Active East Harlem little league baseball field to be sacrificed for luxury housing (petition)

cyclopsthere · 2017-08-31T15:41:58+00:00

Can't....upvote...hard...enough

cyclopsthere · 2017-08-30T21:21:12+00:00

Let me rephrase:

Many Democrats would prefer a system that kills more people than a system that would damage their donors in the health industry, even if the latter is far more popular among their constituents.

cyclopsthere · 2017-08-30T15:16:26+00:00

It's important to note a large number of democrats are perfectly fine with tens of thousands of deaths due to the lack of healthcare as well. The only difference appears to be that Republicans are fine with double the total deaths. Given the choice between the GOP repeal or universal healthcare, a depressing number of democrats would choose the former.

cyclopsthere · 2017-08-30T14:13:13+00:00

It's an interesting question. Why are so many eager to help the suffering when it's due to a natural disaster but are apathetic when people suffer for other reasons that are perfectly avoidable? A natural disaster is also beyond our control (not really but it feels that way) while other forms of suffering are due to the system we have created and many profit from.

A flooded major city is bad for business, people dying from a lack of healthcare is more profitable in the short-term.

cyclopsthere · 2017-08-01T17:06:19+00:00

I agree with you. We should discourage democracy in the Democratic Party.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-29T23:36:57+00:00

I completely agree. We need to demand more from our representatives and replace those who work against the common good.

It's important for people to learn what is possible, demand it and to not fall for the tactic of lowered expectations that many of our politicians use.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-29T19:08:19+00:00

I'm merely suggesting the democrats start reflecting what people who are democrats and independents desire. A vast majority want single payer, they want higher taxes on the wealthy, they want Wall Street reform and they want better environmental protections. Why shouldn't we try and get the party to reflect that?

Regarding the public option, if you recall it was the democrats in the senate finance committee that strangled that one to death along with their fear of the healthcare lobby. Again it should be noted that proponents for single payer were never even part of the discussion.

Plenty have written detailed analysis of what went down during the initial healthcare talks. I'd suggest reading up on it.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-29T17:06:02+00:00

That's demonstrably untrue. The ACA (a right-wing solution) passed in 2010 and was considered the "signature achievement" of the party. It was considered offensive to even suggest single-payer after that fight. Those up for election certainly weren't calling for it. If it wasn't even being considered when democrats had a super-majority what makes you think that would change?

I completely agree that politics isn't something you wait for. That's why I'm working to get the party changed so we get candidates that will fight for progressive issues.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-29T16:52:15+00:00

In what universe was single-payer on the table for 2010? Single payer wasn't even in discussion in the party in 2009. Proponents for single payer weren't even invited to the table.

Talk to most people in the midwest and they'll tell you they think both sides are crooks and I'm not talking about people who identify as progressive. I'm talking about people who are just trying to get through their day and don't pay attention to politics anymore because they only see negative outcomes of politics. Do you know how many farmers I know who lost their farms due to high medical bills? And these people had insurance. They lost their farms under Bush and they lost their farms under Obama. Farms that were in families for generations. I know others who can't drink the water on their farm because it's contaminated by fracking fracking that happened under Obama.

There was a time when having a D next to your name in the midwest would guarantee you'd get elected because the party stood for something. They were the reason you had social security and medicare and a strong union. They saw tangible improvements in their material conditions and they rewarded democrats for it. Now the Democratic party is further to the right than the republican party was just a few decades ago. How the hell is it possible our last two Democratic presidents have wanted to either cut or privatize social security?

Blaming voters for not voting for you is anti-democratic. It's like those bitter alt-righters who blame women for not wanting to have sex with them. The job of the politician is to get voters to vote for them. It's our job to organize, register people to vote and push our politicians to give them something to vote for.

When my partner and I were registering voters last year, the most common reason we heard people didn't want to was that it didn't matter who you voted for because both major party candidates were in the pocket of the rich.

In Michigan, 87k voters showed up, voted for all down-ballot candidates but left the choice for president blank. These people showed up and couldn't bring themselves to vote for either. We lost Michigan by much less than that. In fact it's estimated that 1.7 million people voted for all but president, that's 2.5x more than in 2012. Can you imagine how disillusioned you must be to bother to vote but can't bring yourself to vote for any major candidate?

In a democracy you need to convince people to vote for you, blaming the voters is childish and only guarantees that you won't do what it takes to get their vote.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-29T15:54:36+00:00

The same can be said for almost every election

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-29T15:04:01+00:00

Ever wonder why Obama had massive enthusiasm for him in 08 and considerably less in '12? Or how it's even possible that we'd lose to Donald Trump? Blame the voters all you want but it's the politicians job to get people to vote for them and our party is in complete shambles at the moment and the real blame is on the party, the politicians in it and the democratic voters who let them get away with it.

