Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
Author Message
Redwingtom Offline
Progressive filth
*

Posts: 51,524
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 971
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Soros' Basement
Post: #1
Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
An interesting read.

[Image: obama_carter.jpg]

Quote:The moral of this story is not directed at Democratic politicians; it is meant for us, the liberal rank and file. We still “yearn to believe,” as Perlstein says. There is something about the Carter / Obama personality that appeals to us in a deep, unspoken way, and that has led Democrats to fall for a whole string of passionless centrists: John Kerry, Al Gore, Michael Dukakis, Gary Hart and Bill Clinton. Each time, Democratic voters are enchanted by a kind of intellectual idealism that (we are told) is unmoored from ideology. We persuade ourselves that the answer to the savagery of the right—the way to trump the naked class aggression of the One Percent—is to say farewell to our own tradition and get past politics and ideology altogether. And so we focus on the person of the well-meaning, hyper-intelligent leader. We are so high-minded, we think. We are so scientific.

We are such losers.

Thomas Frank: “We are such losers”
(This post was last modified: 10-28-2014 03:14 PM by Redwingtom.)
10-28-2014 03:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Lord Stanley Offline
L'Étoile du Nord
*

Posts: 19,103
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation: 994
I Root For: NIU
Location: Cold. So cold......
Post: #2
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-28-2014 03:13 PM)Thomas Frank Wrote:  And so we focus on the person of the well-meaning, hyper-intelligent leader. We are so high-minded, we think. We are so scientific.

I see much of left's problem illustrated in the above comment, with additional caveats: that it's more important for a liberal to remind and tell everyone in their "high-minded" peer group that they believe the right things, hold the right views, support the right politicians, and vouch for the right laws. And all at the expense of actually nominating an effective Presidential candidate.

I believe this will be again proven true when Hillary Clinton easily gains the Democratic Party nomination for President - because it is more important to a liberal to elect a women than it is to elect a competent candidate.
10-28-2014 04:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Progressive filth
*

Posts: 51,524
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 971
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Soros' Basement
Post: #3
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
First, it's not going to be easy for HRC. Remember last time. She was entitled!

And second, it's more important to elect nearly anyone when your alternative is McCain or Romney.

If it were just about selecting a woman, personally, I'd select Warren before I'd ever select HRC.
10-28-2014 04:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DragonLair Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,662
Joined: Sep 2010
Reputation: 41
I Root For: Uab
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-28-2014 04:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  First, it's not going to be easy for HRC. Remember last time. She was entitled!

And second, it's more important to elect nearly anyone when your alternative is McCain or Romney.

If it were just about selecting a woman, personally, I'd select Warren before I'd ever select HRC.

I don't really follow politicians but In your opinion why would you prefer Warren before Clinton?
10-28-2014 04:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Progressive filth
*

Posts: 51,524
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 971
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Soros' Basement
Post: #5
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
Clinton will be too beholden to big business...and I don't care quite so much for her foreign policy. That being said...I still need to hear a little more on Warren's foreign policy first.
10-28-2014 04:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lord Stanley Offline
L'Étoile du Nord
*

Posts: 19,103
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation: 994
I Root For: NIU
Location: Cold. So cold......
Post: #6
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-28-2014 04:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  First, it's not going to be easy for HRC. Remember last time. She was entitled!

Easy? No. But through a combination of A) no other real candidate and B) about the only person that could beat a White Women for the nomination was probably a Black Man, then I believe that most liberals would prefer to say "I voted for an African-American president and a Female president" no matter their incompetence nor lack of experience than they would say "I voted for another White male lawyer." Like I said, it is more important for a liberal to tell everyone how pure their liberalism is, and to present their bona fides to the "high-minded" than it is to vote for competency.

(10-28-2014 04:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And second, it's more important to elect nearly anyone when your alternative is McCain or Romney.

In the always fun game of Armchair Quarterback, I quite confident that a Romney presidency would have been better for the USA in foreign and domestic terms than the current crackjack diplomacy and yes-man policy of the Obama Adminstration.

(10-28-2014 04:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  If it were just about selecting a woman, personally, I'd select Warren before I'd ever select HRC.

