The Post Harris/Walz 2024 thread

[Holografix]

"Somehow Palpatine returned"

For 'reasons,' maga republicans chose to write the next chapter of american political history by aping the plot device of the worst of the Star Wars films.

*Donald Trump is a convicted felon and adjudicated rapist.

[Hooch]

Автор сообщения: Soren

Автор сообщения: Hooch

The ideology chart I'm referring to and linked previously is determined by the bills sponsored and co-sponsored, not the bills voted for.

https://www.govtrack.us/about/analysis

A politician's actions are a much better determinant for their political leanings than their rhetoric.

Go to the idealogy tab for the charts from 2015 to 2020.

https://web.archive.org/web/20201101012148/https://www.govtrack.us/about/analysis#ideology

My link uses the same years Harris was in office. According to you. If you want to stand by the data in govtrack as absolute. Do you want to admit AOC is a moderate among the dems?

According to GovTrack, she's also far left.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/alexandria_ocasio_cortez/412804

BOTH are far-left. We not only see this in their rhetoric, but more importantly, in their actions of sponsoring and co-sponsoring bills.

Автор сообщения: Hooch

This has been explained before. In the socio-politico culture of the US, she is a far left liberal. She is not a candidate for the President of the World, so other country's political leanings are irrelevant.

AOC is a full on social democrat. She's further left than me in a lot of ways. Much further left than Kamala by my personal judgement. But you're now saying AOC and social democrats are actually moderate politics by US standards according to your own data with as many as 30% of dems being further left than her?

No, using the data i've provided, both are far-left.

Harris data: 2015-2020.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/kamala_harris/412678
AOC data: 2019-2024.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/alexandria_ocasio_cortez/412804

[Soren]

Автор сообщения: Hooch

Автор сообщения: Soren

Go to the idealogy tab for the charts from 2015 to 2020.

https://web.archive.org/web/20201101012148/https://www.govtrack.us/about/analysis#ideology

According to GovTrack, she's also far left.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/alexandria_ocasio_cortez/412804

BOTH are far-left. We not only see this in their rhetoric, but more importantly, in their actions of sponsoring and co-sponsoring bills.

AOC is on the older data too in the link I provided. In the older data she's further right. You're trying to use the latest data where she sponsored less right wing people. Which ironically. I think most would agree AOC was further left when earlier in her house career when she just started out as a justice dem member. But the data is saying she was actually more right wing between 2015 and 2020?

So. I guess I'll just rephrase the question so you can't get out of it. By your metrics, 2015-2020 AOC was a moderate? She was a social democrat back then too. You can cite the new data and call current AOC a far leftist if you want for all I care. But do you admit 2015-2020 AOC, the same exact data being pulled for Harris back then. That old AOC was actually a moderate back then and that Kamala was the far left extremist?

[Hooch]

Автор сообщения: Soren

Автор сообщения: Hooch

According to GovTrack, she's also far left.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/alexandria_ocasio_cortez/412804

BOTH are far-left. We not only see this in their rhetoric, but more importantly, in their actions of sponsoring and co-sponsoring bills.

AOC is on the older data too in the link I provided. In the older data she's further right. You're trying to use the latest data where she sponsored less right wing people. Which ironically. I think most would agree AOC was further left when earlier in her house career when she just started out as a justice dem member. But the data is saying she was actually more right wing between 2015 and 2020?

Using 2015-2020 for AOC doesn't make sense. She wasn't a Congresswoman until Jan 2019. Being new, she isn't going to sponsor or co-sponsor many bills.

It's why using a longer time frame (particularly for newer politicians) is preferred, it gives us more accurate data.

So. I guess I'll just rephrase the question so you can't get out of it. By your metrics, 2015-2020 AOC was a moderate?

No. She wasn't in office in 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. She was a leftist as per her rhetoric, we know this, and both seem to accept that.

The data for her in the chart from 2015-2020 only counts 2 of those years (2019 and 2020). So compared to the other politicians who have all or most of those years counted, of course her record is going to show less sponsorships. Why? Because there is no data for 4 of the 6 yrs recorded.

You can cite the new data and call current AOC a far leftist if you want for all I care. But do you admit 2015-2020 AOC, the same exact data being pulled for Harris back then. That old AOC was actually a moderate back then and that Kamala was the far left extremist?

No, you are misreading the data.

[Pronoun Paladin ☯]

Автор сообщения: Marcy

Автор сообщения: Hooch

See my edited post where I link to 2020 and her ideology chart compared with others. Doesn't matter if she is not THE FURTHERST left every time, what matters is that it is demonstrably true that she is far left. And has consistently been so.

You don't know what far left is.

Far left in America is essentially center right.

If you lived in other countries like Europe, you would know what Far left is.

No it's not, because Europe is irrelevant to the conversation. First we're talking about American politics and second Europe politics wise are a bunch of "has-beens" maybe 100 years ago they were relevant but now? Nobody cares about them and America is the number one country. Do we see ANY off-topic discussions on European politics or do we see multiple threads about American politics?

