Donnie is not good for right wingers on those issues, they will want to avoid them. The fundie part of the Republican base has to know Donnie is iffy on family values. I doubt he is even anti-choice for real. Doesn't go to church. Married thrice. Married to a model not a good Christian woman.

they're boutique issues when none of them tangibly affect his life. Nonetheless I think he has a good point that if Dems don't start talking more about how they plan on protecting the country from the existential threat of Islamic extremism they cede the entire issue to Trump and the right...thereby giving them an advantage, especially when we or our allies get attacked.

Maher emphatically began his piece by taking his pet issue, marijuana legalization, off the table.

marijuana legalization really affects someone like Bill Maher all that much? He's rich and has probably always had access the the weed he wants. It's a low-stakes concession for him. What about the tens of thousands of men in jail for petty possession or dealing? Yes I watched it, you're missing my point here.

I take him at his word that it is important to him. To begin by belittling him seems to be an odd tactic in advancing your issue.

Nor am I saying the issue isn't important to him, but there's something to be said about how he is largely immune from the negative effects of marijuana prohibition. My only point is that it's easy for him to dismiss these issues as none of them really affect him. I said he has a point in my original post. And I'm allowed to question what he's doing without being over generalized.

He didn't say don't enact human rights legislation. He suggested not giving wingers an issue during the election. Haters get motivated by hate. They'll get out to vote by a bathroom issue but maybe not so much for trump.

He is suggesting an election strategy not changing our democratic ideals.

That doesn't disagree with my original statement. It's still easy for him to suggest such a strategy when it largely doesn't affect him to do so. I agree that he makes a good point.

Does he make a good point or not?

Yes.

So what does it matter if it is easy or not?

Not a complete one, but a good point nonetheless. The easy way out is BS in my opinion because if we reexamine how we talk about some of these issues we can remove the power that they have to motivate the right entirely. The actual problem is not that we're talking about these issues, it's the way that many on the left do it. Maybe there isn't much you could do to shift Marijuna legalization, but that's one of the least divisive issues mentioned in these threads and by Maher. The problem is that if we stop talking about some of these issues entirely we risk creating dispassion among the Democratic base. So we can't afford to do that either.

The same is true for abortion and gay marriage. They are issues which drive the insane RW fanatics to the voting booths. We know where we stand and so do Clinton/Kaine. The economy, jobs, education, social safety net, national security are the issues we need front and center. And we should not allow the RW to bait our candidates into making the bedroom issues our debating issues. Our candidates at all levels should know and understand this. They should be ready to pivot at all times.

Everyone knows where Clinton stands on important issues compared to Trump. Trying to put some controversial issue up front in right wing states is not going to help those issues if it helps Trump.

Just saying it's easy for him to say because he has no skin in the game. That's all.

[youtube]

What's your point?

It's a nuisance, albeit one we do have to deal with, but the term "existential threat" is garbage.

And pointing this out does not mean that your opposed to the strategy outlined by Maher I. This election. But it's context does absolutely deserve discussion.

but if we want the 'obama coalition' to appear (which also happens to be the democratic base) we need to speak to issues and advocate for issues that motivate said base

Without also motivating Trump voters. They're not mutually exclusive IMO.

You don't have to be a conservative or a liberal to address concerns around immigration or racial justice. People have just used words to make that impossible. Being worried about immigration doesn't make you a bigot and supporting racial justice does not make you a radical black supremacist leftist violent shit-stirrer.

and Democrats needs to stand up for black people and immigrants. when we do this as we have been, we are going to agitate trump voters, and that is fine.

I'm sure plenty of Trump supporters would be fine with immigration reform if they felt that the left addressed their apprehension around immigration. But most of the left paints them all with the broad brush of "bigot" because of their concerns, so they have no other logical place to go but yo the right. You're doing it now by saying "no" Trump supporters would like immigration reform or racial justice. It's easy to dismiss people's concerns when one of your main points invalidates their entire perspective and attaches a controversial label to them.