04-jawdrop
10-28-2014 05:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,655
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #7
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
I'd go with HRC over Warren by a long shot. Warren is incredibly dangerous. The fact that she could even get serious mention for the presidency is quite scary. I can't imagine our economy surviving Warren. You would see so much money pull out of here that I don't know how we would function. To me, Warren really is the Mugabe/Zimbabwe candidate.
(This post was last modified: 10-28-2014 05:04 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
10-28-2014 05:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
maximus Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,681
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 1280
I Root For: MEMPHIS
Location:
Post: #8
Re: RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-28-2014 04:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  First, it's not going to be easy for HRC. Remember last time. She was entitled!

And second, it's more important to elect nearly anyone when your alternative is McCain or Romney.

If it were just about selecting a woman, personally, I'd select Warren before I'd ever select HRC.
Socialist Party USA huh?
10-28-2014 06:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Native Georgian Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,519
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 1024
I Root For: TULANE+GA.STATE
Location: Decatur GA
Post: #9
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-28-2014 04:51 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Clinton will be too beholden to big business...and I don't care quite so much for her foreign policy. That being said...I still need to hear a little more on Warren's foreign policy first.
Back when Clinton was still President, Christopher Hitchens made the point that his decisions could always be predicted, if you knew how his big-$$$ people felt and what Dick Morris' private opinion-surveys showed. (For about 25 years, Dick Morris was the Clintons' closest political adviser). Since leaving the White House, the Clintons and Morris have had a very public falling-out. But the basic Clintonian dynamic -- slave to the polls and the "donor community" alike -- remains unchanged.

Has Elizabeth Warren ever said anything that was not the majority-view of DailyKos, MoveOn, etc.? (no).
Why would she start now?
10-28-2014 07:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UConn-SMU Offline
often wrong, never in doubt
*

Posts: 12,961
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 373
I Root For: the AAC
Location: Fuzzy's Taco Shop
Post: #10
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
How can any sane, rational person believe we will be better off if the size of goverment is increased?

Clinton is creepy, but Warren is beyond scary. She is Paul Krugman without the beard.
(This post was last modified: 10-28-2014 09:41 PM by UConn-SMU.)
10-28-2014 09:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardFan1 Offline
Red Thunderbird
*

Posts: 15,148
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 644
I Root For: Louisville ACC
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
Agree about Warren. She was here yesterday stumping for Alison and even some leftwing moderates I'm friends with feel She is so far up Obamas "A" it would take 5 years to dig out. Hillary did the best thing She could do when She bailed Obama's staff for Them. Some though Hillary is slipping as She ages and not sure She could last more than 1 term as president.
10-29-2014 04:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Fo Shizzle Offline
Pragmatic Classical Liberal
*

Posts: 42,023
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 1206
I Root For: ECU PIRATES
Location: North Carolina

Balance of Power Contest
Post: #12
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-28-2014 05:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'd go with HRC over Warren by a long shot. Warren is incredibly dangerous. The fact that she could even get serious mention for the presidency is quite scary. I can't imagine our economy surviving Warren. You would see so much money pull out of here that I don't know how we would function. To me, Warren really is the Mugabe/Zimbabwe candidate.

I never thought I would say it...but...If the GOP manages to gain both houses? Ill vote for HRC just for balance. NEVER allow one gang total control.
10-29-2014 05:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,655
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #13
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-29-2014 05:35 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  
(10-28-2014 05:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'd go with HRC over Warren by a long shot. Warren is incredibly dangerous. The fact that she could even get serious mention for the presidency is quite scary. I can't imagine our economy surviving Warren. You would see so much money pull out of here that I don't know how we would function. To me, Warren really is the Mugabe/Zimbabwe candidate.

I never thought I would say it...but...If the GOP manages to gain both houses? Ill vote for HRC just for balance. NEVER allow one gang total control.

Problem with that is if a democrat is elected president, democrats would probably take back senate too.
10-29-2014 05:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UConn-SMU Offline
often wrong, never in doubt
*

Posts: 12,961
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 373
I Root For: the AAC
Location: Fuzzy's Taco Shop
Post: #14
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-29-2014 05:35 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  
(10-28-2014 05:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'd go with HRC over Warren by a long shot. Warren is incredibly dangerous. The fact that she could even get serious mention for the presidency is quite scary. I can't imagine our economy surviving Warren. You would see so much money pull out of here that I don't know how we would function. To me, Warren really is the Mugabe/Zimbabwe candidate.

I never thought I would say it...but...If the GOP manages to gain both houses? Ill vote for HRC just for balance. NEVER allow one gang total control.

