Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Endorsement: Keith Ellison for DNC Chair

TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/27/2016 5:04:03 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
I don't normally endorse candidates, but I, a conservative Republican, feel strongly that Keith Ellison should be appointed DNC chair. There is no better candidate for the job of rebuilding trust among Rust Belt workers, midwestern moderates, and rural folks.

Keith Ellison has a strong history of caring about the issues middle America cares about: he has strongly supported the Nation of Islam, has proposed innovative ideas such as endorsed reparations to be paid directly to blacks by working-class whites, and has supported the idea of a state specifically for black people. Truly, nothing will reignite the Democratic roots of the working class more than black separatism. Additionally, he has boldly taken the stance that his party must oppose the second amendment. These issues present a bold and surely popular winning agenda for rural America and the rust belt.

On top of this, Ellison is strongly informed on foreign policy. He has solid connections with the Muslim Brotherhood and has the support of CAIR, which has ties to the venerable political party Hamas. Moreover, he has taken the bold step of opposing the Israeli Iron Dome program, which protects Israeli civilians from rocket attacks. He has also questioned Bush's role in 9/11. This bold leadership is just what the American public has been looking for.

I have faith Keith Ellison will represent the Democratic Party well. I think Democrats have found a real winner here, someone who could potentially be the next Jeremy Corbyn. To pass up this great opportunity would be foolish. What do you have to lose?
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,846
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/27/2016 5:13:53 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/27/2016 5:04:03 AM, TN05 wrote:
I don't normally endorse candidates, but I, a conservative Republican, feel strongly that Keith Ellison should be appointed DNC chair. There is no better candidate for the job of rebuilding trust among Rust Belt workers, midwestern moderates, and rural folks.

Keith Ellison has a strong history of caring about the issues middle America cares about: he has strongly supported the Nation of Islam, has proposed innovative ideas such as endorsed reparations to be paid directly to blacks by working-class whites, and has supported the idea of a state specifically for black people. Truly, nothing will reignite the Democratic roots of the working class more than black separatism. Additionally, he has boldly taken the stance that his party must oppose the second amendment. These issues present a bold and surely popular winning agenda for rural America and the rust belt.

On top of this, Ellison is strongly informed on foreign policy. He has solid connections with the Muslim Brotherhood and has the support of CAIR, which has ties to the venerable political party Hamas. Moreover, he has taken the bold step of opposing the Israeli Iron Dome program, which protects Israeli civilians from rocket attacks. He has also questioned Bush's role in 9/11. This bold leadership is just what the American public has been looking for.

I have faith Keith Ellison will represent the Democratic Party well. I think Democrats have found a real winner here, someone who could potentially be the next Jeremy Corbyn. To pass up this great opportunity would be foolish. What do you have to lose?

I endorse Obama.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/27/2016 5:14:38 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/27/2016 5:12:15 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Where is the logic in opposing the iron dome?

Well we can't let people survive rocket attacks, can we? That's just not the right thing to do. The progressive way is to let people die.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,291
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/27/2016 5:18:23 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/27/2016 5:14:38 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/27/2016 5:12:15 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Where is the logic in opposing the iron dome?

Well we can't let people survive rocket attacks, can we? That's just not the right thing to do. The progressive way is to let people die.

Oh, this was a sarcastic post.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/27/2016 5:35:59 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/27/2016 5:04:03 AM, TN05 wrote:
I don't normally endorse candidates, but I, a conservative Republican, feel strongly that Keith Ellison should be appointed DNC chair. There is no better candidate for the job of rebuilding trust among Rust Belt workers, midwestern moderates, and rural folks.

Keith Ellison has a strong history of caring about the issues middle America cares about: he has strongly supported the Nation of Islam, has proposed innovative ideas such as endorsed reparations to be paid directly to blacks by working-class whites, and has supported the idea of a state specifically for black people. Truly, nothing will reignite the Democratic roots of the working class more than black separatism. Additionally, he has boldly taken the stance that his party must oppose the second amendment. These issues present a bold and surely popular winning agenda for rural America and the rust belt.

On top of this, Ellison is strongly informed on foreign policy. He has solid connections with the Muslim Brotherhood and has the support of CAIR, which has ties to the venerable political party Hamas. Moreover, he has taken the bold step of opposing the Israeli Iron Dome program, which protects Israeli civilians from rocket attacks. He has also questioned Bush's role in 9/11. This bold leadership is just what the American public has been looking for.

I have faith Keith Ellison will represent the Democratic Party well. I think Democrats have found a real winner here, someone who could potentially be the next Jeremy Corbyn. To pass up this great opportunity would be foolish. What do you have to lose?

I concur. Honestly, I don't know why the DNC hasn't thought of appointing a Muslim before; that's clearly what blue collar workers want.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Fernyx
Posts: 326
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/27/2016 4:01:58 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
I as a conservative pray he wins, it will split the democrats in 2 and give republicans the office for the next 20 years, and we 'should' have better nominees than Trump in the upcoming years.
YYW
Posts: 36,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2016 4:54:10 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
Obviously there is little doubt that Keith Elliosn would be one of, if not the single worst possible nominee for DNC chair. The progressive bullshit_surrounding his name floating is astonishingly myopic.
Tsar of DDO
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2016 10:55:04 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/27/2016 5:14:38 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/27/2016 5:12:15 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Where is the logic in opposing the iron dome?

