-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | Hickenlooper makes it to the debate
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
While looking at the recent morning consult poll to get a read on second choice voters. (33% of Biden supporters would turn to Sanders at the time of polling)
Noticed this
It's understandable Sanders supporters would be getting a bit concerned.
Sanders announcement didn't appear to draw from Beto support significantly. It'll be interesting to see how this poll changes in the coming weeks and months as old name recognition becomes less a factor and new things happen.
Noticed this
It's understandable Sanders supporters would be getting a bit concerned.
Sanders announcement didn't appear to draw from Beto support significantly. It'll be interesting to see how this poll changes in the coming weeks and months as old name recognition becomes less a factor and new things happen.
Only ever complaining about "American Imperialism" while refusing to acknowledge Chinese Imperialism or Russian Imperialism always gives away the game.
A quote from Sanders. It's in the article, which I linked to. This is Bernie Sanders, in 2015, at a meeting with Campaign Zero, the super good braintrust arm of Black Lives Matter, revealing himself to be completely ignorant of actual information regarding race and criminal justice in the United States. This did not come out until after the campaign was over, for obvious reasons (you might have to work with him later if he's President.)
AOC and Bernie Sanders are practically ideologically identical. If you love AOC but hate Bernie you basically operate on an extremely superficial level - not to mention this bizarre obsession with "the way the world works" and "understanding how the system works" is why we're all barreling into an extinction level event with no serious plan for how to stop it. You have the glorious liberal consensus that "works within the system" to thank for why our society keeps piling up unsolved problems. Of course the Republicans are evil, of course racists continue to exist, but you will never stop fascism with cosmopolitan liberal technocrats and thinking you can is borderline delusional. As the great Innuendo Studios recently closed out a video by saying - if you want to fight fascism, you have to move left.
it was a pretty bad comment. I'm not sure it takes away from what I think is good about him. But your comment about how he hasn't learned or is incapable of learning. does his newest campaign not show that he has?
Yeah youre right I missed it at first. Fixed.
That is ignorant but I think he's doing much much better this time around and it does seem like he's learned as he says.
Megan McCain gave the same advice shortly after 2016 and she regularly lets Trump walk all over her dad, and Comey said something similar when AOC was doing well in her election and he gave a sizable contribution to getting us get in this mess.
This is why the whole "enemy of my enemy is my friend" mindset that some people have is so bad. Republicans, no matter how much they hate Trump, are still Republicans and therefore full of shit. These fuckers are not giving advice out of a desire for Democrats to do well and never, ever will.
No, believing only that ideology matters in a candidate and that any other personal qualities are irrelevant is what is superficial. Someone can believe in something, but completely lack the skills relative to another person who believes the same thing. I don't think Sanders is capable of managing the country because of a pattern of behavior that stretches back decades back to when Barney Frank was complaining about his stubborn, alienating behavior.
And boy, "Cosmopolitan Liberal Technocrats", that's one hell of a dogwhistle. Just come out and say that you don't think educated urban Americans are "real Americans". The vast majority of people in the country live in metropolitan areas!
Because he had his chance to fix it in 2016. And actively chose not to. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/17/us/politics/bernie-sanders-black-voters-outreach.html "What what they do, not what they say" is an important life lesson, and everytime he was confronted with issues in 2016, he chose wrong. Therefore, I do not trust him to choose wisely again.
Ana Navarro and Bill Kristol do this all the time. The type of democrats they're willing to vote for, I guarantee, are strictly to the right of Joe Biden.
edit: actually in fairness, they'd probably vote for Joe Biden
When someone only complains about "Imperialism" when it comes from America, but is unwilling to hold other nations (normally China/Russia) to those same standards and acknowledge bad behavior on their end (election manipulation, annexing countries by force, etc.) generally they're myopic and focused on the US as the source of all evil and/or they're straight up tankies upset that the US opposed those other world powers and didn't let them steamroll other nations.
And yeah fuck Biden. No apology from him. https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/31/politics/joe-biden-lucy-flores/index.html
He does say "If it is suggested I did so, I will listen respectfully".
Buttt yeah Joe, it's been "suggested" I'd say. He's just garbage from every direction. At least none of the other contenders so far are nearly as completely despicable.
He does say "If it is suggested I did so, I will listen respectfully".
Buttt yeah Joe, it's been "suggested" I'd say. He's just garbage from every direction. At least none of the other contenders so far are nearly as completely despicable.
I doubt Navarro would vote for Biden if she couldn't be bothered to vote for Hillary, tbh. I think the only thing that could sway her would be a DINO running explicitly on Reagan's economic policy, and not even a Manchin-type would try that.
