The Virginia Society for the Preservation and Appreciation of High-Quality Posts

[White Trash]

Lastly, this sort of attitude indicates a failure to take Evangelical concerns around abortion and religious liberty issues seriously. Even if you think our positions our wrong, try to see things from our point of view. If the Candidate A, wants to fund baby killers, and make you betray your conscience to be in the wedding business, you'll be willing to accept a lot of crap from Candidate B, and criticism about "family values" from Candidate A's supporters will ring hollow.

I wish there was a way for Democrats to reach pro-life voters, but from a pro-choice perspective I really don't get how that is to be done without neglecting pro-choice voters. This particular issue really seems to be one or the other, unless you count simply not pushing abortion policy at all a choice, which I find hard because pro-life groups are constantly pushing the GOP to restrict abortion in extremely novel ways 365 days a year, which demands pushback from liberals.

I should state that I'm not trying to be a jerk here. I'm just saying that for someone who prides themselves in Christian values, their principles, and so on, to support Trump - let alone support him so deeply like many do, means you are sacrificing a part of your convictions. There is no way you can have both with Trump. Like I said, he is so objectively awul in almost every way that there is just no way to reconcile the two. I can get how people would choose him to get pro-life judges for instance, but it doesn't change anything else. They know who Trump is, what he's done and what he says on a daily basis, so it's just one of those choices people have to make and they have to live with that.

How about the Democrats instead push for defederalizing the issue? Just wondering how that would work.

[White Trash]

Nationalism.

I would have shocked myself by answering this way as recently as a couple of years ago, but in 2017 I'll vote for the smaller unit down to villages and neighborhoods. The past couple of decades have shown that globalization as we know it isn't all that democratic or egalitarian a process. Its leading institutions - the UN, the EU, the World Bank, major corporations, etc. - are corrupt, opaque, plutocratic, and removed from the concerns of too many people. Until someone can offer a better form of globalization, one that is fairer and less disempowering, you can count me out.

And please spare me the global poverty routine. Cost-benefit analysis humanitarianism is just not convincing anymore. It's all exceptionally noble in theory, but as long as the places that I know are socially dysfunctional, economically devastated, physically crumbling, and literally dying off, my moral circle will not and cannot go far enough to take solace in some worldwide utilitarian calculus.

Besides, if your only consolation is some feel-good abstraction, religious fundamentalism and ethnic chauvinism will do the job much better than that for most people stuck on the losing end.

[White Trash]

Kamala Harris has done more for the justice of million Californians, the most racially diverse state in the country, then Bernie Sanders has done for his sh**tty rural white state. Yet it's the old mediocre white guy that is being shoved down the base throat, when Kamala is a inspiration to many WOC who feel the pain of living in Trump America. Explain to me how the low accomplished senator gets a fair shot at the presidency and not the hard-working GA.

As for winning over voters, I think the blue collar dotards are lost for good. Whatever sacrifice they've earned has been lost be embracing the toxicity of Donald Trump. The party ought to push double down on the key demographics that support Democrats, such as women of color, who are the highest turnout demographic of all ethnic groups in the country. Most young blue collar white women can be won over by Kamala platform, even with young blue collar men being just as reactionary as their Fox News watching papa. Moderates who are discomfort with the far-right and far-left can be inspired to cast a vote for the sensible California senator, who won't make you lose your sleep at night. 


I couldn't think of a better nominee who would inspired the base to come out to the polling stations.

You are literally a fucking moron if you think that young blue collar men are all conservative "muh American" Republicans. Here in New England young white men vote mainly Democratic (Especially the Irish). As a matter of fact as you climb up the economic ladder, you will find that it is those sensible "moderate" upper middle-class whites who aren't very blue collar at all, that are responsible for the loss of your precious Maddam Secretary last November. I am well aware that this is one of the most liberal regions of the nation, however it wasn't too long ago that Democrats were able to win blue collar voters in Appalachian States as well as in the rust belt. You talk about doubling down on minority demographics which is all well and good, but what seems to be too much for your thick skull to comprehend is that there are not nearly enough minority votes out there by themselves to win elections. 2016 proved that. You also seem to forget that the economic issues that are plaguing those blue collar "dotards" also plague people of color. What is Kamala Harris going to do about healthcare or wealth inequality? Also, as someone who seems not to care about the lives of people who have hoped to serve the minimum time required, and instead pushes for longer sentences, how do you think people of color feel about that? People of color in America have long been fed the line about law and order, and from what I gather aren't all that convinced that said law and order is being applied evenly or fairly.

But please, be my guest. Continue to divide the "good people" and "those people" by class and race, just like the GOP, and see how far it gets you.