Yang and Tulsi are both social conservatives. They're not "better on policy."
-
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
No. Don't both sides this. Bernie and Biden are not in the same field at all.
This (what I brought up previously):
vs what Bernie said (in a private meeting where he was trying learn more)? If you can't tell the difference between these, you are blinded by hatred. Bernie actually has a good history with race in America. Unlike Biden.
Care to explain How or why? are they social conservatives? I have been hearing hem for a bit and I don't see where this conclusion comes from.
Well what's so wrong with her? Why not instead of mocking me you try to informing me.
I mean, Gillibrand isn't apologizing for Assad or Modi. That seems more than a little worse if we're being real.
Tulsi- https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party
Yang- https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1096442292527874048
https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1107346979611463680
https://www.yang2020.com/policies/pathway-to-citizenship-2/
Take note of the language Yang is consistently using. It's not an accident that he's loved by 4Chan and agrees to debate Ben Shapiro.
yes. actually now I recall her ties to far-right hindu groups as well. I guess my memory slipped.
now it's coming back to me. she is in fact the worst candidate running.
I'm sorry but how is that a good reason? If the company is in trouble they obviously didn't do a good job so why is keeping the executives so important? like important enough that despite their obvious problems they decide to incentivise them to stay. I mean you make it sound like there is an excessively low number of competent people...... like in the world.
Also an executive leaving a company in a dire situation because he/she did not get a bonus how is that supposed to look good to future employers. Like I know that if I abandoned a shift in say crunch time and had an important role in a company I would try to hide that from any future possible employer because it makes me seem selfish and irresponsible.
The fact that these executives would place their own financial well being above that of thousands of workers shows there's a major societal problem.
They're the ones who steered SEARS into an iceberg, and they want to charge people to organize evacuation in lifeboats.
Come on man, you know full well that there are very few if any people on this board who are interested in both Bernie and Biden as their top 2. That may be the case nationally with WWC voter types but not on Resetera. It is disingenuous to conflate them when Bernie supporters here overwhelmingly want him because of his policies or because they are socialists.
Bernie is good for the socialist movement. I want socialism. Therefore, I want Bernie.
If AOC was 6 years older then most of us would want her instead.
you guys are at like "I get blood transfusions from nubile young boys" level of age-fetishism at this point
vote for the YOUNG candidate he's YOUNG it's INCREDIBLE and FANTASTIC that they're YOUNG and FRESH unlike the OLD candidate who is not YOUNG
I, for one, intend to choose the candidate I support based on whether or not I think they have the right policies and can convince me they're not faking it for the primary before they "move to the center in the general election", but like... I mean, it's good that everyone makes decisions in their own way, I guess
When is the last time an old Democrat won? When is the last time a far left candidate won a national election?
How do you expect an old far left Democrat to win the electoral college?
How do you expect an old far left Democrat to win the electoral college?
These people are already rich enough to never have to work again. If they leave in disgrace and never find another job it will be a slight embarrassment at their country club but their lives go on as normal.
Now for the ~60,000 Sears retail workers left? Them being told "don't come in tomorrow we're closed" could potentially ruin some lives. $25 million is the equivalent of giving every sears employee $400. Paying those bonuses likely keeps the stores open and those people employees another 6-12 months.
it does boggle the mind how one could think a candidate running on economic, social, racial, and environmental justice could represent the democratic party in 2019. with such radical ideas like everyone having quality healthcare as a right or being able to live off the money they make from their job it's just clearly not a good fit for where the democratic party is at in 2019. I mean just look at the official party platform. with such ideas like raising the minimum wage, creating good paying jobs, fighting against inequality, criminal justice reform, voting reform, combating climate change, affordable education, universal healthcare, lowering drug costs, etc. I just can't see how anybody would think Bernie Sanders could represent those ideals. truly mind boggling.
this is sarcasm obviously
this is sarcasm obviously
The only older candidate that has ever won the Presidency during a general election for the Dems is LBJ, and he was an inadvertent wartime incumbent.
Not having a national profile and being able to define yourself to voters because of it is a gigantic electoral plus.
"Moving to the center for the general" doesn't happen anymore because of the nature of the internet. You can't do the doublespeak two-face dance you see in Osita's article that I posted a while back you saw Carter doing because it'll get caught.
