The State of the Democratic Party II

[Bakery Hill]

"Rural voters care a lot about supporting Saudi Arabia in one of their vaguely genocidal wars they can't properly handle, in fact doorknocking in rural Oklahoma I hear it every second house."

[MERIZoC]

What's your point?

That a Blue Dog in a Red State voting for the motion would probably be vulnerable in 2018.

And how many of those 10 are in safe blue states?

Why would that matter? "Oh no, now Joe Manchin can't win moderate voters from the GCC block"

[Petrasylvania]

That a Blue Dog in a Red State voting for the motion would probably be vulnerable in 2018.

Why would that matter? "Oh no, now Joe Manchin can't win moderate voters from the GCC block"

Because it would play into campaign narratives that the Democrats are somehow weak on supporting our allies and that they are thus bending over for terrorists?

[Bakery Hill]

Listen the Salafists form an important voting block in West Virginia. They understand, as you should, that the rafida need to be suppressed. I'm Joe Manchin from the Democratic Blue Dog Caucus and I endorse this message.

[Bakery Hill]

Because it would play into campaign narratives that the Democrats are somehow weak on supporting our allies and that they are thus bending over for terrorists?

Yes everyone loves Saudi Arabia, it'd be hard to sell not giving fucking incendiaries to the state many people suspect were involved in 9/11

[Collatis]

That a Blue Dog in a Red State voting for the motion would probably be vulnerable in 2018.

Because it would play into campaign narratives that the Democrats are somehow weak on supporting our allies and that they are thus bending over for terrorists?

This is your weakest defense of Blue Dogs yet. There is not a pro-Saudi voting bloc anywhere in the United States, much less among conservatives who are more likely to oppose Muslims of any stripe.

By the way, does anyone know which five Republicans voted for the motion? I’m guessing Rand Paul and Mike Lee are two of them.

[Improved werpland]

And how many of those 10 are in safe blue states?

Why would that matter? "Oh no, now Joe Manchin can't win moderate voters from the GCC block"

Joe Manchin already dealt with a progressive left-wing challenger in 2010. West Virginians seem to prefer his conservative and Saudi-supporting politics.

[Collatis]

That a Blue Dog in a Red State voting for the motion would probably be vulnerable in 2018.

Because it would play into campaign narratives that the Democrats are somehow weak on supporting our allies and that they are thus bending over for terrorists?

This is your weakest defense of Blue Dogs yet. There is not a pro-Saudi voting bloc anywhere in the United States, much less among conservatives who are more likely to oppose Muslims of any stripe.

By the way, does anyone know which five Republicans voted for the motion? I’m guessing Rand Paul and Mike Lee are two of them.

Never mind, found it. Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Susan Collins, Steve Daines, and Jerry Moran.

[The East Marches II]

Listen the Salafists form an important voting block in West Virginia. They understand, as you should, that the rafida need to be suppressed. I'm Joe Manchin from the Democratic Blue Dog Caucus and I endorse this message.

Salafists buy West Virginian weapons and keep all those federal agencies, that Senator Byrd got them through pork, in business.

[The Parkus Empire]

Because it would play into campaign narratives that the Democrats are somehow weak on supporting our allies and that they are thus bending over for terrorists?

Fuck, m8, I would vote for a Dem against the Saud for my representative any day if his opponent was a Saudi shill.

[Corrian]

The Senate has blocked a motion that would end US involvement in the destruction of Yemen, a move only made possible with the help of 10 democrats. Scum of the earth....

Not remotely surprised, but still pissed off. Fuck those Democrats.

[Corrian]

What's your point?

That a Blue Dog in a Red State voting for the motion would probably be vulnerable in 2018.

"Oh, I might lose my election, so I'll vote to continue to cause the death of thousands of innocents and the starvation of countless more in Yemen so I can keep my seat"

[Corrian]

Because it would play into campaign narratives that the Democrats are somehow weak on supporting our allies and that they are thus bending over for terrorists?

Ah yes, because supporting Saudi Arabia is so popular in this country.

[Valrifell]

That a Blue Dog in a Red State voting for the motion would probably be vulnerable in 2018.

