The Kalwejt Foundation for the Promotion of Atlas Hilarity

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

write-in: Larry Craig.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

And honestly if you do want to talk about "signals", how about the fact that Ellison was given a leadership role as well in an absolutely unprecedented move?

Gabbard and Rybak had leadership roles too, but couldn't stop DWS from rigging the primary.

It's hard to stop someone from doing something that they aren't doing.

Like stopping you from making a well-argued, articulate post?

Come on do you seriously agree with this loon who thinks Ohio 2004 was stolen that the primary was "rigged"?

I mean OK there was some background stuff that boosted Hillary in New York. Yeah that's a state she was sure in trouble of losing.

Name a state that would've voted for Sanders had it not have been for vote fraud or this "rigging".

F**k off, fake Bernie supporter.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

If you're a minority, the law will be vigorously enforced. If you're white, status quo.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Context:

Yes. For everyone but myself, of course.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Context:

Yes. For everyone but myself, of course.

Can we please have a higher standard for "hilarity"?

Really bad humor is one of my things. So probably not.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

lol what are you, a court cuck? can't defend your rights with your own hands?

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

What did Mark Zuckerberg do to everybody to make them act like he's evil?

https://www.facebook.com/

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

I think he'll win the primary but I hope he loses, for things like f**king over his constituents by being one of four Dems to vote for the Stream Protection Rule repeal, approving idiots like Carson and Perry to Trump's cabinet, and voting in favor of JEFF SESSIONS. Yeah, if I had my way, he should resign.

This is what I don't get - you hope he loses, but you understand who will very likely take his place in the Senate then, right? A Republican who would do all those things you just listed and far more.

The JD candidate is definitely someone I'd like in Manchin's seat (as far as I can tell), but she doesn't seem like a realistic winner in WV at all. Is an anti-coal crusader the best option there? Why can't they run candidates for other lower offices in WV first to see if that kind of candidate can actually win? As much as Manchin may piss liberals off, he still votes with Democrats much more than any Republican would.

If groups like JD start torpedoing Democratic Senate seats in conservative-leaning states in 2018, Democrats are going to be in the Senate minority for many years. The current path back to power in that chamber already requires a multi-cycle effort, and has little room for error.

I obviously think Manchin would be the lesser of two evils against a far-right Republican but I think that the right kind of progressive campaign that focuses more on economic issues could win in WV, especially if they are anti-establishment.
</KyleKulinskiHackRant>

I don't think you know that state at all.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

That's all those losers can do, protest. Then when they enter the real world in jobs

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What does this mean? Do you even know? What does it have to do with the topic at hand?

This is especially ironic, given that Betsy Devos is a child of privilege that surely hasn't had to experience "the real world in jobs".

Booing someone because you disagree with someone. There is a reason why millennials are unemployable. They  are spoiled. She shouldn't be Secretary of Education by the way. She should be RNC chair.

Wow, actually reading bronz's posts is a good way to make life interesting.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

I think he'll win the primary but I hope he loses, for things like f**king over his constituents by being one of four Dems to vote for the Stream Protection Rule repeal, approving idiots like Carson and Perry to Trump's cabinet, and voting in favor of JEFF SESSIONS. Yeah, if I had my way, he should resign.

This is what I don't get - you hope he loses, but you understand who will very likely take his place in the Senate then, right? A Republican who would do all those things you just listed and far more.

The JD candidate is definitely someone I'd like in Manchin's seat (as far as I can tell), but she doesn't seem like a realistic winner in WV at all. Is an anti-coal crusader the best option there? Why can't they run candidates for other lower offices in WV first to see if that kind of candidate can actually win? As much as Manchin may piss liberals off, he still votes with Democrats much more than any Republican would.

If groups like JD start torpedoing Democratic Senate seats in conservative-leaning states in 2018, Democrats are going to be in the Senate minority for many years. The current path back to power in that chamber already requires a multi-cycle effort, and has little room for error.

I obviously think Manchin would be the lesser of two evils against a far-right Republican but I think that the right kind of progressive campaign that focuses more on economic issues could win in WV, especially if they are anti-establishment.
</KyleKulinskiHackRant>

I don't think you know that state at all.