So if the Republicans controlled both houses, and appeared to be sincere about scaling back the size & scope of government, you would vote against their presidential nominee to block their efforts?
10-29-2014 05:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,655
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #15
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-29-2014 05:51 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  
(10-29-2014 05:35 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  
(10-28-2014 05:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'd go with HRC over Warren by a long shot. Warren is incredibly dangerous. The fact that she could even get serious mention for the presidency is quite scary. I can't imagine our economy surviving Warren. You would see so much money pull out of here that I don't know how we would function. To me, Warren really is the Mugabe/Zimbabwe candidate.
I never thought I would say it...but...If the GOP manages to gain both houses? Ill vote for HRC just for balance. NEVER allow one gang total control.
So if the Republicans controlled both houses, and appeared to be sincere about scaling back the size & scope of government, you would vote against their presidential nominee to block their efforts?

What has given you the idea that republicans are "sincere about scaling back the size & scope of government"?
10-29-2014 05:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UConn-SMU Offline
often wrong, never in doubt
*

Posts: 12,961
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 373
I Root For: the AAC
Location: Fuzzy's Taco Shop
Post: #16
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-29-2014 05:59 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(10-29-2014 05:51 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  
(10-29-2014 05:35 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  
(10-28-2014 05:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'd go with HRC over Warren by a long shot. Warren is incredibly dangerous. The fact that she could even get serious mention for the presidency is quite scary. I can't imagine our economy surviving Warren. You would see so much money pull out of here that I don't know how we would function. To me, Warren really is the Mugabe/Zimbabwe candidate.
I never thought I would say it...but...If the GOP manages to gain both houses? Ill vote for HRC just for balance. NEVER allow one gang total control.
So if the Republicans controlled both houses, and appeared to be sincere about scaling back the size & scope of government, you would vote against their presidential nominee to block their efforts?

What has given you the idea that republicans are "sincere about scaling back the size & scope of government"?

Nothing. But with Republicans in control of both houses and the presidency, there may be a 1% chance of it happening. With Clinton in office, there is a 0% chance of it happening. So in that situation, why vote for Clinton?

The Republicans are our last, best hope to reverse the slide into sociàlism and financial ruin. Although we may already be in too deep to get out.
10-29-2014 07:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Redwingtom Offline
Progressive filth
*

Posts: 51,524
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 971
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Soros' Basement
Post: #17
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-28-2014 06:58 PM)maximus Wrote:  
(10-28-2014 04:32 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  First, it's not going to be easy for HRC. Remember last time. She was entitled!

And second, it's more important to elect nearly anyone when your alternative is McCain or Romney.

If it were just about selecting a woman, personally, I'd select Warren before I'd ever select HRC.
Socialist Party USA huh?

Were you trying to make some type of point here? If so, please make it so we can discuss. Otherwise, responses like this have no place here. Thanks.
10-29-2014 08:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Progressive filth
*

Posts: 51,524
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 971
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Soros' Basement
Post: #18
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-28-2014 05:01 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  B)most liberals would prefer to say "I voted for an African-American president and a Female president" no matter their incompetence nor lack of experience than they would say "I voted for another White male lawyer." Like I said, it is more important for a liberal to tell everyone how pure their liberalism is, and to present their bona fides to the "high-minded" than it is to vote for competency.

LS, this is an idiotic fallacy that really just needs to stop being promulgated. I can you assure you with 100% certainty that neither I nor any of my liberal friends ever even gave this an iota of thought. It just isn't a factor whatsoever.
10-29-2014 08:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Redwingtom Offline
Progressive filth
*

Posts: 51,524
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 971
I Root For: B-G-S-U !!!!
Location: Soros' Basement
Post: #19
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
(10-28-2014 05:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'd go with HRC over Warren by a long shot. Warren is incredibly dangerous. The fact that she could even get serious mention for the presidency is quite scary. I can't imagine our economy surviving Warren. You would see so much money pull out of here that I don't know how we would function. To me, Warren really is the Mugabe/Zimbabwe candidate.

Thanks! Now I know that I should vote for her! 04-cheers
10-29-2014 08:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #20
RE: Liberals: "We Are Such Losers" ~ Thomas Frank
I think the title and the article speaks to the idealism of ivory tower liberals and how such dreams are shattered by the reality that the nation, unlike universities, cannot forcefully eliminate the competition. I don't even think most people who vote (D) are nearly as left as most of the professors and journalists believe them to be, which is the DNC real blind spot.
10-29-2014 09:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.