The phrase mainly refers to the election of Macron in France - which was apparently the best chance France had of stopping the far-right, and has done a miserable job of governing since then. Because fundamentally his kind of liberal ideology doesn't view society's problems in the same way of the lower classes - which by the way are present in all areas of this country, including the "urban areas" you think I've completely dismissed. Macron's kind of ideology views problems as largely solved, fixable through minor changes and positive thinking - which is exactly the opposite of the case and people who are obsessed with "electability" and "working within the system" and "understanding how the world works" can't wrap their minds around this.
Our institutions don't mean anything anymore. Trump is the President! No pundit sage who was the gatekeeper of what "electability" ever meant understood how he could waltz right into office, or continue to conduct himself after being elected with still a shockingly solid approval rating. This profile of Mitch McConnell is a great example of how the Senate has completely radically changed and how the judiciary is being altered top-to-bottom in a way that will stunt progressive legislation for decades to come without severe intervention and a willingness from Democrats to upend "norms." The way Trump is attempting to expand executive power is scary, but is likely to be rubberstamped. All of this is frightening and unfortunate, but the solution isn't to "return to normalcy" it's to take all of this and run with it. This is why concern trolling over Bernie Sanders "not understanding politics" is absurd - socialists "understand politics" the way it works in 2019 far better than candidates that hedge on virtually every issue and talk about 'working across the aisle' and 'restoring honor to the White House' and all kinds of other platitudes.
Like, the mention of Barney Frank is such a good example of why that kind of politics has utterly doomed us. Barney Frank's style of "working within the system" is precisely the kind of politics that hedges around every issue and accomplishes nothing. (You'll recall - all of Barney Frank's tepid financial regulations have been repealed!) This back and forth from 2016 between him and Robert Reich is such a good example of how arrested that kind of political imagination is and how it views no inherent problem with the way private power and wealth has such an influence on governing.
Last edited:
The only reason I edited was because she apparently did vote for Hillary. so.... I'll give her that one.
Oh, did she? My mistake, I thought she said went with a write-in at some point. So you're probably right, she'd probably vote for Biden.
User Banned (2 Weeks): Excusing sexual misconduct
We have a fucking serial rapist in the White House and people are freaking out about a peck on the back of the head?! Do we want Trump out or are we going to just kill each other over the next two years? Because if we are it's gonna be Trump in 2020.
You have two options for getting power.
a) Win elections
b) Violent revolution
Politics is an explicit substitute for war and violence. The state maintains a monopoly on violence. If you're not interested in (a) and want a dictatorship, just say so and make it easier for other people to stop interacting with you Because only (a) is "working within the system." I am in favor of ignoring norms! I wanted Obama to nuke the fillibuster a decade ago! But that is still very much "working within the system", it's just working within it without holding an arm behind your back.
Political imagination is just that, imagination. We have political realities to actually contend with if we're not going to play pretend and believe that a magical revolution will come in and sweep us to power. And that involves winning race, compromising, and trying to maximize power within a system while trying to fix it so we don't just lose the Senate permanently.
I mean I think it's pretty bad and very gross, frankly. but we've had videos of Biden doing the same thing to children for the past 10 years and there really has not been any outrage over the last decade because of it. I mean it's the primaries and it's pretty clear what's happening right now. This is certainly not Biden's "me-too" moment.
It's not like I'm supporting Bernie to become president of China or Russia.
No, this is more in reference to an incident I'm assuming you were referencing, where we had a (now-banned) alt account arguing exactly that.
these kinds of takes are so fucking garbage, it's really infuriating
I don't want Trump or Biden. And Biden has a history of this behavior. Even that Clinton video with him is just weird as fuck.
Even if you don't care about that, just look at his record. He's just garbage all around.
It really is. Any variety of the "dO yOu WaNt TrUmP tO wIn?" posts.
Yes, we can call out Democrats and still win against a Republican.
That entire series of videos is fantastic. The one about "you go high, we go low" where he talks about liberals is sad to watch, because you see it play out IRL (and even more so here) the way he described.
I'm willing to play the electoralist game, but what I'm not willing to do is make excuses for a party that isn't on the right page with this stuff. The previously mentioned partial repeal of Dodd-Frank received over a dozen Ayes from Democrats in the Senate and over 30 Ayes from Democrats in the House. You certainly also recall the way the same faction of annoying centrist Senators held back Obamacare from being dramatically better, and it's why a lot of great stuff passed through the House during Obama's first term also didn't make it into law. Even on a totally meaningless vote on the Green New Deal in the Senate that Dem leadership was actively encouraging people to vote "Present" on to avoid giving McConnell the satisfaction of it (the right call, fwiw) still three Dem Senators couldn't even be swayed to just vote Present and went out of their way to vote No on something that didn't even matter.