You're right, I don't really. But the fact that a room full of Trump voters cheered Bernie's progressive economic agenda could mean something. Not necessarily, but it's worth trying. The approach of running to the right hasn't helped the Dems.
Do you think West Virginians like big business and corporate greed?

Do you think West Virginians see the world in the same way that you do. Because I get the feeling that many of them would roll their eyes at a berniecrat talking about "the one percent". There is probably a subset of the population that supports populists like trump who would be attracted to Sanders and his economic agenda from an anti-establishment point of view. I'd like to see the source of your knowledge of that room full of trump voters. Do you have a link?

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

I think he'll win the primary but I hope he loses, for things like f**king over his constituents by being one of four Dems to vote for the Stream Protection Rule repeal, approving idiots like Carson and Perry to Trump's cabinet, and voting in favor of JEFF SESSIONS. Yeah, if I had my way, he should resign.

This is what I don't get - you hope he loses, but you understand who will very likely take his place in the Senate then, right? A Republican who would do all those things you just listed and far more.

The JD candidate is definitely someone I'd like in Manchin's seat (as far as I can tell), but she doesn't seem like a realistic winner in WV at all. Is an anti-coal crusader the best option there? Why can't they run candidates for other lower offices in WV first to see if that kind of candidate can actually win? As much as Manchin may piss liberals off, he still votes with Democrats much more than any Republican would.

If groups like JD start torpedoing Democratic Senate seats in conservative-leaning states in 2018, Democrats are going to be in the Senate minority for many years. The current path back to power in that chamber already requires a multi-cycle effort, and has little room for error.

I obviously think Manchin would be the lesser of two evils against a far-right Republican but I think that the right kind of progressive campaign that focuses more on economic issues could win in WV, especially if they are anti-establishment.
</KyleKulinskiHackRant>

I don't think you know that state at all.

You're right, I don't really. But the fact that a room full of Trump voters cheered Bernie's progressive economic agenda could mean something. Not necessarily, but it's worth trying. The approach of running to the right hasn't helped the Dems.
Do you think West Virginians like big business and corporate greed?

Do you think West Virginians see the world in the same way that you do. Because I get the feeling that many of them would roll their eyes at a berniecrat talking about "the one percent". There is probably a subset of the population that supports populists like trump who would be attracted to Sanders and his economic agenda from an anti-establishment point of view. I'd like to see the source of your knowledge of that room full of trump voters. Do you have a link?

Sorry for being Secular Talk sellout
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whxM34M94SE

That's a town hall. The people who seek out a town hall with someone are probably the more persuadable then those who don't, even if its simply a matter of paying attention.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Maybe. Republicans don't sound as out of touch to them as they do to you. And good luck being able to get that kind of talk to enough people in these places to break the bubble, let alone without neglecting your coalition(Rural areas are a pretty small minority of the US). And even if you do break that bubble, there's no guarantee you'll be able to convince enough people to matter.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

KS-04 is not a rural district. At all. It is centered around a suburban city.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Millennials are not really a values group of people. They have the most out of wedlock babies in the U.S. generation, so this is not surprising. A lot of millennial women have 4 baby daddies in their lives. This is not surprising. There's a reason why this generation is the most whacked out, foolish generation in modern memory.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

but KS-04 still went for Donnie by something like 25 points, not that far from WV. And again, the national Dems ignored it.

Similar margins =/= similar seats. The KS-04 special election was a low turnout election. Energization is significantly more impactful in those kinds of elections. For one, KS-04 trended about 2-4 points republican from 2012 to 2016. In West Virginia the trend was more like 10-20 points(and Clinton lost it by around 40 points). Margin tells you nothing about the personalities of the voters on either side.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

but KS-04 still went for Donnie by something like 25 points, not that far from WV. And again, the national Dems ignored it.

Similar margins =/= similar seats. The KS-04 special election was a low turnout election. Energization is significantly more impactful in those kinds of elections. For one, KS-04 trended about 2-4 points republican from 2012 to 2016. In West Virginia the trend was more like 10-20 points(and Clinton lost it by around 40 points). Margin tells you nothing about the personalities of the voters on either side.

Yes, but it shows that it's possible to overcome what's normally a 27 point loss for Dems and turn it into a 7 point loss.

