General Discussion

applegrove

(131,871 posts)

92. I prefer the term 'cocktail socialists'.

Reply to guillaumeb (Original post)

Thu Feb 16, 2017, 05:38 PM

Feb 2017

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

137 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

In defense of Susan Sarandon, and by extension Jill Stein et. al. ? [View all] guillaumeb Feb 2017 OP

OFFS....this election proved we had the numbers without the Farthest Left. We need EC strategy. msanthrope Feb 2017 #1

My point is about complacency. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #5

Tell me the telling signs of complacency you see since Trump's election. nt msanthrope Feb 2017 #26

Fourth paragraph of my post: guillaumeb Feb 2017 #29

That's nonsensical. We lost because of the red counties. Tell me exactly how appeasing the Far msanthrope Feb 2017 #88

after this election no one should ever try to appease them starshine00 Feb 2017 #91

Exactly. nt msanthrope Feb 2017 #95

We lost for a number of reasons. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #97

Thank you proving my point. If the far Left had nothing to do with losing..then why consider them? msanthrope Feb 2017 #101

My point is about complacency. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #103

What you call complacency may also be considered disillusionment Caliman73 Feb 2017 #125

this is a beautiful thing to read, your headline. starshine00 Feb 2017 #86

I'm kinda fucking done with Chamberlain appeasement. nt msanthrope Feb 2017 #98

Tell that to the immigrants being arrested Beaverhausen Feb 2017 #2

Bernie Busters won't listen. They're too busy calling for the world to burn. Charles Bukowski Feb 2017 #4

Dismissive? Prone to generalize? eom guillaumeb Feb 2017 #7

Anecdotal for sure, but I have yet to run into an apologetic Charles Bukowski Feb 2017 #10

As I already mentioned to another responder, guillaumeb Feb 2017 #13

I can't envision a scenario in which Democrats rush to the voting Charles Bukowski Feb 2017 #25

Complacency refers to the non-voting tendency of some Democrats. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #27

I don't see turnout being an issue this time. Charles Bukowski Feb 2017 #30

For the sake of the country, we both hope you are correct. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #32

Unfortunately there's more voter suppression & gerrymandering in place than in 2006 MrPurple Feb 2017 #106

what is a bernie buster? starshine00 Feb 2017 #87

The mythical Bernie voter who will only vote for Bernie. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #100

I met some of them on twitter starshine00 Feb 2017 #107

No doubt. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #109

i don't understand this approach to politics starshine00 Feb 2017 #112

Do you mean the "burn down the house and then rebuild" approach? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #115

in my heart, I do not believe they thought it would go this far. starshine00 Feb 2017 #119

I also felt that Clinton would easily win. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #122

There's nothing mythical about the Bernie Buster. Charles Bukowski Feb 2017 #116

Many things contributed. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #117

I agree. But what of Democratic complacency? eom guillaumeb Feb 2017 #8

Sarandon and Stein are indefensible. Don't want to see any thread defending them on DU ever again. Justice Feb 2017 #3

Did you read ALL of what I wrote? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #6

I just heard Maddow noting that Stein is at the table w/Flynn & Putin in that photo starshine00 Feb 2017 #89

Exactly! Is this Democratic Underground Chevy Feb 2017 #113

"Limo Liberals" as msanthrope pointed out, are not going to do squat in red areas. joshcryer Feb 2017 #9

The title aside, guillaumeb Feb 2017 #11

Post hoc ergo prompter hoc LanternWaste Feb 2017 #44

2010 and 2014 were both low turnout elections. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #102

I don't think economic class is the issue starshine00 Feb 2017 #93

She's just a rich, white, privileged actress. Cattledog Feb 2017 #12

Which does not speak to my points. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #14

yes, why don't you examine why your sympathies seem to lie with these over privileged fools La Lioness Priyanka Feb 2017 #17

I suggest that you read the post, not just the title. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #19

i did. nt La Lioness Priyanka Feb 2017 #20

If you did, I can see no reason for your dismissive responses. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #22

i disagree with your entire narrative that minimizes harms and excuses those who allowed this to La Lioness Priyanka Feb 2017 #31

Please point out where I said or implied that. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #35

By saying they did Democrats a favor you are minimizing all the harm he is doing. JTFrog Feb 2017 #43

I am merely looking for the positive in a negative situation. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #114

I find it bemusing you believe anyone who disagrees with your premise LanternWaste Feb 2017 #46

Based on the numerous responses that accuse me of supporting the idea of 3rd party voting, guillaumeb Feb 2017 #55

Well your subject line specifically says "in defense of". JTFrog Feb 2017 #57

I felt that the post made it clear. I am addressing complacency. And non-voting. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #61

I get enough of this round about bullshit from Trump. JTFrog Feb 2017 #63

multimillionaires and hucksters don't need your support La Lioness Priyanka Feb 2017 #15

Noam Chomsky said it best why the OP's premise is wrong still_one Feb 2017 #16

This. done. TeamPooka Feb 2017 #18

I am not disputing Chomsky's analysis. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #21

I didn't say you agreed with their positions, but I was addressing the point that a trump still_one Feb 2017 #47

The damage was done when Kobach and Putin and Comey weighed in. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #50

