Jimmy Dore fucking destroyed

[citation needed]

In the video, he implied that conservative judges would fuck public sector unions and I don't find that hard to believe.

But the thing is that the liberal judges the Dems had lined up would have done the same thing.

Who is this loser?

back to reddit

gay marriage is bourgeois shit you fucking idiot
thanks for demonstrating just how useless voting for democrats is

isnt Sam Seder part of that "ring of fire" whatever group, that screams about the need to assassinate Trump every video?
Also Sam Seder, isnt this guy complaining about the most mundane useless shit nobody but the pandering political pundits would care about?

can't say I care much for dore, he's a cocktail longue comedian who looks and sounds like he washed up in the late 80s and his wife and little nerd buddy "that's right jimmy, huck huck!" at every quip he makes is kind of cringey.

Fuck off you pozzed out Idpol faggot, Dore is fucking BASED

I'll admit to the occasional social victories you get from voting D, but even those are a mere consolation prize for the slow defeat you'll be getting by propping up the Democrats.

That's kind of horseshit. Niel Gorsurch will be ruling on some important cases for the next 30-40 years. Is it the only election that matters? No. But it will have lasting effect long after Trump leaves office.

They're going to be ruling on whether or not union dues should be mandatory soon. What do you think happens to union membership if they vote it shouldn't be mandatory? I'll give you a hint: it won't be going up.

Are you under the impression that the corporate shill the Democrats would have ruled pro-union?

All this is very unfortunate, but ultimately inevitable with onward march of neoliberalism.

The bright side is that when they make all legitimate forms of political organization of the masses impossible and illegal, the masses will be forced to turn to illegal means. They're selling us the rope with which they will be hanged.

Unions are expecting a 5-4 decisions on the ruling. You would have to be literally fucking stupid to think the liberals and conservatives on the court are as likely to vote against union rights. Or maybe you just have to be a Jimmy Dore fan.

The only person who was more effective at busting up unions than Reagan was Clinton.

Yes, I do think the libs would vote agsinst union rights. I think you're naive for believing otherwise.

Lmao, Sam is jealous and it shows. You can just hear the salt in his voice.

I dont get the point of any marriage being legal why must the Govt "Approve" of my decisions. Gay marriage isnt a right under capitalism its a privilege that can and will be taken away as soon as it is profitable for the bourgeoisie to do so.

Who the fuck cares if you don't have a job and can't feed yourself? The problem is not that the people in charge may be homophobes, the problem is that they have power over you. And then there's that whole exploitation part.

Who cares? It's been proven again and again that the SC will decide in favor of bourgeois interests. Whether it's the federal and state governments - controlled by donor funded muppets, or corporations - i.e. the donors.
None of this civil rights nonsense actually matters if you remain impoverished and exploited.
Right to abortion? Only relevant if you can actually afford it. Which is one of the problems in the US. Same goes for contraceptives.
Gay marriage? Irrelevant if you don't have a job and can't actually reap the financial benefits from it.
Protections against sexual harassment? Good luck if you can't afford a decent lawyer.

The whole thing is completely arbitrary. They will fuck you over if you're not porky. The history of the FBI, DEA and the rest of the alphabet soup proves this. The "law" is only there to add a veneer of legitimacy. Because at the end of the day the rules are written by, and for the bourgeoisie.

...

The whole problem is if the state has authority over that in the first place. Even if the state grands you that positive "right", they can take it away.
Also what backwards country doesn't allow unmarried SOs to visit each other in the hospital?

People who actually know about the subject disagree with you. There was a similar case last year with the California Teacher's Association and it was an even split. If they had one more conservative justice, it would have gone a certain direction. Again, I'll let you work out which way the conservative would have voted in a union case.

How will he even recover?

It's if a medical emergency happens and the patient is unable to consent to visitors. They don't want crazy ex's or scammers coming in a messing with them or trying to get private medical records. Otherwise I could walk into a morgue and just be like "oh yeah that's totally my husband, I'll just take his rolex and social security card it was very dear to me".