These people should be challenged, they should be primaried, they should be pushed on these issues. They should be protested and shamed. I'm fine with 'working within the system' if the Democrats could actually unify on at least saving the planet. Which is what primaries are for! I'll vote for the Democratic nominee no matter who it is because I loathe Trump and the Republican Party. But primaries are for choosing the right candidate, so of course socialists will be harsh toward people they disagree with. It's not really personal. In fact, that's "using the system."
We have other options aside from Trump and Biden. If he was the nominee I'd vote for him warts and all, but he isn't even running yet.
That Sanders quote from 2015 is yikes.
Why oh why can't Warren be a serious contender. Even her very public fuck ups with race relations are like a drop in the bucket compared to some stuff Sanders has done or said.
Why oh why can't Warren be a serious contender. Even her very public fuck ups with race relations are like a drop in the bucket compared to some stuff Sanders has done or said.
But it's really important for people to get out ahead and defend a supremely creepy old white dude with terrible policies and rhetoric for reasons.
I'm just making a connection where a person with a history of treating people in other countries as expendable might hate Bernie for actively pushing back on that impulse, but be ok with AOC who has mostly remained neutral on it.
I really don't buy the Corbyn comparison given how much more incompetent he is and has about 10x the baggage Sanders has.
It's not "making excuses", it's understanding the game you're playing and understanding what the limitations are of it and how you need to work to alter the game when you're in power!
It's not like "coastal liberals" love Joe Manchin, it's that the seat is lost if he were to die/resign, he might not have survived voting against Kavanaugh given the way politics polarized in 2018 at the state level around Trump's approval rating, and we need all the numbers we can get if we're gonna add more states and actually pass legislation in 2020! Protesting and Shaming someone who's making the best out of a very, very, very bad situation is super dumb and a complete waste of time and effort.
The idea that a place like West Virginia will magically start voting for Democrats again if we just "move left" is just straight up wrong. It's a take that ignores all modern history of why those places started voting against Democrats (Civil Rights) and instead inserts an answer in its place that's just left wish-fulfillment. Osita Nwanevus piece should be mandatory reading before talking about this stuff. https://agenda-blog.com/2017/07/03/...cs-neoliberalism-and-the-white-working-class/
The only solution to the Senate is to a) win it b) expand it. Because if we don't, we will lose it forever because places like WV aren't going to stop getting redder, and the entire map is gerrymandered in a way where we will always lose if national approval turns into state level results.
A less bad Corbyn is still bad.
I get it but I believe he has. He's been great so far this time around.
I think many centrists, here indicating Democrats who think the current ills of society are almost fully external or a simple appendage to the current underlying political economic system (and thus under the impression that no systemic changes are needed but merely tweaking the composition of the 10% towards "equal opportunity domination"), see more opportunity in making AOC's intersectional political discourse a handmaiden for preserving the status quo than Bernie's white opposition to capitalist domination. It does not matter that the opposition is the same. Their position rests of the assumption that AOC's ideology would separate gender, race and class. They see value in AOC's ability to expand people's imagination of different futures the way centrism never could, and they believe she can be subjugated to leave behind critique of capitalism (and imperialism),ie. "the natural way the world must always work"). There is probably a gender and race component to this belief of her amenability to subjugation - and that she can become a potent tool for preserving the social order if only given the tutelage of those of the ruling class who see anti-racism/feminism as handmaidens of capitalism. Of course these are people who have very little understanding of the necessity to expand people's imagination beyond the current system in order to radically change the same system - they fully believe no systemic changes need to be made, you need only to remove Trump and Russian influence and the system would work "pretty well".
Last edited:
This. Biden's history on women is way too problematic and it looks like the chickens are coming home to roost. This is just one woman coming forward. I can guarantee you there will likely be a whole lot more. He's from a different era. His objectification of women is something Democrats can't afford not to mention some of his policy positions. Plus, he's old. :p If he's smart and cares about the party/country, he won't run.
User Banned (2 Weeks): Excusing sexual misconduct
seriously
im not advocating one candidate over another at this point but for fucks sake let's quit cannibalizing our own party over small perceived indiscretion. we need to not Al Franken our best chance to win back the Presidency from this attack on Democracy by being so damned reactionary to every little thing someone has ever said or done in their lives.
people make mistakes, let it go, that's why we lose to sociopaths, we can't just pull up our pants and move on with imperfect people. people are imperfect but there are degrees and Biden or any other dem is miles ahead of the white nationalist asshole and vice homophobe in chief.
one of these imperfect dems have to win in 2020, above all.