It was a terrible argument before the election. StubbornThings Feb 2017 #62

Maybe clarity of writing rather than reading comprehension is at fault. LanternWaste Feb 2017 #49

Other than the title, which makes sense if the post is read in its entirety, guillaumeb Feb 2017 #51

Your OP makes perfect sense. StubbornThings Feb 2017 #66

Here's why you're wrong about Jill Stein, and about people who suppported stopbush Feb 2017 #23

No argument with your points, as my post actually shows. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #24

You keep banging on about your post content Blue Idaho Feb 2017 #36

look who else came to dinner starshine00 Feb 2017 #94

"Took away" zipplewrath Feb 2017 #120

I know too many Ds out here in CA who voted third party stopbush Feb 2017 #128

Well, now you're changing your story zipplewrath Feb 2017 #137

It's an out to dodge responsibility for the damage they did. Not buying it. bettyellen Feb 2017 #28

The BOB idiots are happy that trump was elected Gothmog Feb 2017 #34

Off my topic and off my point. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #39

Not at all- this is just advocating (again) that "burning it down" is a good thing... bettyellen Feb 2017 #54

No it is not advocating the "burn it down" philosophy. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #59

No one doubts there's been too much complacency- but she advocated "the burn" as a solution.... bettyellen Feb 2017 #72

They screamed "burn it down" and are shocked people have a problem with it? bettyellen Feb 2017 #45

my theory based on the kids I argued with on social media starshine00 Feb 2017 #118

My point, in the middle of the post: guillaumeb Feb 2017 #37

yes bettyellen yes starshine00 Feb 2017 #96

Sarandon also supported Nader who gave us Bush Gothmog Feb 2017 #33

Not my point at all, even if the title suggests it: guillaumeb Feb 2017 #40

I disagree with the premise of her opinion LanternWaste Feb 2017 #38

Understood. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #41

You are right, of course. There is a silver lining in all the activism. alarimer Feb 2017 #42

Thank you. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #48

Well said, and my feelings about this, as well. JudyM Feb 2017 #74

Sarandon: I want you to sacrifice yourself and your children for my agenda. Sort of like Trump delisen Feb 2017 #52

"if we look at the position that Trump is somehow, on some level, preferable to Clinton" JTFrog Feb 2017 #53

I was speaking to the Sarandon position, or how I perceive her position to be, guillaumeb Feb 2017 #67

I agree with you on one thing.. JHan Feb 2017 #56

We are in agreement on all points. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #68

Are you serious with this, G? bravenak Feb 2017 #58

++++ I don't get it either... I didn't need any "revolution".. JHan Feb 2017 #69

Yes. Definately a WPP. bravenak Feb 2017 #71

Plus forever ismnotwasm Feb 2017 #75

I think they never will bravenak Feb 2017 #76

And if the people aren't more awake to rise up against him we will lose everything. JudyM Feb 2017 #79

You won't lose anything from this compared to us who have never managed to gain bravenak Feb 2017 #82

Completely agree about the privileges, it's disgusting. I also think whatever wakes people up JudyM Feb 2017 #104

***THIS*** JTFrog Feb 2017 #70

I am serious about my point. That complacency by Democratic voters leads guillaumeb Feb 2017 #77

Did any of your family ever get deported? Mine did. bravenak Feb 2017 #81

This matter does not really relate to my post about voter complacency. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #83

Your post was silly bravenak Feb 2017 #85

All our children mcar Feb 2017 #129

Agreed bravenak Feb 2017 #130

I hate them all mcar Feb 2017 #131

Me too bravenak Feb 2017 #132

It is "et al." - not "et. al." Latin: et alia means "and others" in English. "Et" is not abbreviated anneboleyn Feb 2017 #60

I sit corrected. Literally. I am sitting. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #78

Unrec tenderfoot Feb 2017 #64

I agree that Dems need to be engaged beyond the presidency. DanTex Feb 2017 #65

Not literally a defense, more of a search for the good in a very bad situation. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #80

"The position that Trump is somehow, on some level, preferable to Clinton ismnotwasm Feb 2017 #73

That position was Sarandon's. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #84

sorry, I'm not a big believer in burning down the nation to save it Blue_Tires Feb 2017 #90

No argument. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #99

I prefer the term 'cocktail socialists'. applegrove Feb 2017 #92

Both terms fit. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #105

Yes. They do not lose their Healthcare when they have a preexisting condition applegrove Feb 2017 #108

My defense of them is that they have a right to be as loony left as they want. Warpy Feb 2017 #110

True. I defend their right to have an opinion, guillaumeb Feb 2017 #111

Wishing suffering on the poor and oppressed BainsBane Feb 2017 #121

I do not know if enjoyment is the correct word. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #123

Whatever it is BainsBane Feb 2017 #124

I'm not going to defend them in any way. Not even Bernie Sanders. hunter Feb 2017 #126

I also vote practically. A good way to describe it. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #127

I'm not that generous of heart. hunter Feb 2017 #133

Or they feel that voting in Presidential elections is sufficient? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #134

Sufficient for what? hunter Feb 2017 #135

True. But I was talking about the unfortunate tendency of some guillaumeb Feb 2017 #136