Unofficial Stacey Abrams for GA Gov thread. (1 Viewer)

[BladeRunner]

Sorry, completely my bad.  I forgot this was no-joke serious burger Thursdays.

Correct.  Try again tomorrow on Foolish Friday's! 

We take our Thursday's VERY serious around here.

 

[timschochet]

"Democratic Socialist" is nothing more than a smoke screen to fool the lemmings on how they really feel.  It's nothing more than the word "Socialist" preceded by the word "Democratic".  When they realized that "Socialist" wasn't going to work, they added "Democratic" in front of it to make it appear they weren't Socialists.   It certainly has fooled a few people. 

Once there is enough of them and they get the power they so crave, then "Democratic" will be dropped.  Don't be fooled.

I don’t believe this is accurate either. @NCCommish is correct that none of these folks are in support of government owning the means of production, which is the central point of socialism. And they’re certainly not trying to fool anyone; they’re quite clear about their beliefs, so you’re just not right about that. 
Nonetheless as I wrote earlier their views are close enough to socialists on so many issues that I thought it’s OK to use the term. NC does not. Upon reflection he may be right. But the way you’re choosing to shape it is not reflective of what’s really going on IMO. 

 

[Sparky Big Time]

I see she's running for . . . re-election. 

Not possible, it has been asserted over and over that only conservatives refuse to accept election outcomes. 

 

[Snotbubbles]

Why hasn't someone taken those numbers to court and filed a lawsuit?

Seems like pretty blatant cheating to me. 

It's a moot point.  Even if you win, what do you win?

 

[timschochet]

You posted this in a thread about Stacey Abrams, who is most famous  for refusing to concede an election that she lost.

I don’t think this is right. She’s most famous for organizing black voters. 

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I don’t think this is right. She’s most famous for organizing black voters. 

In the right wing media she’s most famous for not conceding.  In mainstream media that’s not why she’s famous.

 

[timschochet]

In the right wing media she’s most famous for not conceding.  In mainstream media that’s not why she’s famous.

Her refusal to concede is being used as a “whataboutism” to make what Trump did seem less bad somehow. But prior to Trump refusing to concede and leading an insurrection, there wasn’t much talk about what Abrams had done in the months since the 2018 election. Almost all discussion of her, even in right wing media, was focused on her ability to galvanize black voting. 

 

[Boston]

Her refusal to concede is being used as a “whataboutism” to make what Trump did seem less bad somehow. But prior to Trump refusing to concede and leading an insurrection, there wasn’t much talk about what Abrams had done in the months since the 2018 election. Almost all discussion of her, even in right wing media, was focused on her ability to galvanize black voting. 

Of course it is a "whataboutism" and it should be...Trump's handling of the election is one of if not the biggest stories on the left and in the MSM...to not point out one the dems rising stars not conceding would be stupid politics...sorry, but you can't have it both ways.

 

[crackattack]

Both statements about Abrams are true. She's an exceptional organizer of the black vote. She also refused to concede her defeat. She was Trumpish before Trump.

 

[timschochet]

Of course it is a "whataboutism" and it should be...Trump's handling of the election is one of if not the biggest stories on the left and in the MSM...to not point out one the dems rising stars not conceding would be stupid politics...sorry, but you can't have it both ways.

I never argued that it shouldn’t be, only that it’s not what she’s most famous for. 
Im not a big fan of whataboutisms. But I understand why people use them. 

 

[Amused to Death]

Of course it is a "whataboutism" and it should be...Trump's handling of the election is one of if not the biggest stories on the left and in the MSM...to not point out one the dems rising stars not conceding would be stupid politics...sorry, but you can't have it both ways.

Honest question: Did Abrams ever claim her election was stolen? Did she claim fraud, file dozens of lawsuits, and have her supporters rally to stop the transfer of power? Because I know of only one politician who's done that. I don't buy that Abrams acted the same or worse than the other guy.

 

[BladeRunner]

I don’t believe this is accurate either. @NCCommish is correct that none of these folks are in support of government owning the means of production, which is the central point of socialism. And they’re certainly not trying to fool anyone; they’re quite clear about their beliefs, so you’re just not right about that. 
Nonetheless as I wrote earlier their views are close enough to socialists on so many issues that I thought it’s OK to use the term. NC does not. Upon reflection he may be right. But the way you’re choosing to shape it is not reflective of what’s really going on IMO. 

Key phrase per the bolded.