Obama's supreme court overturned decades of campaign finance regulations with its Citizens United v. FEC ruling all the same, a considerably more dangerous outcome in the long run than any ruling allowing gay marriage. Interestingly, both of these rulings were activist decisions allowing the court to legislate law instead of law being prescribed by congress as it's supposed to be, both undermining our very system of governance. Friendly reminder that Obama's last supreme court pick was a corporate tool and Clinton's pick would likely have been even worse.

Didn't something happen in the past that made Seder a salty bitch? What was that again?

...

I'm saying, no matter how bad democrats are. The republicans will be worse generally.

...

And so the answer is… To vote for neoliberals all the same?

Hey guess who got NAFTA passed? Who made permanent normal trade relations with China? Who passed the racist crime bill of the '90s? Who deregulated the telecom industry so we only have 5 or 6 corporations that control 90% of all media, and resulted in the consolidation of internet providers so we have a handful of price gouging shitty service regional monopolies? Who repealed the Glass-Steagall Act? Who prosecuted more whistleblowers through the espionage act than any other presidency combined? Who repealed the right to habeas corpus?

Democrats.

There must be some miscommunication here, so I'll reitrerate. No matter how bad you think the democrats are, the republicans will be worse generally.

I dunno fam, Republicans seem pretty incompetent. They couldn't even get their own fascist private health insurance bill from the Heritage Foundation passed. It took a Democrat.

user a little nuance please

One definition of fascism was when private industry controls the government to do its bidding. A bill that mandates private health insurance to subsidize the industry's own gouging of customers fits that definition.

I guess all states are fascist then.

You can't see the forest for the trees. Voting "lesser of two evil" is causing major problems in the long run. Your short term victories will only be stuff that doesn't affect porky's wallet.

Make politicians earn your vote, don't just vote for them because their team is a little bit nicer while screwing you.

All right fine, I violated my own rule when posting that because it fills me with emotion. Fascism is an incoherent term that should only be used in a historical context.

thank you for typing this out.

Its OK comrade one of the most important aspects in a healthy debate is the ability of one member of the debate to concede when they have made a mistake. That alone makes you better than Holla Forums

Allowing Trump to appoint justices who will be there for 30+ years is also doing damage in the long run. Allowing republicans that will vote away healthcare will also hurt in the long run.

I don't know where your from, but I've noticed that people outside of the US really take for granted very basic things and act like they don't need them. Universal healthcare… nah both parties are the same.

youtu.be/HSMGrKSUgj4

Strong bewildering words

I adore your work, user. You saved a dozen others from wasting their time on OP's vid.

I don't think I've ever seen someone get BTFO by a transcript of what they just said.

Neither party is advocating for universal healthcare, though. Did I just get baited?

Click on the More button, beside the share button, and you can get a transcript.

I don't know why these political "Comedians" even call themselves such. They usually became popular through politics rather than actually being funny (because they aren't that funny), and they exist on both the right and left. This goes for Dore, Seder, Crowder etc.
Better off being honest and saying you're a talk show host since that's where these people get the majority of their money.

Dore is somewhat funny, check his standup act (before the show) sometime.

It depends I guess but most of the big talk show comedians got famous in the first place with stand-up.

The two big "political comedians" I can think of are Carlin and Hicks and the latter is still more known for stand up than his show on infowars.

...

sage

Trump is better for the radical left then Clinton. Trump is majorly fucking up US foreign policy, where clinton would be a strong neocon. Prove me wrong.

Who fucking cares. I care more about econmics and geopolitics then fucking gay marriage. This is coming from a bi guy btw.

When this involves a Syndicalist Union then I’ll care. Modern unions are complete cucks. In order for unions to be effective they need to be radical.

No there the same.

The Tippest Toppest Tier! How many in the Red Army do you think had that opportunity?

the fact you don't even know they're one and the same shows how fucking new you are here.

The reality is that this women will ALWAYS be better then Clinton and I will never vote Democrat. And why should I. There neoliberals through and through.

Putting a band aid on capitalism perpetuates it. If you are fine with doing this than you are not a socialist and need to leave immediately.

The Greens are still too succdem tbh

it reads like a nigger debate team
hooktube.com/watch?v=fmO-ziHU_D8"
uh, he, uh,but he, uh, did… uh"

Dore is actually a funny.
Seder is pretty lukewarm.

