3 ms·
Okay, if we change it to "see, cities controlled by politicians who claim to be progressive are bad!", is that more correct? Because either way, the fault seems
by colpabar 4y ago
Okay, if we change it to "see, cities controlled by politicians who claim to be progressive are bad!", is that more correct? Because either way, the fault seems to lie with progressive politicians, whether they are "real progressives" or not.
- dfxm12 4y agoOkay, if we change it to "see, cities controlled by politicians who claim to be progressive are bad!", is that more correct? If you want to explore who calls themselves progressive or not and compare the locales they run, you're on your own, because again, that's a different discussion. Because either way, the fault seems to lie with progressive politicians, whether they are "real progressives" or not. This sentence makes no sense. The only progressive politicians are real progressives, no? Why are you so intent on arbitrarily labeling people as something despite their actions? Or are you still stuck on this branding thing? Cause if so, I've got a bridge to sell you...
- colpabar 4y ago>Why are you so intent on arbitrarily labeling people as something despite their actions? I am intent on illustrating my point that the leaders of SF have successfully labelled themselves as progressives so that the progressives that live there will vote for them. I get your point that they aren't really progressive, but people vote for them because they sell themselves as progressive. I'm also not "stuck on this branding thing" - just because you disagree with me doesn't mean I'm dumb :)
- dfxm12 4y agobut people vote for them because they sell themselves as progressive. Did you happen to see the results of yesterday's election? Or when Breed defeated progressive challengers?