the moment. It’s definitely not true globally. The last two elections didn’t have one. The one before that didn’t have a party incumbency advantage. I think Dems should consider that incumbency is a disadvantage now.
Sister Golden Bear
@schrodingers_cat: As my comment said… let’s use our energy towards actually protecting trans people rather than religating things
You wanna focus on refighting things, fine. But using my comment to do so entirely misses my point and I don’t appreciate being used as your ammo.
WaterGirl
@Baud: You made me laugh!
*on a very much no laughs kid of day.
WaterGirl
@WTFGhost: I passed your test. I hope everyone takes it.
lurker
everyone is missing the point … we needed to let the triple entente win – then we avoid postwar germany, the Anschluss, Vichy France, that problem with the French colony in Vietnam, some side trip to Korea before then, the Middle East would have been solved. and we would not have gotten the inflation from postwar Germany to keep circulating until it showed up as inflation in the 2020s in the US.
the path can be a little hard to follow, it went out past Neptune at some point, but if you look at it the right way, you can tell that we have been getting this wrong for about a hundred years …
; – )
schrodingers_cat
@Sister Golden Bear: I am sorry. The comment is out of the edit window otherwise I would have deleted it.
A successful Democratic incumbent President was pushed out by the media and some bigwigs including NP. They are going to try this again. That is not relitigating the past but being prepared for the future. I am not sanguine about the future either my own or this country’s.
Anyway now that I now how you feel I won’t use your comment again to make this point
Muting myself on this thread now.
frosty
@WaterGirl: I toggled the pie. Jesus Tap-Dancing Christ*, first comment from that idiot did just what you told us all to stop doing. I for one am sick of all the re-litigation etc. I’m trying to train myself not to read anything further than “Democrats should …” in any comment, post, op-ed, or news story. With mixed success.
Keep trying WG!
* h/t Ms Cracker
The Audacity of Krope
@frosty: FOH. If you don’t want something discussed on a thread, you don’t make a whole new thread where you yourself only discuss the thing you’re trying to to rule out of discussion.
This whole thread was ill-conceived.
WaterGirl
@The Audacity of Krope: Sorry, but that’s bullshit.
I offered up a thread saying why I think it’s time to move on, and I SPECIFICALLY ASKED PEOPLE NOT TO RE-LITIGATE in this thread.
Do you think people are too careless to read the post? That happens all the time, so I reminded them in comment #2 when I replied to you.
So let’s rule that excuse out.
So you and anyone else who chose to beat the drum of relitigation in this thread instead of participating in the conversation as I framed it, basically flipped me off and said FUCK YOU.
Don’t think I didn’t notice.
It takes a lot of balls to blame some people’s disregard on me.
Kathleen
@Subsole: I know the thread is dead but I had to thank you for expressing my feelings and frustration in a way I cannot articulate. I said in 2016 that Hillary didn’t use the right “tone” when she asked the country how its day went so America threw the dinner plate at her.
This is the last place where I would express my thoughts about why the real problem with the Democratic Party is not the Democratic Party (as if the world were waiting with bated breath for my opinions anyway LOL!)
The Audacity of Krope
@WaterGirl: This was provocative and it’s astounding that you cant see that.It’s a big blaring red sign saying “I, Watergirl, get the last word on this.”
I read your post in full. What you basically did is tell all of us not to think of a pink elephant. You ought to know what the end result will be.
Now, if the post were “X happened, please discuss only X,” this certainly wouldn’t have been my response.
And this isn’t even about relitigation. What too many people don’t seem to be comprehending is the Democrats made clear to a lot of people they’re unreliable allies.
Look how eager people here and certain pols were to throw unions under the bus or black or Latino men or unions or trans people.
This is about learning lessons and you are actively objecting to that. You have twice in this thread actively denied there is a lesson to be learned and haven’t responded to any of the people, not just me, that pointed out there are implications beyond just this race.
hotshoe
@The Audacity of Krope: hoo boy comment 157 takes some kind of cake.
Dunno what kind, but def not the winning-best-in-show kind.
hotshoe
@The Audacity of Krope:
No it’s not, you stupid mean arse.
What your goddamn comments show here is that you can’t handle any post — out of a half dozen posts available on Balloon Juice on any given day, much less out of an infinity of posts available on the internet as always — where you are asked politely please to not share your opinion about “pink elephants”. Any other of your opinions would be fair here, just not the specific “pink elephant” ones … but you’re too mean to be quiet for one moment.