Crowder is only funny when he is getting decked at protests.

Source?

They are but it comes off as a bigger fuck you to the Democrats then a vote for psl or whatever that no one at all will ever notice.

What are we going to do about you new cross posters who refuse to obey the rules? Should we ban you? What would you do?

...

Depends on which ones you're talking to. Some are pretty radical, including unironic tankies. Jill had to beat a couple self-proclaimed socialists to win the nomination, unfortunately she was too much of a chicken to be the public face of the party's anti-capitalism plank. I expect the presidential nominee in 2020 to be much more radical.

And I should say that one of them she beat simply because she was an obnoxious loon with bipolar disorder.

you accelerationists really are a confused lot

I think Ajamu was a step in the right direction, even if he's partially idpol in some areas (for obvious reasons) himself. Instead of being all "don't vote democratic" his crew were more along the lines of "BURN DOWN the democratic establishment!" (Not sure how many watch "The Left Forum" here since it's usually chock full of idpollers)

Based on what comes out of Mint and Black Agenda Report and his articles on counterpunch (especially the anti Obama ones) I'd say he was one of the best possible 'known' picks. Normies on both sides were shitting bricks on some of his platform points, like defund Israel and pull out of the ME entirely. "This a people thang, not a military thang" I remember him quipping to some libcuck sarcastically.

there might be too many people in the actual leadership that think they must bend and yield to normies. I know I wished they had flipped the ticket.
May need to 'shock and awe' some awake by Trumpeting a bit.

Jodi Dean "Democracy and other Neoliberal Fantasies"

I literally said it doesn't do anything though

you said it perpetuates capitalism, that's not nothing.

Kek I guess I misunderstood what you were saying.

My point was that reformism perpetuates capitalism rather than ending it and thus is complicit in all of the awful results of the capitalists system. All I mean was that if you are really a part of the Left you would be against this

But of course you knew that and are using semantics because you're butthurt accelerationism is right

i understand what you mean, i'm saying it's bs.

neoliberalism was the capitalist's reaction to the welfare state. welfare state was becoming increasingly unmanageable, so they just scrapped it. it worked for a while, then that started turning on them too.

point is, reformism really is useless: it won't end capitalism and it won't save it. things being like this, it's actually good praxis for leftists to advocate for pro worker reforms: they won't bring communism, but they make workers' lives less hellish and are a pain in the booj's side. even though the revolution is far, doesn't mean the class struggle is dormant.

So that we can build a new welfare state that will be gutted for a new neoliberalism a few decades down the line? Learn how cycles work in capitalism you fucking liberal idiot

Everybody except braindead ultras know how they work.

Ok, idealist.

Ultras are "well read"

actual material conditions of the workers ARE IRRELEVANT, BOYS why do you even care lol

There becoming MarketSocs though.

Yep they worked great for the Nordic countries which totally aren't in crisis right now

hey you're the one who thinks reforms > material conditions, not me. there's no saving capitalism even if the succdem god gets down from the clouds and starts pissing welfare checks on everyone, lol.

don't worry for the nords, they're just at the wrong end of the cycle :^)

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE TEA IN CHINA? HUH?

The thing is though that wealfair states require imperialism to prop hem up. If most reformers advocated nationalization of mining, banks, and utilities instead of wealfair then I would support them.

Remember that part in the Communist Manifesto where Marx and Engels told the workers to relax and just vote for liberal politicians who would give them higher wages and better healthcare while continuing to horde surplus value and oppress their fellow working people in third world countries to support said privleges?

Thanks for informing me o’ enlightened one

remember that part in the communist manifesto where marx and engels were disproportionately mad over a chinese pictogram board discussion?

So you aren't for ending capitalism?

Remember the part where cyclical history had one big surge of revolutions but then cyclical history shit itself and it didn't happen again no matter how many recessions and crashes there were?

see

Well any kind of advanced bourgeois state requires imperialism tbh.

What is Syria

and?

kek

to the right of the anti imperialist line?

Syria isn’t imperialist, yet it’s capitalist. Same with Venezuela. Reformists should try to reform imperialism away.

