3 ms·

"Many on the left" meaning every Democratic senator and congressperson, and the Democratic president himself too?

by jolux 6y ago

at_a_remove 6y ago
What, you think Obama and the Clintons would have minded terribly if it turned out that way? Anyway, we're not shifting the goalposts to the leaders, we're talking about the people, which is the subject of the article. The people of the left were completely down with the faithless electorate concept, whoopie! And somehow you missed this point. Which leads me to a question: why? Perhaps you didn't hear about it. Perhaps you forgot it. Maybe you brushed it aside. Or maybe you recalled it and decided it wasn't worth mentioning. Each of these are mechanisms through which people are steered. You accuse the far right of doing something that the far left was doing just four years ago, and still you have thought yourself objective, but it doesn't work.
- Tostino 6y ago
  You can find people of any background who will spout contradictory rhetoric. I don't think you're making this argument in good faith. 2016 was a whole lot closer than 2020, and Clinton conceded and there was no serious calculated attempt to overturn the election results by either the public at large, or people who had any power to do so. Equating that with what's going on now does not seem like an argument made in good faith.
  - at_a_remove 6y ago
    I was hanging out in lefty circles in 2016; the faithless electorate idea was wildly popular, as was the "the popular vote should win." These were the last hope for many who were previously so confident.
    - jolux 6y ago
      It's true that the popular vote should decide the presidency but unfortunately it doesn't in the US. It's a bad sign that we keep electing presidents who didn't win a majority of the popular vote. Nonetheless, we have to follow the rules and processes in the Constitution until we get the opportunity to change them.
    - watwut 6y ago
      The popular vote should win is still popular on left. In large part because both Clinton on Biden won popular vote. And partly because they don't count as real Americans in popular rhetoric and are getting increasingly ressentful about that.
- jolux 6y ago
  >The people of the left were completely down with the faithless electorate concept, whoopie! Well, I certainly wasn't, and I contest that this belief was widespread within the left, but without evidence one way or another we're not going to resolve this aspect of the disagreement. What I do know is that no significant number of people with political positions and political power used that power to throw the election results into doubt, as Mitch McConnell and GOP congresspeople are now doing.
- ttesttom 6y ago
  I don't think Obama would have supported it as he called Clinton urging her to concede early on election night. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307536-obama-urged-clinton-to-concede-on-election-night https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307536-obama-urged-cli...

"Many on the left" meaning every Democratic senator and congressperson, and the Democratic president himself too?

by jolux 6y ago

"Many on the left" meaning every Democratic senator and congressperson, and the Democratic president himself too?

What, you think Obama and the Clintons would have minded terribly if it turned out that way? Anyway, we're not shifting the goalposts to the leaders, we're talking about the people, which is the subject of the article. The people of the left were completely down with the faithless electorate concept, whoopie! And somehow you missed this point. Which leads me to a question: why? Perhaps you didn't hear about it. Perhaps you forgot it. Maybe you brushed it aside. Or maybe you recalled it and decided it wasn't worth mentioning. Each of these are mechanisms through which people are steered. You accuse the far right of doing something that the far left was doing just four years ago, and still you have thought yourself objective, but it doesn't work.

Tostino 6y ago
You can find people of any background who will spout contradictory rhetoric. I don't think you're making this argument in good faith. 2016 was a whole lot closer than 2020, and Clinton conceded and there was no serious calculated attempt to overturn the election results by either the public at large, or people who had any power to do so. Equating that with what's going on now does not seem like an argument made in good faith.
- at_a_remove 6y ago
  I was hanging out in lefty circles in 2016; the faithless electorate idea was wildly popular, as was the "the popular vote should win." These were the last hope for many who were previously so confident.
  - jolux 6y ago
    It's true that the popular vote should decide the presidency but unfortunately it doesn't in the US. It's a bad sign that we keep electing presidents who didn't win a majority of the popular vote. Nonetheless, we have to follow the rules and processes in the Constitution until we get the opportunity to change them.
  - watwut 6y ago
    The popular vote should win is still popular on left. In large part because both Clinton on Biden won popular vote. And partly because they don't count as real Americans in popular rhetoric and are getting increasingly ressentful about that.
jolux 6y ago
>The people of the left were completely down with the faithless electorate concept, whoopie! Well, I certainly wasn't, and I contest that this belief was widespread within the left, but without evidence one way or another we're not going to resolve this aspect of the disagreement. What I do know is that no significant number of people with political positions and political power used that power to throw the election results into doubt, as Mitch McConnell and GOP congresspeople are now doing.
ttesttom 6y ago
I don't think Obama would have supported it as he called Clinton urging her to concede early on election night. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307536-obama-urged-clinton-to-concede-on-election-night https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307536-obama-urged-cli...