It proves that margins can get weird in more obscure elections. It would mean something if it at least happened under a midterm electorate, but not under a much smaller electorate during a special election when liberals were highly energized by trump and conservatives weren't.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

but KS-04 still went for Donnie by something like 25 points, not that far from WV. And again, the national Dems ignored it.

Similar margins =/= similar seats. The KS-04 special election was a low turnout election. Energization is significantly more impactful in those kinds of elections. For one, KS-04 trended about 2-4 points republican from 2012 to 2016. In West Virginia the trend was more like 10-20 points(and Clinton lost it by around 40 points). Margin tells you nothing about the personalities of the voters on either side.

Yes, but it shows that it's possible to overcome what's normally a 27 point loss for Dems and turn it into a 7 point loss.

It proves that margins can get weird in more obscure elections. It would mean something if it at least happened under a midterm electorate, but not under a much smaller electorate during a special election when liberals were highly energized by trump and conservatives weren't.

It's a fair point that the situation was odd but it proves that deep red districts (and states) aren't unwinnable.

Just a question, do you think if Joe Manchin stopped taking cash from big business3 and didn't vote in favor of pollution (my biggest problems with him right now) he would be more or less electable?

You can potentially win weird districts in weird situations, but that doesn't mean you can reliably win them in normal situations. On Manchin:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, not taking donations, thus denying yourself access to very important campaigning tactics that your opponent will still have access to, is very damaging to ones electability. The only people who you'd please are already safe democrats, and many in WV would probably see it as a liberal grandstand. It would hurt royally unless a politician was prolific enough to attract a storm of grassroots donations(eg GA-06 special election, sanders presidential run). It doesn't work for senate races in economically depressed small states, especially when none of the enthusiastic donors like you. It is devastating to be known to the electorate only from attack ads(see Matt Heinz vs Martha McSally).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Do you know anything about West Virginia?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Clinton isn't a moderate, especially not in the eyes of the average West Virginian.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

WV would be particularly difficult but it's possible to do a national campaign for several progressive candidates in certain states, small dollar out-of-state donations are way better than big-money out-of-state donations.

Not with anywhere approaching the effectiveness of taking from larger groups. Most of the people donating to Sanders aren't going to even be paying attention to congress on a serious level. You'll get the leftover cash of a donor base a fraction of the size of the Sanders base. And the heavily invested minority that still donates will probably be more interested in candidates being ideologically/tonally pure enough for them then being a good fit for the state. It's been tried. It hasn't worked.

[/quote]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That would be a no, then.

West Virginians don't see environmental regulations in the same way that you do. Basically, they see them as the reason coal (and thus West Virginia) died. You are very bad at understanding that other people see political issues differently then you.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not so sure, especially among the Sanders-Trump-Clinton voters. Plus, I don't think that's quite the "good-bad" dichotomy they use to judge candidates.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

1. Big money has been tried and it hasn't worked for the Democrats. Hillary got WAY more money than Trump and still lost. Democrats have lost seats they shouldn't be losing. Take 0 corporate money and maybe people won't think you're a sellout or some establishment shill. Maybe you'll get a bit less money, but then what do you do? Go all over the place talking about how your opponent takes big money donations (as Republicans tend to do), and about how your average donation is twenny seven dollahs.

Lol. That doesn't work as well as you think it does. Most voters really don't care. Again, not everyone sees everything in the same way that you do. The attack ads airing all over the state are much more
effective then the target of said ads speaking in random bars or wherever

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most of those people, while not well off, aren't actually starving. They're often just rich enough to be primarily concerned with social issues. Those who are are often less interested in programs to help the poor and more interested in making themselves well-off enough to not need it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why do I even argue with you...

The idea that WV's and working class people, can't be persuaded to vote for left-wing parties, and left-wingers if there was a candidate that spoke to their concerns and to their ideals is ridiculous.

http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

Someone who has a lot more experience with white rural america then you.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

1. Big money has been tried and it hasn't worked for the Democrats. Hillary got WAY more money than Trump and still lost. Democrats have lost seats they shouldn't be losing. Take 0 corporate money and maybe people won't think you're a sellout or some establishment shill. Maybe you'll get a bit less money, but then what do you do? Go all over the place talking about how your opponent takes big money donations (as Republicans tend to do), and about how your average donation is twenny seven dollahs.

