General Discussion

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)

61. Surreal...

Sun Mar 29, 2015, 06:30 AM

Mar 2015

The fervent "2+2=5," even when the post is right in front of us:

Are Democrats better off losing the presidency in 2016?
If we win in 2016, we likely can't hold it for 2020. If we lose in 2016, we're probably back in the game 2020. Of course, winning in 2016 probably gets us at least 1-2 more supreme court justices and cements some liberal policy. Thoughts?

A post that clearly works to depress the vote, a post that doesn't even mention GWB. Yet the denial would be sustained all the way down the page if I cooperated. "War is Peace!" almost always demands the last word...

DCCC email campaigns urging us to accept doom. Relentless insulting of the base. And constant messaging like this OP. I don't believe we've *ever* seen such a relentless, transparent, and coordinated effort to depress the Democratic vote, as we have seen recently from the corporate faction of our party.

We misunderstand our politicians and their messaging machines in 2015 when we assume that their goal is always to win. That was the old system, democracy. The goal in an oligarchy *pretending* to be a democracy is to use the two parties you already own in whatever way possible to ensure continuation of the corporate agenda.

Red versus Blue = Oligarchy Theater for the Masses

Mass spying on Americans? Both parties support it.
Austerity for the masses? Both parties support it.
Cutting social safety nets? Both parties support it.
Corporatists in the cabinet? Both parties support it.
Tolling our interstate highways? Both parties support it.
Corporate education policy? Both parties support it.
Bank bailouts? Both parties support it.
Ignoring the trillions stashed overseas? Both parties support it.
Trans-Pacific Job/Wage Killing Secret Agreement? Both parties support it.
TISA corporate overlord agreement? Both parties support it.
Drilling and fracking? Both parties support it.
Wars on medical marijuana instead of corrupt banks? Both parties support it.
Deregulation of the food industry? Both parties support it.
GMO's? Both parties support it.
Privatization of the TVA? Both parties support it.
Immunity for telecoms? Both parties support it.
"Looking forward" and letting war criminals off the hook? Both parties support it.
Deciding torturers are patriots? Both parties support it.
Militarized police and assaults on protesters? Both parties support it.
Indefinite detention? Both parties support it.
Drone wars and kill lists? Both parties support it.
Targeting of journalists and whistleblowers? Both parties support it.
Private prisons replacing public prisons? Both parties support it.
Unions? Both parties view them with contempt.
Trillion dollar increase in nuclear weapons. Both parties support it.
New war in Iraq. Both parties support it.
New war in Syria. Both parties support it.
Carpet bombing of captive population in Gaza. Both parties support it.
Selling off swaths of the Gulf of Mexico for drilling? Both parties support it.
Drilling along the Atlantic Coast? Both parties support it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

104 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Are Democrats better off losing the presidency in 2016? [View all] Renew Deal Mar 2015 OP

scotus is primary all other concerns are secondary Romeo.lima333 Mar 2015 #1

+ 1 million MBS Mar 2015 #96

I do, too deutsey Mar 2015 #100

Yes get the red out Mar 2015 #103

Um, that would be NO. Losing it in 2016 would be awful. CaliforniaPeggy Mar 2015 #2

Winning is better than losing. hrmjustin Mar 2015 #3

Yup. Agschmid Mar 2015 #4

Loosing? Warren DeMontague Mar 2015 #73

They do it in New Hampshire TheCowsCameHome Mar 2015 #77

. hrmjustin Mar 2015 #91

Sorry, pet peeve. Warren DeMontague Mar 2015 #94

No Kalidurga Mar 2015 #5

It would be interesting to see if the OP is a member of any of those groups... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #23

+100 n/t JustAnotherGen Mar 2015 #102

THAT is a dumb question. I don't know of one babylonsister Mar 2015 #6

Forget about viability Renew Deal Mar 2015 #8

OK. Horribe idea imo. Still. nt babylonsister Mar 2015 #26

We, the people, cannot afford to lose in 2016!!! Major Hogwash Mar 2015 #45

Definitly, it was the "lost decade" and all these years later we're still working on RKP5637 Mar 2015 #65

assuming what you say is true 2016 would probably be more important than 2020 JI7 Mar 2015 #7

This... Renew Deal Mar 2015 #9

What kind of dumb ass question is that bigdarryl Mar 2015 #10

Would Floyd Mayweather be better off losing to Manny Pacquiao or vice versa?/NT DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #11

I think Floyd would be better off losing Cali_Democrat Mar 2015 #13

Floyd thinks he's better than Muhammad Ali or Sugar Ray Robinson because they lost... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #17

He's undefeated brush Mar 2015 #63

I don't want to turn this into a boxing thread DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #72

Not even close to the same Renew Deal Mar 2015 #14

"Tanked" DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #19

And none of their best candidates ran. Renew Deal Mar 2015 #21

Fox News and the righties were convinced that Romney would be the winner Gothmog Mar 2015 #85

Kind of exactly but I think most Foxies knew better while some believed their own bullshit. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #88

"We likely can't hold it for 2020" based on what? arcane1 Mar 2015 #12

When was the last time a party held the presidency for 16 years? Renew Deal Mar 2015 #15