I'm not willing to believe anyone who claims they are a Socialist of ANY kind.  There is ZERO doubt that if they ever get enough power they will certainly drop "Democratic" from their label.  They may not directly say it now, but that's because they don't want to lose votes.  Once they get enough they'll be bigly Socialists in all but name.  You'll see.

Again, and I can't stress this enough, "Democratic Socialist" is nothing more than a smoke screen.  And it was deliberately added because "Socialist" wasn't fooling enough people.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I never argued that it shouldn’t be, only that it’s not what she’s most famous for. 

It is the primary reason that her name has been invoked by right-leaning posters for over a year now.  I think that’s probably a good reflection of how and why she’s being talked about in right-leaning media.

 

[BladeRunner]

I don’t think this is right. She’s most famous for organizing black voters. 

She didn't do any of that until AFTER she lost and never conceded the election.  She's most famous for screaming "RACISM" and not conceding.

 

[BladeRunner]

Honest question: Did Abrams ever claim her election was stolen? Did she claim fraud, file dozens of lawsuits, and have her supporters rally to stop the transfer of power? Because I know of only one politician who's done that. I don't buy that Abrams acted the same or worse than the other guy.

yes, yes and yes.

Also, I love how you narrow it down so much that only ONE person can qualify. 

The fact of the matter she was Trump on election losses before Trump.

 

[Boston]

I never argued that it shouldn’t be, only that it’s not what she’s most famous for. 
Im not a big fan of whataboutisms. But I understand why people use them. 

Agree and disagree...for the dems her registration prowess is her calling card but, on the right, she is seen as a sign of hypocrisy.

 

[Amused to Death]

yes, yes and yes.

Also, I love how you narrow it down so much that only ONE person can qualify. 

Thanks, I will look it up. I have not followed her career other than knowing she was largely responsible for turning GA blue.

Only one person has gone to such extremes as I described, and it wasn't Abrams.

 

[NCCommish]

"Democratic Socialist" is nothing more than a smoke screen to fool the lemmings on how they really feel.  It's nothing more than the word "Socialist" preceded by the word "Democratic".  When they realized that "Socialist" wasn't going to work, they added "Democratic" in front of it to make it appear they weren't Socialists.   It certainly has fooled a few people. 

Once there is enough of them and they get the power they so crave, then "Democratic" will be dropped.  Don't be fooled.

Democratic Socialism is a thing that exists. See Europe. 

 

[squistion]

Yes I read that. I guess I just don't understand why it's considered an epithet. Do you?

It would be like if one kept intentionally and repeatedly calling The Republican Party, The Rupub Party using it as epithet or a form of disrespect or derision. It would be a shortened version of the name and is not what the party actually calls itself, and some people would probably find it offensive and considered it pejorative. 

 

[BladeRunner]

Democratic Socialism is a thing that exists. See Europe. 

No doubt, but we live in the USA where that only exists in name only.

I'm not willing to believe the wolves in sheeps clothing.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

It would be like if one kept intentionally and repeatedly calling The Republican Party, The Rupub Party using it as epithet or a form of disrespect or derision. It would be a shortened version of the name and is not what the party actually calls itself, and some people would probably find it offensive and considered it pejorative. 

I'm certainly not going to go to the ramparts over the issue, but it is childish. It's a little like if your friend is Robert, has always gone by Robert and asks you to call him Robert, but you insist on calling him Bob.

 

[BladeRunner]

I'm certainly not going to go to the ramparts over the issue, but it is childish. It's a little like if your friend is Robert, has always gone by Robert and asks you to call him Robert, but you insist on calling him Bob.

When you have no argument to stand on, go after grammar, spelling and punctuation. 

Democrat Party has long been used.  No one's going to stop using it now because some anonymous posters on an internet forum have no other arguments to stand on (posters in general, not you specifically).   It's a petty excuse used to throw up smoke screens to distract from rational discussion.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I'm certainly not going to go to the ramparts over the issue, but it is childish. It's a little like if your friend is Robert, has always gone by Robert and asks you to call him Robert, but you insist on calling him Bob.

It’s this plus the fact that “Democratic” is a word with a positive association that opponents are trying not to reinforce.  Like if a group called themselves the “Charity Club” but you insisted on calling them the “Charit Club” instead.

 

[timschochet]

Key phrase per the bolded.

I'm not willing to believe anyone who claims they are a Socialist of ANY kind.  There is ZERO doubt that if they ever get enough power they will certainly drop "Democratic" from their label.  They may not directly say it now, but that's because they don't want to lose votes.  Once they get enough they'll be bigly Socialists in all but name.  You'll see.

Again, and I can't stress this enough, "Democratic Socialist" is nothing more than a smoke screen.  And it was deliberately added because "Socialist" wasn't fooling enough people.