Well we can't let people survive rocket attacks, can we? That's just not the right thing to do. The progressive way is to let people die.

Because some of us don't believe we should be giving any aid to countries like Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Also, many experts say Iron Dome doesn't actually work and the early warning system is more effective, combined with the fact that Qassam Rockets miss their targets roughly 80% of the time.
YYW
Posts: 36,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 12:36:09 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/28/2016 10:55:04 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 11/27/2016 5:14:38 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/27/2016 5:12:15 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Where is the logic in opposing the iron dome?

Well we can't let people survive rocket attacks, can we? That's just not the right thing to do. The progressive way is to let people die.

Because some of us don't believe we should be giving any aid to countries like Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Also, many experts say Iron Dome doesn't actually work and the early warning system is more effective, combined with the fact that Qassam Rockets miss their targets roughly 80% of the time.

It's perfectly legitimate to not want to support Saudi Arabia. What is not legitimate in any respect is to desire to distance ourselves from Israel.
Tsar of DDO
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 12:42:23 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 12:36:09 AM, YYW wrote:
At 11/28/2016 10:55:04 PM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 11/27/2016 5:14:38 AM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/27/2016 5:12:15 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Where is the logic in opposing the iron dome?

Well we can't let people survive rocket attacks, can we? That's just not the right thing to do. The progressive way is to let people die.

Because some of us don't believe we should be giving any aid to countries like Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Also, many experts say Iron Dome doesn't actually work and the early warning system is more effective, combined with the fact that Qassam Rockets miss their targets roughly 80% of the time.

It's perfectly legitimate to not want to support Saudi Arabia. What is not legitimate in any respect is to desire to distance ourselves from Israel.

Really? So we should be okay with the occupation of sovereign territory, the violation of UN Resolutions and the violation of various international agreements including the Hauge Convention and the Geneva Convention?
YYW
Posts: 36,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 12:53:42 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 12:42:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 11/29/2016 12:36:09 AM, YYW wrote:
It's perfectly legitimate to not want to support Saudi Arabia. What is not legitimate in any respect is to desire to distance ourselves from Israel.

Really? So we should be okay with the occupation of sovereign territory, the violation of UN Resolutions and the violation of various international agreements including the Hauge Convention and the Geneva Convention?

Recognizing Palestine as a "sovereign territory" is inconsistent with the UN's current recognition of their status as a non-member observer state within the United Nations. There are some states which recognize Palestinian sovereignty, while many others (including the United States) do not. So, to the extent that you're suggesting that Palestine's sovereignty is settled, you're misrepresenting reality.

And, before you start throwing numbers at me (as in, a majority of UN member states have recognized Palestinian statehood and, moreover, engaged in the establishment of bilateral relations with them) recognize that a state's sovereignty is not contingent upon a majority of countries' recognition as such. It's quite a bit more complicated than that, for reasons that are as complex as they are controversial.

With respect to your suggestion that supporting Israel implies the violation of UN resolutions and various international agreements, including the Hague Convention and Geneva Convention, that, too, is mistaken for somewhat similar reasons. First of all, you have failed to articulate any form of violation of any international treaty, law, or anything else and therefore your argument fails for that reason alone. But, because I know the conventional arguments (and they are easily dismissed), the fact that the United States militarily supports Israel does not mean that we are party to "violation" -- if any -- which Israel may or may not have themselves engaged in.

Just to ignore some of the more basic and structural aspects of what I imagine you would hold out as arguments (e.g. "the UN has passed resolutions condemning Israel, and yet the US aids Israel, therefore Palestinian blood is on America's hands," and other, similar idiocy) the actor distinction is one that is oft lost on the progressive left. The fact that the US does something and then Israel does something does not mean that the US is liable for what Israel does, if it's wrong at all. And, beyond that, there is no indication (competent or otherwise) that Israel is engaged in any form of misconduct in any sense.
Tsar of DDO
thett3
Posts: 14,349
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 7:39:29 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
Oh please let this happen. Double down. I want the exodus of whites from the Democratic Party to accelerate.

The Democratic Party needs to make it clear that there is no place for white people in either the party or their vision for America. Young whites voted for Trump, but only by a 5 point margin. By appointing leaders like Keith Ellison, we can probably push that margin to 15 next cycle
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 8:25:11 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 7:39:29 PM, thett3 wrote:
Oh please let this happen. Double down. I want the exodus of whites from the Democratic Party to accelerate.

The Democratic Party needs to make it clear that there is no place for white people in either the party or their vision for America. Young whites voted for Trump, but only by a 5 point margin. By appointing leaders like Keith Ellison, we can probably push that margin to 15 next cycle

The map may look like this in 4 years if they decide to go the Ellison route:

http://www.270towin.com...