There's only one really divisive candidate so far this time around and it's Biden (assuming he runs). He's the Clinton of this cycle. He will cause people to not vote at all if he's the nominee.
Any of the other candidates I think people will get behind and win easily against Trump. Whether it's Sanders, O'Rourke, Buttigieg...whoever.
Believe and support women*
*when convenient
if your take is that we should stay silent about sexual harassment in regards to a potential presidential candidate because trump please keep it to yourself or say it out loud to yourself enough times that you realize what a truly awful take it is
you know what's gonna get us 4 more years of trump? takes like that
you know what's gonna get us 4 more years of trump? takes like that
Relying on people like Joe Manchin works out right up until the point you have an actually seriously important issue and then suddenly he's almost useless. He wouldn't vote for healthcare reform, he won't support the GND or anything equivalent, he supported gutting the already tepid financial regulations from 2010, and even though he opposed Kavanaugh he (along with other Dems!) confirmed Gorsuch. I agree we need to expand the Senate - but would Manchin support that? Anything even vaguely center left is an iffy proposition with him already, you can't count on him.
This ignores a lot of the way people are motivated to vote, also. The average voter just hears "The Democrats control the Senate" or "The Republicans control the Senate" and they don't understand nuances beyond that. That motivates people nation-wide to vote one way or another to get a change. If you accept the existence of these kinds of Democrats that will always throw a wrench in anything substantial, you're kneecapping yourself long-term, because the public hears "Dems control the Senate!" and then those same Dems proceed to accomplish nothing major because of the conservative stragglers, they blame all Democrats for this - Dems who know they already control the Senate are less motivated to vote, and this becomes a vicious cycle.
The 2010-2014 era of some really insane Republicans losing safe races hurt them for awhile, but in the long-term it actually created a frighteningly unified party for the most part. That's why primaries are so important to get the party on the same page. If you can't do that, you can't get anywhere.
This ignores a lot of the way people are motivated to vote, also. The average voter just hears "The Democrats control the Senate" or "The Republicans control the Senate" and they don't understand nuances beyond that. That motivates people nation-wide to vote one way or another to get a change. If you accept the existence of these kinds of Democrats that will always throw a wrench in anything substantial, you're kneecapping yourself long-term, because the public hears "Dems control the Senate!" and then those same Dems proceed to accomplish nothing major because of the conservative stragglers, they blame all Democrats for this - Dems who know they already control the Senate are less motivated to vote, and this becomes a vicious cycle.
The 2010-2014 era of some really insane Republicans losing safe races hurt them for awhile, but in the long-term it actually created a frighteningly unified party for the most part. That's why primaries are so important to get the party on the same page. If you can't do that, you can't get anywhere.
this ignores the substantial differences they have. corbyn is probably way more left on economics (has bernie ever flirted with a maximum wage?) . on foreign policy they are on entirely different planets. Sanders doesn't dabble in Russia apologetics and flirt with authoritarian regimes, unlike Jezza.
Strong showing for Yang.
6% someone else? That number is pretty high. They should start showing some details on that. It is the Democratic caucus. Do they want someone else to run?
This was his comment on the matter:
I don't see anything wrong with his reply here. You could tell, from his 2016, and 2020 campaign, that he was listening, and did learn from that conversation (and many others he had, as well). When BLM activists stormed the stage of an event he was speaking at, he released a comprehensive racial justice platform. During the debates in 2016, Bernie and O'Malley were the only candidates to say "Black Lives Matter" when pressed on the issue. He was very vocal about the shooting that were happening by police. Now, in 2019, he is striving to have a more diverse campaign staff, and has improved his overall messaging toward POC. He was also the candidate that had the strongest statement in support of Ilhan Omar, and against the right-wing government in Israel. We haven't seen Congress so openly express it's racist side in awhile (Dems and Republicans), and Bernie was an important voice on the matter, against all that.
I think the picture is very clear here. Bernie is a Senator from the whitest state in the country. He knew he wasn't adept when it came to issues regarding POC. He wanted to learn more, so he spoke with smarter people than him, on the matter. Then he learned. He has no outstanding animosity toward POC. That's ridiculous to assume. You also can't deny he has one of the best platforms for POC, has the most support from them in his key demographic (young people), and been an absolute positive force for them in the Democratic party. Just look at the mainstream ideas in the party today vs 2014.
- Status