Well we disagree. But getting back to the subject of this thread, are you willing to concede that, given her positions, Stacey Abrams, whatever you might think of her, is not a socialist? 

 

[BladeRunner]

Well we disagree. But getting back to the subject of this thread, are you willing to concede that, given her positions, Stacey Abrams, whatever you might think of her, is not a socialist? 

I'm not willing to agree to that.  I think she's on the same path.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

When you have no argument to stand on, go after grammar, spelling and punctuation. 

Democratic Party has long been used.  No one's going to stop using it now because some anonymous posters on an internet forum have no other arguments to stand on. 

Huh? The whole point was that you said "Democrat Party".

And yeah, it's a silly issue precisely because it's so unimportant. And yet the only people who do it are Republican partisans. I wonder why that is?

 

[timschochet]

I'm not willing to agree to that.  I think she's on the same path.

I don’t understand. You’ve been presented evidence to the contrary. You were challenged to provide evidence yourself to back up the claim and you haven’t done so. Why hold to this position? 

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

Well we disagree. But getting back to the subject of this thread, are you willing to concede that, given her positions, Stacey Abrams, whatever you might think of her, is not a socialist? 

Good luck with that, Tim. These folks aren't willing to concede that anyone to the left of Atilla the Hun isn't a socialist.

 

[jamny]

Let me know when I can no longer call them Democrats and have to start calling them Democratics so as not to offend.

 

[BladeRunner]

Huh? The whole point was that you said "Democrat Party".

And yeah, it's a silly issue precisely because it's so unimportant. And yet the only people who do it are Republican partisans. I wonder why that is?

typo.  My bad.

It's an absurd distraction and we shouldn't waste anymore time on it.  I won't be changing it anytime soon for the Grammar Nazis.

 

[Amused to Death]

Let me know when I can no longer call them Democrats and have to start calling them Democratics so as not to offend.

I don't quite get it either, but its not new. It goes back to at least the 1940s. Its been brought here several times that its used as an insult. So I can only assume the continued use is to be purposely insulting in an passive manner.

I also don't get why some things are considered insulting to other groups, but if I learn that it is, I stop out of respect. Simple as that.

 

[ignatiusjreilly]

typo.  My bad.

It's an absurd distraction and we shouldn't waste anymore time on it.  I won't be changing it anytime soon for the Grammar Nazis.

Incorrect grammar to own the libs. That'll learn 'em!

 

[BladeRunner]

I don't quite get it either, but its not new. It goes back to at least the 1940s. Its been brought here several times that its used as an insult. So I can only assume the continued use is to be purposely insulting in an passive manner.

I also don't get why some things are considered insulting to other groups, but if I learn that it is, I stop out of respect. Simple as that.

Only one anonymous poster on this board has EVER brought it up. 

Not going to change a commonly used word because some guy is sensitive about EVERYTHING.  It's not an insult, its a commonly used term.

 

[Amused to Death]

Only one anonymous poster on this board has EVER brought it up. 

Not going to change a commonly used word because some guy is sensitive about EVERYTHING.  

Its only commonly used as an insult. Been that way since the 1940s. Now you know. Your insistence on being disrespectful is noted.

 

[BladeRunner]

Its only commonly used as an insult. Been that way since the 1940s. Now you know. Your insistence on being disrespectful is noted.

Negative.

What?  Because wikipedia says so?  That same wikepedia that anyone can edit? 

Sqiz probably edited that whole thing himself.  

 

[unckeyherb]

I don't remember too much about Abrams except being impressed with here on a few interviews.I read this quote as saying the Dem party is a big tent thing, she said she would be  considered a moderate in California.

Can I assume this extended shortening of the word Democratic is even more insidious and insulting?  I checked wikipedia but couldn't find quantified-abbreviation-offense-chart.

Shots fired from @The General

 

[squistion]

typo.  My bad.

It's an absurd distraction and we shouldn't waste anymore time on it.  I won't be changing it anytime soon for the Grammar Nazis.

So you will keep using it even after being told repeatedly that people find it offensive?

This is similar to, as one poster noted above, "Like if a group called themselves the “Charity Club” but you insisted on calling them the “Charit Club” instead" or as another poster said," It's a little like if your friend is Robert, has always gone by Robert and asks you to call him Robert, but you insist on calling him Bob."

The only reason you keep doing this appears to be just to antagonize people. This is much the same as the bigoted poster who always referred to the undocumented aliens here as "bad hombres" (a phrase which is an incorrect blend of English and Spanish) only when happened to be Latinos, but never anyone Canadian, Irish, German, English, etc. He denied he had racist intent but no one really believed that. 