Your ego is way too big for your heart.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
WaterGirl
@The Audacity of Krope:
You go to war with the allies you have, not the perfect allies that don’t exist.
Point me to the allies that are so much better than the imperfect allies in the imperfect Democratic party.
I’m waiting.
The Audacity of Krope
@WaterGirl: Well, aside from maybe two people, Democrats here have validated my belief that Democrats aren’t worth the consistent support. Some individuals among them, maybe.
But there is zero self-examination among supporters of the dumbest, cruelest thing Democrats have done in my adult life. Those same people are mostly lashing out with bigotry toward other groups or doubling down on the ageism.
You know who are good allies who I can trust? No. And you won’t. Because I only count my personal relationships among those now.
KSinMA
Thank you, WG. You appear to be ahead of your time. I do hope you’ll have more company once TFG takes office.
dnfree
@schrodingers_cat: You were a primary voter and you feel betrayed. You do not speak for all primary voters, although I wonder if some of the voters who stayed home saw it your way. I was also a primary voter, and when I saw the debate I felt betrayed by Biden’s ego and the failure of those closest to him to see reality.
We do not know if Biden would have won in November. Personally I don’t think so.
RevRick
@The Audacity of Krope: In your opening salvo you asserted that too many Democrats showed a lack of character and judgment when they told President Biden that he needed to drop out of the race.
Well, I flatly dispute that assertion. I believe that quite the contrary they exhibited the epitome of character and judgment.
They told President Biden a hard truth: that he was a sinking ship who would drag many others down with him.
Do you seriously think that was easy?
They weren’t making any moral judgment about President Biden. They were just telling him the hard nosed political reality that he could not win reelection and he risked having all the good he accomplished thrown on the trash heap.
Was it fair that he got squeezed by a nasty bout of inflation? No. Was it fair that perceptions about his age and capabilities were distorted? No. But the final straw was his disastrous performance in his debate with Trump. There was no recovery from that.
Politics is a sharp-elbowed sport and sometimes parties have to make sharp-elbowed decisions against one of their own. It’s not like this has never happened before. The fact is many Presidents and Vice Presidents have been given the heave-ho: Tyler, Fillmore, Pierce, Buchanan, Johnson, Hayes, Arthur. Most recently, Truman in 52, Johnson in 68, and Nixon in 74. Some deserved it, but all because they had become political liabilities.
I am part of an institution— the Church — that has the sad record of cowardice in this regard, letting bleeding wounds in the system bleed far too long, because telling someone they had to go wasn’t nice. Sometimes it’s pastors, sometimes it’s parishioners, and the ugly reality is that it will cost no matter what, but someone has got to step in and say, “we can’t afford this bleeding anymore.” And believe me, that takes guts.
You’re entitled to your opinion, but don’t bully the rest of us by claiming that you, and you alone, have the high moral ground.
schrodingers_cat
@dnfree: Biden won the primaries, and he won the nomination. It is not just my opinion that’s what happened. Changing the nominee 3 months before the election made Dems look feckless and we lost the election.
Whether Biden could have won is something we will never know. But we do know that his replacement lost.
The Audacity of Krope
@RevRick: Well, we can disagree about who’s telling whom hard truths, but this was a thoughtful response and I do appreciate that.
Quinerly
@dnfree: you nailed my feelings exactly. I, too, feel betrayed by Biden and his ego. I do NOT feel betrayed by MY party.
Didn’t come here to add fuel to this fire. I am just sick of 2-3 commenters here who start this Biden would have won crap (or some variation of it) on every thread. It’s obnoxious and toxic. I am beginning to wonder how they function in their day to day lives, face to face with people in the real world.
Quinerly
@WaterGirl:
Thank you.
The Audacity of Krope
And, again, that is not at all what I’m asserting. But I have no problem assigning individuals who cling tight to strawmen rather than engage the argument presented them the moral low ground.
Am I wrong to worry that a party that only decided gay people are worth protecting about ten years ago and so swayable by media narratives and opinion polls will stick by us if opinion shifts? What about the trans folk among us, at imminent risk right now?
Democrats conceded the election in July as far as I’m concerned to appease the money masters. This is not a party worthy of unflinching support or the designation of our last bulwark against the drooling hordes.
A big part of the problem is even some Democrats are too sympathetic to the views of the droolers.
ETA: I’ll repeat again that Biden isn’t the only one who got underbussed this year for insufficient popular support; see also Palestinians, University students, trans folk, police reform enthusiasts.