Lol. That doesn't work as well as you think it does. Most voters really don't care. Again, not everyone sees everything in the same way that you do. The attack ads airing all over the state are much more
effective then the target of said ads speaking in random bars or wherever

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most of those people, while not well off, aren't actually starving. They're often just rich enough to be primarily concerned with social issues. Those who are are often less interested in programs to help the poor and more interested in making themselves well-off enough to not need it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why do I even argue with you...

The idea that WV's and working class people, can't be persuaded to vote for left-wing parties, and left-wingers if there was a candidate that spoke to their concerns and to their ideals is ridiculous.

http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

Someone who has a lot more experience with white rural america then you.

Considering that they voted for democrats  in the past, many of them including McGovern and Mondale, I'm not going to take the article as the truth.

 I don't know what your problem is with the democratic party be a party of the under-privileged and the working class is (as a left-wing party should be), unless it's driven by blatant classism.

Also the article was so stupid, I don't know where to begin.

Bluntly, I doubt  courting the voters who last went for democrats under Bill "end welfare as we know it" Clinton would be good for the democratic party.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

Someone who has a lot more experience with white rural america then you.

As someone who has a lot more experience with white rural American than you, I can assure you that that article is bullsh1t.

It's hyperbolic, but it gets at the fact that there is a pretty big information bubble in many of these places. It was obviously colored by the experience of its writer (growing up in a white rural area).

http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

Someone who has a lot more experience with white rural america then you.

...

Never call yourself a "leftist" ever again.

Leftism isn't about who you think you can convince to vote for you.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

Someone who has a lot more experience with white rural america then you.

As someone who has a lot more experience with white rural American than you, I can assure you that that article is bullsh1t.

It's hyperbolic, but it gets at the fact that there is a pretty big information bubble in many of these places. It was obviously colored by the experience of its writer (growing up in a white rural area).

And this claimed existence of an information bubble is a lie.

https://www.cjr.org/analysis/breitbart-media-trump-harvard-study.php It's not just rural voters, but its among trumps base, which is, by the way, pretty heavily composed of working class whites.

http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

Someone who has a lot more experience with white rural america then you.

As someone who has a lot more experience with white rural American than you, I can assure you that that article is bullsh1t.

It's hyperbolic, but it gets at the fact that there is a pretty big information bubble in many of these places. It was obviously colored by the experience of its writer (growing up in a white rural area).

http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

Someone who has a lot more experience with white rural america then you.

...

Never call yourself a "leftist" ever again.

Leftism isn't about who you think you can convince to vote for you.

But it is, in literally all its forms, about egalitarian ideas and helping the least fortunate/striving for a more equal society.  Ridiculing some of the less fortunate areas of the country and writing them off is antithetical to leftism.

There's a difference between "I doubt we can win these people's votes without sacrificing too much of our core values, if at all" and "Lets leave these people to die".

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

I'd say in NH the House is very much more populist while the Senate is more establishment,  this is true for both Republicans and Democrats.  

With the House you get a lot more "everyday folk" since there are so many seats, while the Senate attracts more typical politicians that aspire to be in DC someday.

NH is pretty unique, though, because one out of every four New Hampshire residents is a member of the New Hampshire House of Representatives.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Why is this forum so obsessed with hating her?

Because this is forum of Hilary democrats, they hate anyone or anything not pro Hillary, doesn't matter if it's Bernie wing of the party, Trump, Biden etc.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Mathematically speaking, your chances of winning are 50/50.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

How does he plan to fund this? Are we suppose to expect the deficit hawks in the freedom caucus to pass this? Are Democrats gonna even entertain the notion of working with a Republican President after seeing how their last two Presidents were treated by the opposition Party?

Bush was treated worst easily by far . It was just that unlike clinton and obama, Bush held on to both houses of congress for the first 6 years of his president.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Ach, szkoda kurwa gadać, szkoda kurwa strzępić ryja naprawdę.

Reported for a racist attack.....if I understand my Polish correctly.

You meant your google translator?