But to do this without authentically addressing, from the left, the concerns of white working class people is a mistake, and it's precisely why Some people are supporting Trump.

for instance, there is no real reason not to support BLM, but plenty of white people don't.

while one can make a more complex issue of immigration, there is no complex issue around BLM, besides racism

But not all white people are. And as a supporter of racial justice, there are reasons not to support Blck Lives Matter even if you support their entire policy agenda as I do. Most of my criticism of BLM concerns their presence on college campus and their attacks on free speech. Do you honestly believe that being opposed to BLM necessarily makes you racist? That's a gross over-generalization that subverts your otherwise clear intellectual motivations.

it does make you racist

can you disagree with some tactics, sure. But if one can't acknowledge that there is a deep crisis and therefore a level of desperation in this activism, then one just does not care enough about black people overall.

We weren't talking about supporting the core message of BLM. We were talking about supporting BLM. And what I'm saying is that you can have reservations about BLM and still support racial justice. But when you say people that have reservations about BLM don't support the core message of the organization and are racist, you're leaving some well-intentioned white peoples with no other place to go but the right to voice their concerns. You've invalidated them on the left. And, as I said, this is a mistake. This way of thinking actually brings us closer to fascism by pushing non-fascist whites into the undecided or Trump camp.

And doing something to address that would greatly impact people outside of the category you identified.

you need someone to advocate on your behalf for those issues as well, and those who dismiss issues that do not apply to them as boutique issues, are just callous and quite frankly have an outdated view of who exactly comprises the democratic base.

Well-stated point.

Personally, I think we ought to have more political parties, to be quite honest, so that more voices are being heard.

Some kind of coalition-style government.

We need to have intellectually genuine political debate, which is a tall order.

Any issue that you can think of will be better under a Clinton Supreme Court than a Trump Supreme Court.

If we focus on issues that bring in the most voters and Clinton wins, everyone will be better off.

so ignoring issues that are core to our base is silly.

at least get that right

if anyone really gave a shit about you, would you take to trolling women on the internet? i don't think so.

i could argue the issue, and have many a time, but not with you.

We seem to be helped by this issue. Since hb2 cooper went from down 3 to up 3 and Ross went from down double digits to within in 5

Whether you like it or not, most Americans (esp ones undecided) care little about liberal pet causes nor do they care when it's shoved in thier faces to choose with sides.

I am getting so god damned tired of being told my values don't matter. Fuck him and fuck everyone who thinks that way.

is derived from his two specific examples.

He is not going to advocate losing Ohio over "legalizing marijuana" - if that became a key issue. Drop it, don't even worry about it, even deny supporting legalization.

Barack Obama said "marriage should be between a man and a woman." He defused the issue. Did he believe it? He dropped his "opposition" like a hot potato, when it didn't matter anymore as an issue!

In other words, we should allow our candidates a little room to be victorious! We shouldn't require them to fall on their sword over something "politicized" as a key issue - just have faith our candidate will be on the right side when the barriers start to fall!

potato dropping involved. Dismissing the basic rights of others as 'politicized' issues that should be set aside for the sake of your own personal profits is conservatism.

Many on th he religious right are not inclined to vote for Trump. They can be drawn go the poll SC by a culture war appeal.
However, it will be the right that ignites the culture war. Trump has done that with his tirades against muslims, and his pledge to nominate Justices that will repeal Roe v Wade.
So fighting the war is not something we can forgo.

In the real world, he has no chance in hell.

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#00009d]Besides, the dems followed his advise in gay marriage in 2004 and still lost. It's almost like the American public prefer people who have and stand up on principal or something.

Besides, how can we call Trump out for being a divisive bigot when we wont even stand up for transpeople, the most marginalized and persecuted group in the country?

Maher is off the mark here.[/font]

I really don't think cultural issues are all that important.

I wouldn't put them in the top 100 issues.

I wonder when posters here starting making fun of LGBTQ people and claiming we "want a pony" again? Or which homophobes get to speak on behalf of our candidates? Or when we get blamed for Democrats losing elections again?

I don't miss the last decade at all. Maher won't ever leave 2005 though, he's stuck there, and so are his followers. Nobody really cares fortunately.

... avoid issues that'll only divide the middle and the left and focus on issues that'll rally the middle to our side.

On that note, one such issue to avoid is gun control. The right is unified, but the middle and left are far from it. Wait 'til after the election to push gun control issues.

Concerning your own pet issue, consider ... is that the hill you want to die on?

It's a rhetorical question.