And I don’t give two flying fucks who had a better chance of winning.
RevRick
@schrodingers_cat: We also know that before he exited the race his polling was cratering and Democratic enthusiasm was only in the mid 50s, and that soared after Harris replaced him.
schrodingers_cat
@RevRick: The only poll that matters is the one on the election day. The gamble of expediency didn’t pay off.
Fake Irishman
@WaterGirl:
Hey, I dropped you an email a few days ago with a few ideas. Did you get a chance to read it? No rush….
Quinerly
@schrodingers_cat:
It’s really ashame that you don’t have a job as a highly paid campaign consultant instead of spending hrs and hrs a day on a little known blog.
WTFGhost
@WaterGirl: Well… yeah.
“Why can’t *they* just be ready to move on, and deal with the impending shitstorm?” is a question – not necessarily yours, but kinda-like it, I think
My answer is:
It’s possible not to even *know* why you – you, the person reading this – might rise to bait on x_topic.
You might not like the reason why you do it, so you’re in a bit of denial… maybe.
Or, you think if you *don’t* do it, you’ve abandoned someone.
Or you think if you don’t do it, that empty spot inside you is going to keep growing. Or, if you don’t, the big, burning, blazing, ball of whatever’s-hotter’n-plasma-as-in-fusion, ball of *PAIN*, will consume you, so, you re-engage.
Or… well, you know the answer, if you can ask yourself the right questions. And this really helps absorb ordinary emotional shocks. Some people find emotional self-care easy; others, hard, but, it is a think that can be learned. One warning: anyone drained of resources, or under great stress, can revert to less mature behaviors
You might need a week’s vacation, to alleviate stress, so you stop re-engaging. Or you might need to go see your doc, and find out why you’re getting puffy, and find they can put in a stent to stave off a heart attack. Or…
It’s dangerous to say why for anyone else. Like, I don’t care if the Republicans “love cruelty”. i just care about *stopping* their cruelty. If it leads to tears-of-missed-cruelty, that’s a bonus, but the job is stop the cruelty. That is my humble philosophy.
(Actually, since it’s my philosophy, it’s not a bit humble, it secretly thinks it’s the best in the entire multiverse, and, well, who else’s could be that perfect – for *me*?)
WTFGhost
@WaterGirl: Um. Some posters have said this too, but I want to mention an idea, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy.
The commentors are, what they are – that’s the “acceptance.” It’s like, accepting one’s agoraphobia is, what it is. (que sera sera…)
Okay, now, you don’t want people to leave, but that’s in flux. If you speak of your fear, you might help manifest it, i.e., I could say “stop blaming me for people leaving! I wasn’t even here!” because I’m feeling singled out. Which is ridiculous – to a person who isn’t carrying around unexplored pains. But if I’m depressed, or feel like the perpetual outcast, I might feel scolded.
So, “please don’t talk about it” isn’t exactly a *bad* idea. Certainly, don’t talk to much, and OMG will we have something new to scream about next week, ha, uh, haha, uh… HOHOHO?
What’s the commitment? Well – given some folks are sore and don’t know what to do, and emotions are rubbed raw, what can *you* do, to be the best poster/pager/etc. you *want* to be, for your own reasons. Commit to a good “life”, with as much detachment as you can, over something you can’t control directly.
Like, maybe don’t try to be “polite”, but try to be *kind*. Maybe if someone pulls out a pet peeve, say “why does that bug you so much?” if you don’t already know, rather than making a witty, but less-than-kind, remark.
Maybe, realize you just don’t have to respond.
Maybe, realize “I hated him, when he did this to me; now I just did it to him” and realize, yeah, if you’re polite, you still have to apologize. Pie the poster if you’re afraid of a gloat.
Maybe realize a snarky answer to “rebuild the Democratic Party,” is far less fascinating than a quick bull session on *how* to rebuild the Democratic Party, and do we agree on the pillars, etc., whatever.
Maybe have some bull session threads? No “that’s stupid hyuk hyuk” posts – valid, useful, criticism (“Mars has no magnetosphere”), and other bull session commentary.
Um… there *is* a reason the initials are “bs” but it’s supposed to demand good faith. You don’t just barf up any old word salad you like; this is not the post 1/202/2025 Presidential podium. If you’re picking nits with an idea, you are trying to make it succeed, or, you’re sure you’re about to show how it fails, you’re just not sure *how*, yet.
That’s a bull session.
WTFGhost
@Subsole: Thank you.