"Oh, I might lose my election, so I'll vote to continue to cause the death of thousands of innocents and the starvation of countless more in Yemen so I can keep my seat"

Yemen is a ways over there. I'm here, my Senator is here, so is my representative. Call me cold, but I can't exactly find it within myself to get outraged that people half across the world will continue to be killed.

I mean, I don't find myself with moral outrage in the midst of an African insurgency or civil war.

[Corrian]

"Oh, I might lose my election, so I'll vote to continue to cause the death of thousands of innocents and the starvation of countless more in Yemen so I can keep my seat"

Yemen is a ways over there. I'm here, my Senator is here, so is my representative. Call me cold, but I can't exactly find it within myself to get outraged that people half across the world will continue to be killed.

I mean, I don't find myself with moral outrage in the midst of an African insurgency or civil war.

But I would also gather you'd be perfectly fine with ending that. And us to stop supporting Saudi Arabia in committing it.

[Valrifell]

Yemen is a ways over there. I'm here, my Senator is here, so is my representative. Call me cold, but I can't exactly find it within myself to get outraged that people half across the world will continue to be killed.

I mean, I don't find myself with moral outrage in the midst of an African insurgency or civil war.

But I would also gather you'd be perfectly fine with ending that. And us to stop supporting Saudi Arabia in committing it.

Yes, this is true. Ending it would be nice, but maintaining the status quo isn't exactly making things worse for people in the region, it just isn't making it better. A position I think, better describes my lack of outrage.

[The Parkus Empire]

The Senate has blocked a motion that would end US involvement in the destruction of Yemen, a move only made possible with the help of 10 democrats. Scum of the earth....

The Seventeenth Amendment was a mistake

[Corrian]

But I would also gather you'd be perfectly fine with ending that. And us to stop supporting Saudi Arabia in committing it.

Yes, this is true. Ending it would be nice, but maintaining the status quo isn't exactly making things worse for people in the region, it just isn't making it better. A position I think, better describes my lack of outrage.

Typical of Americans to not care about our destruction elsewhere, so not really surprising.

[Improved werpland]

The Senate has blocked a motion that would end US involvement in the destruction of Yemen, a move only made possible with the help of 10 democrats. Scum of the earth....

The Seventeenth Amendment was a mistake

There probably would have been much less support for this bill if that were so.

[Pope Joan]

Because it would play into campaign narratives that the Democrats are somehow weak on supporting our allies and that they are thus bending over for terrorists?

Ah yes, because supporting Saudi Arabia is so popular in this country.

It is popular with the powerful Jewish Lobby, who are making common cause with the house of Saud against the Shiites. Israel is aiming at Hezbollah and the Sauds at Iran, but for a while their routes follow the same path

[The Parkus Empire]

The Seventeenth Amendment was a mistake

There probably would have been much less support for this bill if that were so.

No, not really. Statewide popular elections require much more pandering because they need massive campaign machines

[Reversistan]

Should the Democrats risk working with the Republicans on infrastructure?

Yes, but they ought to be very careful about it.

[Pope Joan]

Should the Democrats risk working with the Republicans on infrastructure?

Yes, but they ought to be very careful about it.

How ironic that American steelworkers are endorsing Trump (not the GOP per se, but Trump) while the establishment DNC leaves them to twist slowly in the wind. Same goes for infrastructure: Jobs! Real hands-on work and not just paying others to retrain people with skills that will soon not be needed. And it helps build up our nation physically.

FDR did something like that.

But now it comes from Trump, so the DNC cannot stand for it.

Instead, they want NAFTA and the TPP.

[Improved werpland]

There probably would have been much less support for this bill if that were so.

No, not really. Statewide popular elections require much more pandering because they need massive campaign machines

So they’d be less supportive of unpopular stuff like this when they aren’t subject to actual voters? I think the original reason we got rid of the old system hasn’t changed. This is just an anti-democratic pipe dream for Republicans who got excited about the number of states they control

[Kramanica]

I see you back Shia extremists of any stripe, regardless of whether they are useful for ending the occupation of Al-Quds.

lol Saudi propaganda bullshit

The only extremists are the imperialists trying to destroy a country

Do you have any talking points that don't sound like they came straight from the mouth of the Ayatollah?