Nigga what?

Just don't reply next time.

Is venezuela not a welfare state?

It means you cant reap the economic benefits that people get from
being married in the US which is pretty gay tbh.

TFW no Confedrated Sydaclist if America

Venezula is a lot smaller than the US and much less hungry porkies

the racist part is giving them a price for that

...

please tell me this is real
it's like I'm having 3 erections at once

this is pretty dumb. Conservatism has clearly lost the culture war and the liberalization of culture is absolutely inevitable, like you really think gay marriage would've been outlawed for 40 more years if a republican won over obama?

...

all cross-x debates sound autistic user

...

Stop being a fucking faggot. The state exists as an instrument of class control. Literally anything it undertakes will be somehow manipulated to be in the interest of the bourgeoisie, whether it be by cooption, giving the government more data, or by any other means. We cannot work within the state to do any of this shit, especially when in the status quo the only things we can get are gay marriage lmao

just check his twitter

You know that Americans do NOT have universal healthcare and both the Dems and Republicans don’t support it.

You really don't know how the Supreme Court works do you? They don't just leave after president is out of office. Theyre there for decades after the president who appointed them is gone.

I feel like infants might know more about politics than most of you here. In what sense are republicans losing the "culture war" or whatever? The republicans have a majority in the senate, house, most state governments (governors, state senates, judiciaries), and they have a republican president in the White House. Those are your anti-gay marriage folks. It doesn't even matter what "most people want" if they're not in power. The Supreme Court is an extremely important part of the process that can protect some rights even as congress wants to take them away. like the upcoming case, which will likely destroy union membership (in its already low position).

For one thing, more democrats are coming around to universal healthcare. But anyway, the point is that they're going to undue whatever small progress we've made with the affordable care act. Thats the point I'm making. People abroad have a luxury that Americans don't when they pretend both parties are the same.

Holy fuck user I read about half of this before watching the video and thought it was a joke.

I like that even most of Sam's commenters are on Jimmy's side here. Not only that, but Sam has been doing that youtube show for like 7 years and has 100k less subscribers than Jimmy - who's only been doing his show for 4 years.
-Truth be told though, I think Jimmy had less subs than Sam did prior to the 2016 election.

In any case, I used to like Sam, or at least not despise him, though I hadn't listened to him in years at this point. Seeing him again with his words typed up like this though. Holy shit, dude sounds pathetic, milquetoast and butthurt.

Long live Comrade Dore.

People voted for Obama and they got Romneycare anyway. Wake the fuck up already.

It's so painfully obvious this guy is just butthurt that Jimmy Dore backed out of having him on his show, he won't shut up about it.

Not to mention people voted for Clinton and they got HW Bush's NAFTA. Outside the Taft-Hartley Act itself, NAFTA and permanent normal trade relations with China have probably been the most destructive set of decisions towards union membership because they allowed corporations to use the nuclear option and just move elsewhere.

It's still an improvement over having no healthcare, or healthcare with no government subsidies. Plus in the early days, Obama campaigned heavily for a public option, which would have led us very close to universal healthcare.

And even then, more democrats opposed it to republicans.

You're comarde thinks socialism is when the government pays for an army and builds roads. He's not your guy.

The only major problem I have with this whole notion that things have to get bad and we have to cross our arms while more and more people die because any incrementalism isn't full socialism. There are countries that are total fucking shit holes for huge amounts of people, like Mexico just to our south, and they won't even have a revolution. They have giant murals in their public buildings with red flags, mutilated nazi corpses and ghoulish caricatures of business men.

I just don't see why people are going to suddenly have the veil lifted, in 2008 a shit ton of people who might even be here right now thought that Ron Paul had the answer for why the economy crashed. He was the anti-establishment candidate, everybody thought we needed to get rid of the debt and become capitalists.

And then he went to Kucinich's district and told people to vote him out of office for opposing the Heritage Foundation's pharmaceutical and insurance lobbyist bill.

what
source

He's referring to the affordable care act, but in a way that makes it spooky.