Irrelevant. arcane1 Mar 2015 #18

When was the last time there was this kind of babylonsister Mar 2015 #28

When was the last time there was a great demographic shift? joshcryer Mar 2015 #55

In presidential elections with an incumbent on the ballot, the incumbent has won bornskeptic Mar 2015 #95

When was the last time you rotated your tires and lost a lug nut snooper2 Mar 2015 #104

Unless the GOP change their position on immigration, the Hispanic vote will be even stronger in 2020 Gothmog Mar 2015 #86

....... steve2470 Mar 2015 #16

Hey steve! Cha Mar 2015 #25

hey Cha! :) steve2470 Mar 2015 #27

Bush was a nightmare think Mar 2015 #20

This would be worse and have more lasting consequences still_one Mar 2015 #33

Worst Nightmare. Scott Walker. Walker would really mess things up. /nt think Mar 2015 #34

Not at all jmowreader Mar 2015 #22

WTF Cha Mar 2015 #24

When the GOP are rounding up clown like Cruz to run, it is nover a time to lose an election. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #29

No. We can't afford to lose in 2016. TDale313 Mar 2015 #30

Kuh-wazy. A-Schwarzenegger Mar 2015 #31

No! Contrary to some views there are major differences between still_one Mar 2015 #32

Losing is not good, or better. Mz Pip Mar 2015 #35

Don't forget they control the lion's share of the governorships and state legislatures too.../NT DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #76

NO!!!!! We lose the presidency, we lose SCOTUS. Period. Initech Mar 2015 #36

There is no such thing as a good year to lose the Presidency, or the Senate, or the House. DebJ Mar 2015 #37

WTF Hekate Mar 2015 #38

A short-term Democratic loss... Binkie The Clown Mar 2015 #39

this is fantasy. Any republican term in the WH is dangerous and affects millions of individuals bigtree Mar 2015 #41

well done Willem Mar 2015 #42

The White House is not a rook. RandySF Mar 2015 #44

That was the theory Nader promoted in the 2000 election. And we saw how well that worked out. pnwmom Mar 2015 #47

People said this shit in 2000. RandySF Mar 2015 #50

The Nader strategy. joshcryer Mar 2015 #56

well Willem Mar 2015 #40

Is America better off? RandySF Mar 2015 #43

NO. NO. NO. NO. NO. A thousand times NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! pnwmom Mar 2015 #46

Only if you want a right wing Supreme Court for the next two decades DFW Mar 2015 #48

If they win in 2016 octoberlib Mar 2015 #49

It depends if a corporate Dem is the nominee yes we would be better off losing anotojefiremnesuka Mar 2015 #51

"Accept Doom" email campaigns, posts like this.... woo me with science Mar 2015 #52

Oh yes, "corporate messaging" is behind "anti-GWB 2.0." joshcryer Mar 2015 #54

Just fascinating to watch the attempts at spin. woo me with science Mar 2015 #57

The OP is objectively against "GWB 2.0." joshcryer Mar 2015 #60

Surreal... woo me with science Mar 2015 #61

^This^ should be a pinned OP. RiverLover Mar 2015 #62

Ask GWB. Or alternatively *. joshcryer Mar 2015 #53

If the Republicans run a tea-party type candidate Revanchist Mar 2015 #58

If the GOP Selects a TeaHadist to run for POTUS the Democrats will select a Corporate Dem anotojefiremnesuka Mar 2015 #59

never Doctor_J Mar 2015 #64

If we lose in 2016 we may never get it back. DCBob Mar 2015 #66

It is NEVER desirable to lose ANYTHING. RBInMaine Mar 2015 #67

If Ted Cruz is the Republican nominee, 2016 = Democrat win. Yorktown Mar 2015 #68

I heard exactly the same nonsense in 1980 thucythucy Mar 2015 #79

LOL Reagan had popular appeal, Cruz has God-nut appeal Yorktown Mar 2015 #92

The American people thucythucy Mar 2015 #98

I guess it depends on how much you like Social Security and Medicare. Vinca Mar 2015 #69

Of course not . . . Geez louise DrDan Mar 2015 #70

No! It is imperative that the Democrats keep avebury Mar 2015 #71

And giving up the US Supreme Court for two more generations? hlthe2b Mar 2015 #74

I'd say losing the senate & the presidency is the worst case HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #75

Just plain dumb idea HERVEPA Mar 2015 #78

No Proud Liberal Dem Mar 2015 #80

NO. DinahMoeHum Mar 2015 #81

That's a question that can only really be answered 'after the fact', Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #82

Depends on who the Democratic nominee is. n/t 99Forever Mar 2015 #83

Losing in 2016 is a horrible concept Gothmog Mar 2015 #84

You have to be honest about probably losing Roe but once you betterdemsonly Mar 2015 #87

If we lose in 2016... yuiyoshida Mar 2015 #89

Why wouldn't we hold it in 2020? MineralMan Mar 2015 #90

No. HuckleB Mar 2015 #93

And lose how many SCOTUS seats? gollygee Mar 2015 #97

we have to win in 2016 because i really don't want to go through all the hassle of Takket Mar 2015 #99

No Liberalynn Mar 2015 #101