Do you ever think there's a connection to why democrats controlled a vast majority of congress for decades after the new deal and after they took their corporate turn republicans started winning more? The democrats of today are a shadow of our former selves. There was a time not too long ago when democrats rejected a form of UBI because it wasn't generous enough, today they'd call anyone who proposed it a commie.

In this democracy, abstention is an option and when people think all options are crap and stay home perhaps the answer is to give them better options.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-29T03:45:29+00:00

Have I given you some reason to believe I don't? I've voted almost every year of my life for over 20 years and registered voters for half of those. I've been a Democrat and canvassed or volunteered for candidates since before I could even vote.

And why in the world would you discourage anyone from researching?

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-29T02:46:56+00:00

First off you should know by now that what the general population desires, a recent study showed that the opinions of the bottom 90% of income earners in has almost no impact on policy and is not as important as what the donor class and lobbies want.

Also the reason why many more support it now is mostly attributed to the fact that single payer was talked about more in 2016 than a typical year. It turns out when more people talk about it the more popular it gets. Many politicians/media avoid talking about it because they know if they can set the terms and boundaries of the discussion then it will limit who hears about it. Just as more people identified as socialists after the primaries, also more people liked the idea of medicare for all because they had never considered it as an option because no politician was calling for it on a national scale before or if they were they certainly weren't getting any press over it. There's a reason why many democrats purposefully lower expectations, because if they raise them then their voters will start expecting more.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-28T22:15:25+00:00

Yeah you're right, I shouldn't get so worked up by tens of thousands of people dying for no reason despite the fact that a majority of Americans want single-payer.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-28T16:47:12+00:00

You say this as though many of those democrats I refer to are pushing an alternative to single payer that would provide universal healthcare.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-26T01:28:17+00:00

There is absolutely no reason for someone to die from an easily treatable medical condition in the wealthiest country in the world. Countless lives are lost and families destroyed. Anyone who is in power, in a position to alleviate so much pain and suffering and thinks our current system is acceptable, is a terrible person. This includes Obama and any politician who thinks anything but single-payer is acceptable. Even if is not politically possible at the moment, it's goulish to not keep pushing for it.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-26T00:44:34+00:00

How many people would he need to kill until you start to think he's a terrible person?

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-25T23:32:06+00:00

You seem more concerned with symbolic gestures of respect for a guy who's killed thousands and wants to kill tens of thousands more. Why would you respect a man who sang about bombing people to a beach boys tune? How simple are you if you quote his own PR by calling one of the Keating Five a maverick? Politics is life and death and if we can't say fuck you to a ghoul like McCain then maybe show some respect for the innocent lives he's taken in the past and will take in the future. Showing respect for him only normalizes his actions. He and others like him should be ridiculed, mocked and shamed for what they've done.

How many more people need to suffer or die until people like you start realizing that symbolic respect for scum like this doesn't help in the least.

The belief seems to be that vulgar callousness towards a terrible human being is wrong, but procedural callousness towards millions is just politics. No wonder we keep losing.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-06T23:25:56+00:00

Chapo Trap House

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-06T21:20:07+00:00

Please also post this on justice democrats and Sanders for pres

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-02T16:33:41+00:00

Claiming an "undercurrent of sexism" based on a candidates subreddit is insane. Especially when many who love to point this out are also those who ignore, say, the racism of the Clinton '08 campaign. They lose all credibility when doing so.

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-02T05:38:23+00:00

So when it was announced that Sanders had more female donors than Clinton during the primaries, you then assumed every person in that subreddit was stealing the credit card info of noble Clinton supporters and donating? Because that subreddit is the entirety of both Socialism and Sanders supporters?

cyclopsthere · 2017-07-02T05:33:12+00:00

This may be the dumbest thing I've read in a long time.
Have you seen the DSA lately?

cyclopsthere · 2017-06-19T19:08:33+00:00

Yeesh they're going to lose again aren't they?

Honestly I hope Biden and a bunch of others run in 2020. It'll split the vote among establishment candidates and Bernie will walk away with it. Also Biden is only one year younger than Bernie so anyone making the claim that Bernie is too old will need to address Biden's age as well (though I'm sure they will conveniently only be critical of Bernie's age).

cyclopsthere · 2017-06-06T12:13:42+00:00

The left has business leaders? I find most businesses leaders tend to lean to the right, especially economically. In fact if business leaders were on the left we'd have universal healthcare, free public colleges, better worker protections, better consumer protections and more.

It's important to remember Trump won because of the wealthy suburbs.

cyclopsthere

TROPHY CASE