GOD DAMN JEREMY
YOU'RE MAKING IT REAL FUCKIN HARD ON ME TO ABIDE BY MY "NO SUCCDEM" RULE

No I want a source that Obama literally campaigned against Kucinich

Until the other user responds to you, here's some choice excerpts from news articles I found:

*sniff*

I'm not saying anyone should worship him as an infallible god-emperor or that he's a paragon of theory, or that he's even someone you should go to for theory of any kind - I'm saying find me another youtuber/ news show with over 250k subs who's saying things like 'Marx was right', 'all cops are corrupt', 'the system is built to fuck you' and 'we need a revolution, I'm not even kidding' on a regular basis.

That's why Jimmy is a comrade.

I just wish he'd come around on gun control and earn his 'arm the poor' moniker.

Just give in, you know you want it.

If you're afraid you'll stop hating them don't worry, succdems always find a way to disappoint even those who expect nothing.

what can he smell?

Do you think I'm actually retarded? Of course I am aware of this, I never said otherwise. My point was that it doesn't matter either way.

How out of touch with American politics are you? The defining feature is quite literally a culture war between "liberals and conservatives" it is a giant bi-polar political system that functions off of spectacle. Yeah they've been in power for months and what have they accomplished? Essentially nothing. The biggest highlight of this presidency so far has been failing to repeal ACA, failing to build a wall, failing to accomplish anything that was really promised, with the BIG highlight being the sperg out over football players taking a knee.

When I say that conservatives have lost the culture war, this is evidence of that. The liberalization of culture is inevitable under a liberal political conception because to maximize "freedom" in the social and cultural sense, everybody needs to water down their beliefs to participate. This is why you see Muslims or Jews who eat pork with their friends and drink, and refuse to force religious beliefs on others. Because a democratic liberal society is unable to tolerate paternalistic worldviews which it is inherently incompatible with. The republicans can only hold legitimacy by continually pointing at how liberals are destroying our values, but when they get into office they can't actually do shit, and if they do it doesn't last for long - one step forward is to steps back as soon as anybody else gets into power to repeal it. This is because paleoconservatism is inherently paternalistic and will therefore never be able to enforce it's cultural values within a democratic framework as paternalistic views on culture are in contradiction with liberal society. Conservatives cultural rights to practice religion or whatever are not actually under threat by the state, and so other people will not accept a society where they are blatantly having that culture enforced at the expense of a "political liberalism" (as John Rawls puts it) which seeks to allow the maximum amount of cultural participation.

American politics is defined by a political system that runs off of a culture way between these conservatives and liberals because both the dems and the republicunts are literally almost identical as parties in terms of economics - both have adapted strictly neo-liberal views on the economy and look to dismantle the welfare state as much as possible in favour of freemarket solutions, unless pressured IMMENSELY like the dems are with universal health care, which they're still reluctant to adopt despite the fact it would instantly win the 2020 election. This is primarily because the democrats and republicans require 1. votes and 2. money and political capital in order to out compete the other, and the easiest way to do this is to blame the spook of "liberal" or "conservative" culture as the reason for problems in society to get votes through pure moralism and outrage, all the meanwhile peddling capitalist individualism and neo-liberal policies that are private market/business friendly so that you get given tons of fuckin money to compete with other parties. The US now has two parties that are economically identical, even if the republicans are a little more intense economically, who essentially legitimize themselves off of identity based culture wars which helps differentiate each other and provides the easiest way to gain political power. Stop pretending that these parties care about anything other than serving business interests and appealing to empty identity platitudes when it doesn't affect their chances of keeping power in society.

It doesn't matter what supreme courts we have. Society has already legalized abortion and gay marriage and marijuana. Social liberalism is clearly the victor in the culture war. The supreme court won't change shit in the long run besides MAYBE gun control. They serve a neo-liberal consensus and socially/politically liberal state apparatus. Conservative paternalism is meaningless.

Did that outline it well enough for you brainlet?

the problem i have is that the notion that if things get bad enough people will make heads roll is that it's patently false. i just don't understand how bad they want it to get. there's places where people have to stand in puddles mining ores for 12 hours a day to make a living but somehow this is still too comfy.

then there's the material conditions crowd who is possibly even dumber. capitalism has been in late stage since at the very least 100 years, the material conditions are ALREADY here.

why are so many leftists millenarists?