Quinerly
@WTFGhost:
Interesting.
I guess my question is “do these people behave this way in their day to day lives?”
If so, then they need to get some help because clearly they aren’t functioning well. They possibly are alienating friends and loved ones with this behavior. That’s sad. Obviously, they can’t control themselves.
Now, if they are going on with their day to day lives WITHOUT randomly blurting out their OPINIONS on the election and OPINIONS on how they perceive Biden was treated in July and are only polluting every “conversation” here with their opinions and grievances, I submit they are doing it to be obnoxious and overbearing. Trollish. Unproductive. Childish. And Weird.
WaterGirl
@Fake Irishman: Yes, I did see that, and was able to skim it before I marked it as unread and in green so it would stand out as soon as I caught up on work enough to go back to it.
I appreciate your sending the message. :-)
WTFGhost
@Quinerly: Geez.
Most people, most of the time, in most situations, really don’t need this level of introspection, so, they’ve never learned it. Or, the places where they want a tool like this is isolated to a small part of their life, so they’re not really missing anything vital. They’d be happier, repair a few relationships, yadda yadda, but on the whole, might not have *that* different of a life.
For some people, emotions are like neon signs, and you ask, “how can you not notice how badly your orange is arcing?”
To other people, emotions are like those crayon colorings, covered in black crayon, you have a stylus, you can scrape off most, but not all, of the black crayon, so “it’s blue and green, or… well, maybe some yellow, too!”
And oftentimes, these two types of people can’t understand each other, because they can’t believe what they’re hearing about introspection.
“Just look for the neon, STUPID!!!”
“keep scraping at a section, eventually, you’ll get through.”
That’s what your response made me think of. Some people might find it easier than others, or, they might not have too many really *complicated* emotions, or, those complicated emotional situations aren’t *too* crippling, or maybe they’re all “que sera sera”. (I mean the literal translation – not necessarily the song.)
EveryDayIHaveTheBlues
Kamala lost despite the polls showing her with a slight edge, despite the deluge of money after she entered the race, despite the uptick in registration, despite the focus on Dobbs, despite her outreach to the youts.
At the point Biden dropped out, none of those five factors (polls, money, registration, focus on reproductive rights, young voter emthusiasm) were at Kamala’s level.
It seems clear that the anti-incumbent trend was strong this year. To her credit, Kamala managed to jui-jitsu Trump into being portrayed as the incumbent (remember him whining about this?). Again, Biden wouldn’t have been able to do that as effectively (if at all).
Logically then, what conclusion does one draw about Biden’s chances vs hers?
Quinerly
@WTFGhost:
Dipped back in. Appreciate your thoughtful comments.
Will leave it at that.
Hope you have a great weekend. Take care.
Quinerly
@EveryDayIHaveTheBlues:
Always smile when I see your nym. Would love to see it more often.
Have a great weekend.
EveryDayIHaveTheBlues
@Quinerly: Thats very kind of you. Thank you, this brightens my day! And a great weekend to you as well!
What are your thoughts on the theory I proposed?
EveryDayIHaveTheBlues
I was Team Biden, and strongly opposed his dropping out until he did so. But the fact that senators didn’t want to appear with him at rallies was not a good sign.
In the end, loyalty towards individuals has no place in politics especially when the stakes are so high. That loyalty should solely be preserved only FOR YOUR COUNTRY. I believe we can and should discuss “the switch”, but in the context of how best to win future elections.
Criticizing Pelosi and Obama for not being loyal to Biden may well be correct, but I think those critiques should be accompanied by a cogent argument showing how Biden could have done better than Kamala.
I won’t cede first place to anyone in my disgust and rage at Trump, Rs and any of the folks who voted for him out of malice (I put T voters in two and only two categories: one basket full of evil deplorables [if you will!], and one full of ignoramuses; I’m talking about the first basket here), and MY only goal is ro ensure we beat them. Using what ever legal means are necessary. I dont give a shit if they’re underhanded or deceiving or perceived as unfair. Fuck that. As long as it’s legal, just do it.
dnfree
@schrodingers_cat: We simply disagree, and that’s okay. You think changing candidates made Democrats look “weak and feckless” and I think changing candidates, although risky, was a sensible response to what we saw in the debate, and the realization that at some point in the next few months we could see an even worse appearance by Biden that would completely crater not just the race for the presidency, but the down ballot races as well.
Two things can be true: Biden was a good and competent president, and Biden didn’t have another good four years in him.