I like some of the younger candidates. I just like Bernie more. Biden doesn't represent the party anymore. That's a fact. The party now, and the field, is a reflection of Bernie and his policies. So yes, he very much represents it. Not to mention He's the most progressive, and has a really strong history of supporting the things I prefer.
Maybe...he's just the best candidate for some people? Not everyone here just sees an old man yelling at clouds. If that's all you see, despite the many good things he has to offer, I suggest you take a moral look at yourself, and question if your concerns are valid, or if you're just being ageist.
She has a long history of extreme homophobia and islamophobia
You are repeatedly asking people to respect your standards while impugning theirs and suggesting that they "don't care about racism" or are "ageist" here.
campaigns shouldn't do things this unless they already have the milestone in the bag
If AOC were of eligible age I would absolutely be the first one on the "Draft AOC" bandwagon. Why is it so ridiculous to support the candidate who best reflects your policies and your ideology? I swear some people cannot even fathom politics as a conflict of competing interests and instead view it as some sort of "Who can give the best Aaron Sorkin speech"-off.
It's also kind of silly for some people to keep saying "these two old men don't represent the party" when combined they keep amounting to like a majority of who people have as their respective first choices. Obviously to some extent they very much do represent who the party wants.
It definitely feels like some Dem voters have this weird obsession with wanting a sexy young person that could star in a CW show or something as their President, though. People did this same weird fawning thing with Trudeau and Macron.
It's also kind of silly for some people to keep saying "these two old men don't represent the party" when combined they keep amounting to like a majority of who people have as their respective first choices. Obviously to some extent they very much do represent who the party wants.
It definitely feels like some Dem voters have this weird obsession with wanting a sexy young person that could star in a CW show or something as their President, though. People did this same weird fawning thing with Trudeau and Macron.
On yang's tweets there is I feel much reading in between the lines and you know what if he is liked by 4chaners I can't care because his policies ( yes even the immigration one despite his use of language) are progressive and you know what if Yang by use of language convinces those people to vote him in and accept said policies then.... I see it as the ultimate cosmic joke and it would be great. He is against abolishing the Electoral college and I disagree with him on that but he certainly offers enough to in my opinion leave that fight for another time.
As far as Tulsi, again much reading in between the lines which is not.. Unfair but I can't completely disqualify her policies or actions because of those perceived notions of anti semitism which so far seem only perceived to me. She is completely anti interventionist which is a lot more helpful than whatever damage her I guess dog wistling does if you are right.
Well there is her anti-LGBTQ history which I can't really have against her because well it has been a while and at around 2010 I was part of that anti-LGBTQ camp and well I changed completely so I have to believe that she can too.
She's literally backing multiple people who have either performed or facilitated the mass killing of civilians! What part of that is non-interventionist? The fact she'd allow it to happen on her watch and not even say something?
Maintaining the electoral college is a conservative position that advantages white rural americans and disadvantages multicultural urban ones. When someone talks like a social conservative, goes on programs hosted by social conservatives, and tweets things like "Deaths now outnumber births among white people in more than half the states in the country. Much of this is low birth rates and white men dying from substance abuse and suicide. Our life expectancy has declined for 3 years. We need to do much more. ", yes,, I'm going to assume he's a social conservative. It's not hard to steer clear of Ben Shapiro and avoid talking like you're worried about immigrants who don't assimilate.
There is no "reading between the lines" with Tulsi. I strongly suggest you read the article, absolutely no one is talking about anti-semitism with her, it's about her Islamophobia and how it led to her making frequent appearances on Fox News bashing the Obama admin for things like the Iran deal (and it gets so, so much worse.) She's not actually anti-interventionist at all!
Preach what? This is utterly superficial.
Preach it.
You think people are only supporting bernie because he's old and a "comfort of the past"?
What even is this thread sometimes?
Excuses. It being private is more damning because it shows this is how he thinks behind closed doors. You're right, he is learning on these issues, however, this is his second shot at the presidency not his first and this old dog find it really hard to do new tricks. You may be ok with politicians who do the absolute minimum for minorities, but not everyone agrees. Despite protesting with MLK Jr. Bernie didn't bother keeping up with racial politics like he should have.
Of course it does. How we communicate signals how we think and feel and frame our ideas. So you're ok admitting Bernie is bad at issues about race, but when it comes to lowering your opinion on him regarding how her went about these issues you'll just give him a pass on. Like this won't become a problem when he's running America from the highest office of the land.