Except I do have no healthcare under obamacare. I haven't seen a doctor in over a decade.

And most of Jimmy's subs are way more recent than 4 years. He only started getting big after Bernie was getting screwed during the primary and people woke up to how rigged the system is.

Which we would of got if Romney won

And he went back on his promise once he got into power. Admit it that the Dems are just as shit as the republicans.

What book is she reading, user?

Capital: Volume 1

Romney wasn't running on Romney care for one thing. Most republicans hate the affordable care act today, so it's dishonest to point out some republicans were in favor of it some decades ago. Also Obama's opponent in 2008 was certainly not in favor of it; so it's not as if we would have gotten it in 2009 had we voted republican or democrat. Every republican representative voted against it – you may not remember that. Not a single one voted for it in the House.

And lastl just because republicans like or hate something, doesn't make it wrong. There are other reasons it could be wrong. Romneycare provided 98% of Massachusetts population with insurance. You'd be silly to argue that's it's not an improvement given the state of healthcare in the US at the time.

And again it must be one of those things, where if you live in the U.K. healthcare is just a luxury you don't have to think twice about.

Obama couldn't get it passed because some in his party didn't want the public option. He didn't "go back" on it for funsies. Every republican was against it and the alternative was to not pass any bill at all. You may also recall the democrats lost their majority in 2010. There was a very small window to get the bill passed.

obama should have been trump-tier on joe lieberman, it would have at least been funny tbqh

The world doesn't revolve around you.

Picture of the homeless black man in the middle of a gay pride parade

but it's also undeniable that obama era efforts for new regulations did a lot to soften damages as well as lessen grievances. an Occupy Wall Street counterpart under McCain may have been more significant otherwise.

the nose knows

...

Now that the Republicans are in office they aren’t repealing Obama care. Because hey won’t

Obama had two whole years to get it passed, but he didn’t because he never supported it in the first place.

Jimmy Dore is an embarrassing brainlet. Seder destroyed him in their debate:

youtube.com/watch?v=SH_pgiRdm7U

He sure spent a lot of time traveling the country, asking people to support something he never wanted.

To the gulag you go!

Can you just go back to reddit asshat

Sam Seder was correct. Hillary was better than Trump and Trump's court appointments (all of them, not just Gorsuch) will fuck over the left for decades, you retards:

thedailybeast.com/donald-trump-cries-obstruction-as-he-transforms-the-federal-courts

thehill.com/regulation/administration/346248-trump-quietly-putting-his-stamp-on-the-courts

You could have a Socialist POTUS and Congress and it won't mean shit if everything they pass gets struck down by the courts.

...

lmao

>>>/reddit/
>>>/suicide/

Do you even remember whom Obama picked for his last supreme court nomination? It was a neoliberal piece of shit who thought money = speech. Why the hell would Hillary have been any better?

Buttsex is bourg decadence and peak degeneracy

Reminder that even if you believe this wholeheartedly, Clinton is both a pathological liar (even by politician standards) and basically a Republican anyway.
youtube.com/watch?v=WAIbjAUNXLQ

...

But if I give my bf a bj, is that still decadance, or is it just petit-bourgieous.

Man marxists are weird

Marxists don't use words like "degenerate" to describe social actions because that would be retarded

The answer to the Supreme Court problem is to vote with the prole's ballot box. You only need one good vote to veto whatever nomination the Senate makes.
They won because they were hated less than the democrats, not because they or their ideas are popular. Whenever polls are conducted for things like support for universal health care or higher taxes for the rich or increased subsidies for the poor as much as 60% of people support them.
Gay marriage is bourgeois bullshit and it literally doesn't matter.
Holy shit, you are so fucking stupid.

They're all on the same fucking side you dipshit. The Supreme Court has done fuck and all to protect anything of value for working people, and they'll continue to do just that whether Republicans nominate an extreme right judge or the Democrats nominate a slightly-less-extreme right judge.

You are a pitiful brainlet and I feel sorry for you.

I deplore the undemocratic DNC side-lining of Bernie, but it's absolutely true that Hillary would not be as bad as Trump.