In other words. The Far Left in America are the far left, and Europe is extremely far left. Not the other way around.

Plus in discussing politics it simple makes more sense.

Take Hitler, he's labeled as a ring-winger, but by American standards he's a left-winger, and that makes sense. And considering Hitler was just a socialist who supported many social programs for his countrymen, he's not really that much more radical then many of the self-labeled left-wing governments we see in Europe.

Universal Basic Income
Universal Healthcare
Anti-Gun, Anti-Knife
Anti-Free Speech
Hate speech laws.
Pro-abortion

Do those above topics strike you as right-wing stances or left-wing stances?

[Quillithe]

Автор сообщения: Soren

Автор сообщения: Hooch

According to GovTrack, she's also far left.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/alexandria_ocasio_cortez/412804

BOTH are far-left. We not only see this in their rhetoric, but more importantly, in their actions of sponsoring and co-sponsoring bills.

AOC is on the older data too in the link I provided. In the older data she's further right. You're trying to use the latest data where she sponsored less right wing people. Which ironically. I think most would agree AOC was further left when earlier in her house career when she just started out as a justice dem member. But the data is saying she was actually more right wing between 2015 and 2020?

So. I guess I'll just rephrase the question so you can't get out of it. By your metrics, 2015-2020 AOC was a moderate? She was a social democrat back then too. You can cite the new data and call current AOC a far leftist if you want for all I care. But do you admit 2015-2020 AOC, the same exact data being pulled for Harris back then. That old AOC was actually a moderate back then and that Kamala was the far left extremist?

Sweet! I was wondering which dots were rightmost of the blue ones and I had totally forgotten about Marie Gluesenkamp Perez

She's great

[Soren]

Автор сообщения: Hooch

Using 2015-2020 for AOC doesn't make sense. She wasn't a Congresswoman until Jan 2019. Being new, she isn't going to sponsor or co-sponsor many bills.

It's why using a longer time frame (particularly for newer politicians) is preferred, it gives us more accurate data.

Govtrack already explained in their methodology (on the page I linked) that people who haven't sponsored or co-sponsored enough bills are excluded entirely from the data and the chart. That's why not every house and senate member is on the chart or data. So she had sponsored enough that she was included in that data set and it was deemed to be accurate enough.

[Quillithe]

Автор сообщения: Saturn830

Christ, they actually complimented Cheney and said he was putting the country first. Laughable.

https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/1fb7y88/dick_cheney_september_2024_i_am_going_to_become/

[Pronoun Paladin ☯]

Автор сообщения: Quillithe

Автор сообщения: Saturn830

Christ, they actually complimented Cheney and said he was putting the country first. Laughable.

https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/1fb7y88/dick_cheney_september_2024_i_am_going_to_become/

Lets be clear here.

Nazis were socalists. Nationalist Socialists Workers Party. Trump has repeatedly said that America will never be a socialists country.

Also Nazis are dead except for Nazis like George Soros. Who funds a large chunk of a Highly Progressive causes. During the below clip, George Soros was asked if it was difficult hunting for hiding Jews and stealing their wealth, and he says it wasn't difficult at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4EFGI0vwlE

Also lets be clear. Outside of the DNC were Pro-Palestine/Pro-Hamas protesters/Democrat Biden/Harris voters.. Hamas a split from a group known as the Muslim Brotherhood, which is a group that Hitler extensively worked with and supported.

Swastikas are not an uncommon sight in Pro-Palestine/Pro-Hamas rallies.

And the only other version of Nazism is Neo-Nazis, which we see in Ukraine and currently are giving military grade weapons to to fight Russians, a group that historically opposed actual Nazis.


IN other words stop trying to smear Trump as a Nazi.

Cartoons like that is why people say the left can't meme.

[Soren]

Автор сообщения: Chunk Norris ☯

Nazis were socalists. Nationalist Socialists Workers Party. Trump has repeatedly said that America will never be a socialists country.

The nazis weren't socialists. Some of the first people they killed were the brown shirts in their own party stupid enough to actually believe the party was about socialism. In the Night of Long Knives, the first people Hitler had killed were the people in his party who were actually socialists and believed in worker's rights. Some time after that he had political opposition who were communists locked up. Then political opposite who were socialists were locked up. Then trade unionists got locked up. Then jewish people and other people they considered degenerate.

Hence, the party wasn't socialist. They were fascist and nationalist. Fascism being a form of ultra-nationalism. The reason nazis are called fascists is mostly because their party was basically just the german version Mussolini's National Fascist party of Italy.

[Quillithe]

Автор сообщения: Chunk Norris ☯

Автор сообщения: Quillithe

https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/1fb7y88/dick_cheney_september_2024_i_am_going_to_become/

IN other words stop trying to smear Trump as a Nazi.

Cartoons like that is why people say the left can't meme.