 

[BladeRunner]

Can I assume this extended shortening of the word Democratic is even more insidious and insulting?  I checked wikipedia but couldn't find quantified-abbreviation-offense-chart.

Shots fired from @The General

Oh....my....God.  This is REALLY going to set them off now. 

 

[unckeyherb]

Anyone offended by the term democrat is actively looking to be offended, nothing more.  What a ridiculous tangent.  

 

[Snotbubbles]

Anyone offended by the term democrat is actively looking to be offended, nothing more.  What a ridiculous tangent.  

Yes, the guy said it was a typo, it's a pretty common typo to boot.  I apologize in advance to anyone offended by the term Democrat, I make that typing same mistake regularly.

 

[NCCommish]

No doubt, but we live in the USA where that only exists in name only.

I'm not willing to believe the wolves in sheeps clothing.

It exists in name only because we continue to screw the majority of the people over for the benefit of the few. Because we are already an Oligarchy/Kleptocracy. Maybe you're good with a government that exists to serve the narrow interests of wealthy corporations and individuals but many of us aren't. 

 

[BladeRunner]

It exists in name only because we continue to screw the majority of the people over for the benefit of the few. Because we are already an Oligarchy/Kleptocracy. Maybe you're good with a government that exists to serve the narrow interests of wealthy corporations and individuals but many of us aren't. 

You know who else constantly used the term "Oligarchy" and "Kleptocracy" to stir up the people to get themselves into power?  Yeah, that's right, the Russians of the late 18th and early 20th century.  How did that "Socialist" government go? 

Or maybe the "Socialists" in Vietnam and Cambodia?  How did that go? 

Venezuala?  Cuba?  North Korea?  How did all of that go?

It's patently and factually clear that Socialist governments (more like "regimes") have historically shown that they don't serve the people either.  In fact, I would say they're more of a threat to "the people" than Capitalism ever was (IF it ever was).

 

[squistion]

Negative.

What?  Because wikipedia says so?  That same wikepedia that anyone can edit? 

Sqiz probably edited that whole thing himself.  

Some other sources noting that it has been considered offensive and pejorative for many years.

https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2019/02/07/why-republicans-say-democrat-party

https://www.npr.org/sections/publiceditor/2010/03/26/114585414/since-when-did-it-become-the-democrat-party

https://www.businessinsider.com/democrat-party-republicans-trump-2017-12

 

[wikkidpissah]

It exists in name only because we continue to screw the majority of the people over for the benefit of the few. Because we are already an Oligarchy/Kleptocracy. Maybe you're good with a government that exists to serve the narrow interests of wealthy corporations and individuals but many of us aren't. 

plzplzplz dont waste your time engaging the magpies in here, my friend. get in, state your point, get out. the minions are not here to discuss. they are here attempting to confirm whatever imaginary victories might de-hollow their lives. the Chinese govt cares more about America's well-being than TPF argubots. this is wordpr0n, and you're not the one getting off.

a post of mine 11/19:

Welcome to Suckerdome. The people who populate TPF and sweat whatever stoopit trial theyre all on about now and play the sim game of POLITICS MATTER dont even know how little of what theyre doing & saying is actually them. Suckerdome has elevated herd hierarchies & caveman manners to engage easy, greedy us in an opioid of words. The only wrong move in the game is to play.

 

[jamny]

My real name is James. There are some people that can't seem to call me by that and always call me Jim.

It doesn't bother me.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Her refusal to concede is being used as a “whataboutism” to make what Trump did seem less bad somehow. 

Or it's just that we hold politicians to the same standard regardless of what letter happens to follow their name.  Trump's refusal to concede the 2016 election was worse than what Abrams did, but that doesn't make Abrams' actions any more defensible.

 

[unckeyherb]

Jesus, this thread jackknifed quickly.

 

[James Daulton]

Anyone offended by the term democrat is actively looking to be offended, nothing more.  What a ridiculous tangent.  

Hell, compared to the infantile ways the party of Trump usually refers to liberals, I'll happily take democrat.

 

[BladeRunner]

Hell, compared to the infantile ways the party of Trump usually refers to liberals, I'll happily take democrat.

Do we need to list the infantile ways the party of Harris and Biden refer to conservatives?  I mean, you guys have entire news networks and comedy shows dedicated to it.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Jesus, this thread jackknifed quickly.

That tends to happen with one particular poster shows up.  (Not talking about tim, of course).