Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 21 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,549 posts, read 16,536,658 times
Reputation: 6032
Advertisements
[quote=radiolibre99;46325185] But the issue about guns, prolife and others aren't about a certain identity. Just because certain demographics gravitate toward those issues more doesn't make it an identity issue.
You're confusing this too much
As I said at least 3 times before, Im not defining identity politics by race or gender or sexuality. Please stop trying to claim that I am. Again, as I said before, it just looks like you are ignoring what I have typed because you want to portray me a certain way.
Quote:
. Identity politics is when the Dems pander to specific demographics with issues that cater mostly or only to them such as LGBT, Latino, BLM, gender issues, etc. How is this so difficult to understand?
You're trying to claim that because Christians gravitate toward prolife issues that it suddenly makes it an identity politics thing?
I understand your definition of Identity politics, what I dont understand is why you believe pandering to groups who arent LGBT, Latino,BLM, or women isnt the same thing.
your only explaination seems to be that those groups include all colors, but so does being LGBT, and so do non discrimination issues and so do voting rights,and so does police brutality. Those as the issues you are actually talking about when you say LGBT, immigrant and BLM
Quote:
And I'm not just basing my argument on race but identity but at the same time above even all the identities racial issues take precedent.
Again, I said from the beginning that I define it by the issue itself. Im fine with you having a different definition, but in your post, you seem to break it down to the simplicity of pandering to a group of people, and it that case, you would be arguing a distinction without a difference.
Let me state it this why.
Why is it wrong(worse?) to pander to gay people, and not wrong(worse)to pander to religious people ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by radiolibre99
Instead of just arguing that both camps use identity politics why not address why Dems rely on it in the first place if their mantra used to be one based on economics? Why did they change? Why the hostility toward Bernie and other liberals who say that it's not just about diversity or identity but the economy and class issues?
Why is this happening to the left, dsjj251??
The point of my post is that both sides do it, but only one gets attacked for it.
And to be clear , dont think Democrats "rely" on it as you claim. We fundamentally disagree on that.
I also dont think we changed. Barack Obama clearly drove home an economic message, and so did clinton in many of her campaign speeches( go to her youtube page and watch them). She as simply drowned out by Donald Trump, and while the media covered every campaign speech he made, they only covered hers when she addressed him.
Wow.. I didn't realize that guys knew Booker was a total loser... he is being groomed for 2020 and I would wager 85% chance of him being the nominee... it's sad because I think Booker is a good guy but his ambition is leading him to make a lot of backroom deals with Wall Street and asking a lot of "favors" from the political establishment...
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 21 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,549 posts, read 16,536,658 times
Reputation: 6032
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie
Wow.. I didn't realize that guys knew Booker was a total loser... he is being groomed for 2020 and I would wager 85% chance of him being the nominee... it's sad because I think Booker is a good guy but his ambition is leading him to make a lot of backroom deals with Wall Street and asking a lot of "favors" from the political establishment...
Cory Booker was/is a rising star. He doesnt need backroom deals or favors.
Anything he is doing, it is because he wants to, not because he is being forced.
Why is it wrong(worse?) to pander to gay people, and not wrong(worse)to pander to religious people ?
When you pander to LGBT it's usually creating a broad set of policies based on their identity. You depend on them as a base because of their identity. They're politics become wrapped up in their identity.
You don't have to be religious to be prolife but more religious people do gravitate to prolife issues.
I get your point but these are two different things because no one identifies as prolife as an individual or identity. You're arguing that in a roundabout way right wingers pander too which if you deconstruct it as such, makes some sense. But I'm talking about applying the politics of identity in a direct way.
Instead of just arguing that both camps use identity politics why not address why Dems rely on it in the first place if their mantra used to be one based on economics? Why did they change? Why the hostility toward Bernie and other liberals who say that it's not just about diversity or identity but the economy and class issues?
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 21 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,549 posts, read 16,536,658 times
Reputation: 6032
Quote:
Originally Posted by radiolibre99
When you pander to LGBT it's usually creating a broad set of policies based on their identity. You depend on them as a base because of their identity. They're politics become wrapped up in their identity.
You don't have to be religious to be prolife but more religious people do gravitate to prolife issues.
I get your point but these are two different things because no one identifies as prolife as an individual or identity.
You dont have to be gay to support equality.
Also, when I say religious, i dont just mean pro life, the LGBT issue is obviously apart of that as well. So are "decency laws", alcohol sales, Parental notice/consent laws, Hiring discrimination,medical treatment, divorce law and much more.
Everything you just said in the bold, can be said about catering to religious groups.
as for prolife itself , people do indeed state that they are pro life or pro choice, people spend thier lives and careers on that one issues and vote solely on it.
Wow.. I didn't realize that guys knew Booker was a total loser... he is being groomed for 2020 and I would wager 85% chance of him being the nominee... it's sad because I think Booker is a good guy but his ambition is leading him to make a lot of backroom deals with Wall Street and asking a lot of "favors" from the political establishment...
This is one big advantage to an outsider like Trump . He didn't need to sell himself out.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 21 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,549 posts, read 16,536,658 times
Reputation: 6032
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie
You can believe whatever you want... tick tick tick tick...
I think you are missing my point.
The things you see as bad that he is doing, he is doing them because he likes them. You are trying to paint him as the "good guy with ambition" and that may be true, but his flaws are of his own doing, not because of some invisible hand guiding him.
Sometime politicians you like personally dont always agree with you, people need to realize that.
The Republican Party has gone more towards the center while the Democrats have gone further left .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
