General Discussion

boston bean

(36,931 posts)

57. And whose side is that? nt

Reply to PowerToThePeople (Reply #56)

Sun Apr 26, 2015, 03:08 PM

Apr 2015

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

82 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The 99% is not valid percentage to be using... [View all] boston bean Apr 2015 OP

Hear! Hear! BlueCaliDem Apr 2015 #1

-1 L0oniX Apr 2015 #37

I think they are referring to those voting against their interest betterdemsonly Apr 2015 #2

So, the 1% isn't really the 1% either? nt boston bean Apr 2015 #3

OWS is an anarchist movement that was able to get some dems to adopt its memes betterdemsonly Apr 2015 #4

Everyone who uses the percentage meme... boston bean Apr 2015 #5

52% of voters disagree, but there eligible non-voters that may well agree betterdemsonly Apr 2015 #6

Oh, so 99% of people who vote agree on one issue? boston bean Apr 2015 #8

No 99% own less than 1% and have less political influence than 1% betterdemsonly Apr 2015 #9

99% of people can't agree on that.... don't agree on that... and have a different idea boston bean Apr 2015 #15

Doesn't matter whether they agree. It is a statistical fact meant to highlight the problem of betterdemsonly Apr 2015 #21

I'm pretty sure most LGBT do vote democratic... boston bean Apr 2015 #30

I agree with you about this -> "OWS isn't interested in electoral politics" Caretha Apr 2015 #71

Anarchism: a doctrine urging the abolition of government or governmental restraint brooklynite Apr 2015 #76

Pfft Caretha Apr 2015 #81

!% of this country's population controls (aka "owns") 40% of its wealth. The Republican KingCharlemagne Apr 2015 #7

Oh, so being against racism, sexism, and homophobia boston bean Apr 2015 #11

That's right. Republicans use racism, sexism and homophobia to divide the KingCharlemagne Apr 2015 #18

So, women, minorities, LGBT need to take a back seat here. boston bean Apr 2015 #19

Sigh. "You folks". Please proceed - nt KingCharlemagne Apr 2015 #23

Are you trying to sow division? Why can't we walk and chew gum at the same time? Comrade Grumpy Apr 2015 #29

Why are you asking me? I'm responding to arguments boston bean Apr 2015 #31

Snark much? Caretha Apr 2015 #72

The Communist Party of the USA was at the forefront of the civil rights KingCharlemagne Apr 2015 #43

It's a question that in the asking reveals that the asker knows zip about the issues deemed 'social' Bluenorthwest Apr 2015 #48

It sounds like you're suggesting gollygee Apr 2015 #60

I apologize if I gave that impression. Of course, Dems fight racism, sexism and KingCharlemagne Apr 2015 #63

The point of wedge politics is to place it such that there are more of us on this side. n/t lumberjack_jeff Apr 2015 #10

The 99% is an economic group. CJCRANE Apr 2015 #12

Is part of this 99% is supporting Warren, Sanders, Clinton, O'Malley? boston bean Apr 2015 #13

Do you support LGBTQ rights? CJCRANE Apr 2015 #14

Sure as hell I do. But I'm for damn sure that no where near 99% of people in this country do. boston bean Apr 2015 #17

Do you support the right of all poor, working class and middle class people CJCRANE Apr 2015 #20

Sure I do. But do you? boston bean Apr 2015 #24

The 99% is just shorthand CJCRANE Apr 2015 #26

Does it include, women, LGBT, minorities and the particular issues they face boston bean Apr 2015 #27

It includes everyone who is not part of the 1%. nt CJCRANE Apr 2015 #42

I'll ask again: boston bean Apr 2015 #44

It's a label, not a strategy. But econonic empowerment of the "99%" by default will give more power CJCRANE Apr 2015 #45

Still not an answer to my specific question... but I guess this is as good as I will get boston bean Apr 2015 #46

You're making a category error. "African American" is a label. "Gay" is label. The "99%" is a label. CJCRANE Apr 2015 #47

And when things weren't so lopsided, women and minorities and LGBT faced boston bean Apr 2015 #49

I didn't say that. It's one struggle of several overlapping struggles. CJCRANE Apr 2015 #50

Words mean things. An identity is not a lable. Jesus. Bluenorthwest Apr 2015 #51

As per my other reply CJCRANE Apr 2015 #53

If you knew anything about LGBT and women's politics, you would know how specious your argument is. Bluenorthwest Apr 2015 #58

Downstream here in this thread, I am basically accused of being against wealth equality.. boston bean Apr 2015 #62

Black women make far less than White women. Why not remove them from the "Women Group" Bonobo Apr 2015 #69

But it is an economic group FRAMED as in opposition to "the 1%", which is where this breaks down... brooklynite Apr 2015 #77

Rec a whole lot treestar Apr 2015 #16

I think maybe it's a slogan for trying to build class consciousness... Cheese Sandwich Apr 2015 #22

That is what I am trying to get too. boston bean Apr 2015 #25

It means the middle class and poor should unite to take power from the super-rich Cheese Sandwich Apr 2015 #28

Do you think like others above that social issues are what is preventing boston bean Apr 2015 #33

I didn't read every single comment by other people posting in the thread. Cheese Sandwich Apr 2015 #52

You don't like it when people dismiss minority and womens rights as a non-issue betterdemsonly Apr 2015 #32

Where have I delcared it a non issue? boston bean Apr 2015 #34

You called it a meaningless slogan betterdemsonly Apr 2015 #36

The slogan is, the issues are not. boston bean Apr 2015 #39

You don't get the slogan. Don't use it betterdemsonly Apr 2015 #40

Who is insulting anyone? My pointing out that 99% of the people in this country boston bean Apr 2015 #41

We know who's side you are on in the fight against wealth inequality. n/t PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #56

And whose side is that? nt boston bean Apr 2015 #57

If 99% agreed with you you'd be happy with that % ...right? L0oniX Apr 2015 #35

Specific issues LOoniX. Thought that was obvious... boston bean Apr 2015 #38

Would require something we obviously lack as humans, agree.... AuntPatsy Apr 2015 #54

it appears to me as though some here PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #55

99% is a perfectly valid percentage to be using truebluegreen Apr 2015 #59

Sad but true LostOne4Ever Apr 2015 #61

99% makes the intended point perfectly. It is rock-solid icon for that purpose. GoneFishin Apr 2015 #64

Yes, the 99% does have people in it who disagree with us, but we know what's best for them alarimer Apr 2015 #65

The term 99% is not the name of a political party lunatica Apr 2015 #66

I strongly disagree. F4lconF16 Apr 2015 #67

99% is a reference to financial status. nt Bonobo Apr 2015 #68

100% of us need Trillo Apr 2015 #70

The percantage is off. raouldukelives Apr 2015 #73

"Centrists" were the ones that told gays to shut-up about marriage rights. Marr Apr 2015 #74

Nail meet head! Caretha Apr 2015 #82

Hillary Clinton quickly rose to membership in the 1% and is therefore DISQUALIFIED to serve the 99%. NYC_SKP Apr 2015 #75

sex panther "60% of the time, it works every time" NM_Birder Apr 2015 #78

In purely economic terms hifiguy Apr 2015 #79

It is about wealth and power, not political parties or leanings. Jamastiene Apr 2015 #80