If you think a meme is supposed to be 100% literally true the problem might be on your side

[Hooch]

Автор сообщения: Soren

Автор сообщения: Hooch

Using 2015-2020 for AOC doesn't make sense. She wasn't a Congresswoman until Jan 2019. Being new, she isn't going to sponsor or co-sponsor many bills.

It's why using a longer time frame (particularly for newer politicians) is preferred, it gives us more accurate data.

Govtrack already explained in their methodology (on the page I linked) that people who haven't sponsored or co-sponsored enough bills are excluded entirely from the data and the chart. That's why not every house and senate member is on the chart or data. So she had sponsored enough that she was included in that data set and it was deemed to be accurate enough.

That doesn't appear to be true. You linked both the current analysis methodology and the older 2020 stated methodology. Neither appear to say anything about a threshold or exclusion. Check for yourself.

Also, on the link you provided (waybackmachine), it shows that Harris (in the Senate) is far left, and AOC (in Congress) is far-left. Look in lower left hand corner on the respective charts to find them.

Where are you getting the ideas that a) there is a threshold for the chart, and b) that according to the ideology chart in 2020 for Congress, AOC is moderate? Am I missing something here?

Regardless of a threshold or not, the data clearly shows that AOC is far left in all ideology charts.

[Pronoun Paladin ☯]

Автор сообщения: Soren

Автор сообщения: Chunk Norris ☯

Nazis were socalists. Nationalist Socialists Workers Party. Trump has repeatedly said that America will never be a socialists country.

The nazis weren't socialists. Some of the first people they killed were the brown shirts in their own party stupid enough to actually believe the party was about socialism. In the Night of Long Knives, the first people Hitler had killed were the people in his party who were actually socialists and believed in worker's rights. Some time after that he had political opposition who were communists locked up. Then political opposite who were socialists were locked up. Then trade unionists got locked up. Then jewish people and other people they considered degenerate.

Hence, the party wasn't socialist. They were fascist and nationalist. Fascism being a form of ultra-nationalism. The reason nazis are called fascists is mostly because their party was basically just the german version Mussolini's National Fascist party of Italy.

Bro look at the riots going on outside of the DNC from the folks who are socialist and hate other socialists. And both sides will vote for Kamala Harris

Fascism is just another left-wing ideology, it's what I think current liberal in America are. This is not an insult, this is a descriptor.

A fascist someone who supports strong social and economic regimentation, which means lots of laws for the economy and laws for the social aspect of peoples lives. The support of a strong Central government and the willingness to do violence to advocate for ones political goal.

That's a fascist. Hitler was a fascist, but so are many other people. I think that average left-winger in America that we frequently call liberal is actually a fascist. And most classical liberals are actually what we call conservative or right-wingers.

As for socialism and Hitler. Socialism is where the PEOPLE control the means of production. But the PEOPLE end up being the government and of course all socialist tend to play favorites and decide who gets a voice and who doesn't. Look at how socialists in America have treated their own side in this regard. They knew that Joe Biden wasn't going to be President. Vivek called it over a year before Joe Biden resigned. Instead of a primary they had delegates select who they wanted to be President. In other words they didn't want their own PEOPLE to have a say who they wanted to run for President. And lets not forget all the times they kept other Democrats off the ballots or didn't give them any air-time. But I digress.

Socialism is where the government controls the means of production. That was Hitler. Watch Schindler's List. It was about a rich guy buying his way into the good graces of the Nazi Party, being given a factory and told what to produce. The PEOPLE control the means of production.

[Pronoun Paladin ☯]

Автор сообщения: Quillithe

Автор сообщения: Chunk Norris ☯

IN other words stop trying to smear Trump as a Nazi.

Cartoons like that is why people say the left can't meme.

If you think a meme is supposed to be 100% literally true the problem might be on your side

That's just it the left can't meme because nobody else believes in their fantasy.

If Trump were an actual supporter of the Nationalist Socialists Workers Party, or even a socialists, the meme MIGHT make sense...otherwise it's simply name-calling and almost a desperate expectation that people will find this entertaining.

It's political humor. It's not really funny unless one is a huge supporter for the cause, and then it's almost a flirtatious feel to it as everyone laughs at every joke that isn't really that funny.

[Holografix]

New campaign ad just dropped:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lKA_GeGwIo

[Hooch]

Автор сообщения: Chunk Norris ☯

Socialism is where the government controls the means of production. That was Hitler. Watch Schindler's List. It was about a rich guy buying his way into the good graces of the Nazi Party, being given a factory and told what to produce. The PEOPLE control the means of production.

Not exactly. Socialism involves public or collective ownership of the means of production, which means the government or the community owns and controls production, distribution, and resources, with the goal of reducing inequality and ensuring that wealth benefits everyone. This is distinct from the state-controlled or command economies of other systems.

In other words, Socialism is more than just "government controls means of production." That alone is not the qualifier.