When has splinterism brought about intended political change?

[LoZoccolo]

[daleanime]

1. When has compromising brought about intended political change?

:shrug:

[dtexdem]

10. Ow, I don't like splinters.

Bad, bad, splinters!

;-)

[daleanime]

33. ....

:eyes:

[Oregone]

2. When does advocating liberal policies equate to spinterism?

Another epic fail unrecced into oblivion.


BTW: If people aren't important enough to worry about while governing, why the fuck are you so worried now? I'm sure the numbers of discontent "splinterists" are negligible, so is your fear justified? Are you in full out panic mode over votes you'll pick up in the center anyway? Is the sky really falling when you played perfectly according to your very own rules? Why don't you have faith in the 3-D chess plan?

[LoZoccolo]

3. >Implying that I believe that advocating liberals (sic) policies equate (sic) to spinterism (sic).

[Oregone]

4. Then I don't know what the fuck you are talking about with this splinterism hysteria

If the chess game was truly 3-D, this should all be according to plan; of course I wonder why you are running around in fear like a headless chicken

[Individualist]

6. Well said!

:thumbsup:

[Warren Stupidity]

7. it has its own language

reminds me of marxists from the late 60's.

[LoZoccolo]

8. Splinterism is voting for third parties. n/t

[Oregone]

11. Why would they do that when the Democratic party bends backwards to meet their desires

I mean, shit, look how the party came out swinging for universal, single-payer healthcare! For those concerned about social and economic justice, they should look no further!

Im not sure these type of people you are so scared of exist. Are you sure? What makes you think that?

[LoZoccolo]

13. When has splinterism brought about intended political change?

[Oregone]

15. When do splinterists exist?

I'm not sure your question is even worth mulling over if these boogeymen you are hysterical about don't really exist. What are their grounds for existing? Doesn't the Democratic Party undoubtedly represent and push for any agenda these potential "splinterists" may stand for, rendering their existence as useless and without grounds?

[LoZoccolo]

20. People who voted for Nader in 2000, for instance. n/t

[Oregone]

24. They never existed, because the Democratic party represents and fights for liberal policies

They had no reason to exist.

Your proof is Nader votes, but those are just votes from Democrats that confused him for Joe Lieberman, the Democratic VP (they look the same).

Never happened. Driving to the Center is always the right political strategy. Chill, believe in your 3-D Chess strategy and know all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

[jgraz]

28. Because Democratic voters are mean and stupid and don't appreciate how good they have it!

After all, democracy not about voting for people who represent your interests, it's about unwavering allegiance to your team no matter how badly they hose you!!




(:sarcasm: for the irony-impaired)

[Ignis]

37. Or "Independents" like Crist?

[LoZoccolo]

39. I do not support Crist. n/t

[Ignis]

45. Of course you don't, and I wasn't implying that.

I might disagree with your message, but it's incredibly consistent. :thumbsup:

[Oregone]

43. And Bernie Sanders

A vote for Bernie is a vote for Republicans! I read it here today

[Ignis]

46. Even a year ago, I'd be surprised to learn that.

Today? Meh, just add it to the list of slings and arrows, right? :)

[Warren Stupidity]

5. 1861?

[joeybee12]

25. You might also include the French and Russian Revolutions...

oh, and ours in 1776. Although I don't think the OP wants a list because he already has his answer.

[TheKentuckian]

9. Splintering from neoliberal/neocon policy is the only path

to any political change that benefits most Americans.

[LoZoccolo]

12. When has splinterism brought about intended political change?

[Warren Stupidity]

14. when have large field rodents driven in the indy 500?

[TheKentuckian]

31. I'm not sure but it can't be much less effective than corporate taint licking

I've not splintered anyway so it's kind of a lame question unless you mean following meekly along the path to hell because our party leadership finds it to be the path of least resistance or savvy politics.

I haven't changed an iota other than I hope to become less callous and calculating regarding our gay brothers and sisters rights and not browbeating the Naderites for following their consciences and not turning a blind eye to the right wing of the party who has sold us out by electing Reagan and the shrub along with pushing absurd Republican philosophy and their failed policies both on the ground and certainly in elected office.

The so called splintering is nothing more than leadership going somewhere that some cannot follow and that most shouldn't even consider but justify in lame fashion as you seem to be trying to do now.

If you share my goals for our people then row with me but I'm not changing course for solidarity in failing ourselves in some bogus political calculation or to soothe those that believe in toxic nonsense.

[jgraz]

16. ... is a shit statement.

[Electric Monk]

32. Listen. If you really wanted to join the PFJ, you'd have to really hate the Romans.

Brian: I do.

Reg: Oh yeah? How much?

Brian: A lot!

Reg: Right. You're in. Listen. The only people we hate more than the Romans are the fucking Judean People's Front.

PFJ: Yeah

Judith: Splitters.

Francis: And the Judean Popular Peoples Front.

PFJ: Oh yeah. Splitters.

Loretta: And the peoples Front of Judea.

PFJ: Splitters.

Reg: What?

Loretta: The Peoples front of Judea. Splitters.

Reg: We're the Peoples front of Judea.

Loretta: Oh. I thought we were the Popular Front.

Reg: Peoples Front.

Francis: Whatever happened to the Popular Front, Reg?

Reg: He's over there.

PFJ: (To the old man.) SPLITTER!

[metapunditedgy]

17. If an elected official moves away from his campaign promises, is that not splintering?

Which side of the split exactly are you calling "splinters?"

You seem to be suggesting that people should *expect* not to get what they voted for, and be happy with that.

[Oregone]

18. Besides--All that stuff is OKAY if you're a DEMOCRAT!

[metapunditedgy]

19. Hey, the photoshoppers are improving; that's the funniest version of that toon I've seen.

It doesn't explain why that guy is holding a bar of soap, though.

[Oregone]

21. LOL

[gratuitous]

22. You're not going to like this answer

But the Reagan "Revolution" was the result of splinterism in the GOP. Compare and contrast the policies advocated by that noted liberal radical Richard Nixon (such as creation of the Environmental Protection Agency) and what the GOP stands for today. The minority view nitwits who want to run government even though they don't believe in the function of government has gone from the hare-brained splinter extremists of the old Republican party to the very heart and soul of the party.

[LoZoccolo]

34. Reagan ran as a Republican; Anderson was the splinter. n/t

[Telly Savalas]

36. A major transformation certainly occurred there

but was it really a result of splinterism? I don't recall Reagan Republicans taking over the GOP by threatening to withhold support from the mainstream moderates who controlled the GOP in the early 1970s.

[gratuitous]

48. I think Ford's loss to Carter in 1976 can be attributed to it

A lot of Republicans sat out that year after Reagan lost the nomination. Ford had to run hard right during the primaries, then tried to tack back to the center during the general election, and it almost worked. But I think that a lot of Reaganauts figured that if they couldn't have their man, they'd rather lose.

[Davis_X_Machina]

23. It has brough about lots of good feelings, though.

I thought that's why we did politics -- as a form of self-expression.

Was I mistaken?

[John Agar]

26. The republican break from Whigs?

My grasp of that history is not very clear, however...

[Marr]

27. Don't worry-- we're just an "insignificant minority".

What are you so upset about? You should be anxiously awaiting that electoral proof that the party doesn't need to listen to the "far left".

[Oregone]

29. Insignificant to govern for should also be insignificant to worry about

This hysteria seems completely irrational

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. Funny how a powerless and irrelevant group can simultanewously endanger The Party.

Woodchuck math, I guess.

[asdjrocky]

35. I didn't even know splinterism was a word.

I learn so much at DU. It really is like the college I never got to go to.

[LoZoccolo]

38. I should have spent a week worth of threads anticipating these sorts of responses.

Then maybe this thread could be spent actually answering the question that I posed.

[asdjrocky]

44. Woulda...shoulda...coulda....

I know what you mean. My life is full of regret.

[Oregone]

42. It isn't according to Webster

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/splinterist

I wondered the same. But, hey, its fun to make up words for made up imaginary groups that I want to fight with. This is something we should all get behind!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

49. Splinterism: The Art of making splints. Similar to Nonsenseism the Art of producing nonsense words

[QC]

40. My cat's breath smells like cat food. n/t

[Bobbie Jo]

41. Fancy that! nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

47. Fancy Feast.

[Scurrilous]

50. LOL

:thumbsup:

[Canuckistanian]

51. Fucking Judean People's Front

Splitter!

[MineralMan]

52. Smile...no text...

[Scruffy1]

53. The liberal establishment is a splinter

A very painful large one like the time i got one of those cocktail ones rammed through my foot. These assholes only use the rethugs for cover and go around whimpering " We need more votes". My ass- they need more balls. (magine if you took away the rethugs pork. Only 102 votes for the Kucinich Amendment. Fire your Congresscritter if they voted against stopping endless war.

[LoZoccolo]

54. I'm wondering if any daytime DUers can think of an example. n/t