You need to look past the surface level to appreciate what separates AOC from Bernie, they're not identical people. How a politician frames their message, how they interact with the public and what their personality is can be crucial with winning elections and shaping public opinion. AOC is better at doing those things than Bernie, and she didn't need to lose to Hillary first to get there. She has a greater bond with younger generations with their language and presentation, since she is closer to their age range and life experience than he is (unlike Bernie she had jobs outside of politics), she's more likeable as a person to people who don't like Bernie's cantankerous uncle personality, she's more inclined to working with the details with bills in congress more of a Warren mindset then a Bernie mindset, so she knows what she's talking about because she's in the trenches and is ok with being pragmatic there. She's formed a sort of alliance with Pelosi, as well, making a niche for herself as an attack dog to scare conservatives into cooperating. Which helps form alliances with the liberal faction and gives her a smoother ride to leadership slots in the future, she didn't threaten to give the country to Trump in order to get cosy with leadership. Being young and photogenic helps, too. Bernie's an 80 year old man who has trouble getting out of the shower.
How can caring about how the world works be a bad thing, btw? If you don't prioritise how to understand how the government works the best plan in the world to stop climate change is going to hit a wall because without properly navigating politics has been why the status quo is like it is today, the movement was never able to penetrate government process. This is what AOC is doing with the BND, and she's legislating with her own hands not just sticking to amendments like Bernie is known for. How do you propose to solve something viral like climate change if you can't be bothered figuring out how the system functions? That's a failure waiting to happen.
Maybe try getting quotes from a credible expert in how to fight fascists, rather than a You Tube channel? They may have good things to say on the matter but they're not operating in the halls of Washington.
If you want fresh young candidates, why aren't you more pissed off at the DCCC blacklisting all consultants that work on a primary campaign against a sitting democrat? That's where it actually makes sense to worry about building up a bench. Who the fuck cares how old the president is? It's the last job of anyone's political career.
I do believe in the need for someone fresh in leadership. It makes no sense for people like Biden, Schumer, Pelosi, or Hoyer, all leading a post-trump era with Reagan-era theory of politics. As in, litterally every last one was in Congress when Reagan was still president over 30 years ago.
Bernie is old like that too, but he is seen as fresh because his version of politics was always on the outside of standard politics, until the post-trump era where the party is finally starting to look like Bernie's party.
I understand that calling the need for someone young and fresh for Pelosi had a large unfortunate degree of ageism, but that's not all there was to it. But with bernie I honestly don't see the generous argument for that which isn't simplistic ageism, especially grouped aside his polar opposite of this field of candidates in every way but age.
Pete, Kamala, and Beto are leaps and bounds better than two old cranky out of touch 80 year olds. Hell I would include Warren in there since while being old herself she is still nearly an entire decade younger than Bernie.
Kamala and Pete in particular represent who the party is today.
I think it's a fair expectation to have Presidents who aren't far more likely to be dead by the end of their second term than finish out their term. As Biden and Bernie will be close to being 90 by the end of a second term, although given male life expectancy it is extremely unlikely either live that long to finish out a term.
Last edited:
by this same token, though, the 2016 primary makes no sense at all - wouldn't this have implied that the democratic party should have nominated martin o'malley? was he the only one that could have won?
it's somewhat striking that the argument over the past three years has shifted from "vote for the candidate with the most experience who is the most qualified and has the most name recognition" to "vote for the candidate with minimal experience who has low name recognition", and that the only constant appears to be that both of those candidates are positioned against the crypt keeper himself, bernie sanders
like maybe this is my pepe silvia moment, but I'm reasonably convinced that the conclusion here (vote for the candidate that is not sanders) is the point. the reasoning behind it just shifts to whatever facts are at hand, and that doesn't make it especially convincing to me
Preach it.
That post is overt ageism and it's disappointing to see an admin applauding it. My thinking is that we should choose candidates by their policies rather than by what year they were born...
Up to $770k now. Will be a tough road to hit $1,000,000 by midnight, but still possible
Beto is trying to hit 1 million in donations since his rally yesterday. This should update every 5-15 minutes or so with the latest numbers.
If you feel like donating y'all can here https://secure.actblue.com/donate/beto-email-20190331
It's like electability. Because it's so nebulous you can apply it a ton of ways.
What LOL? Do you not see the huge difference?
Me: "Bernie made a racist statement. He's done a lot to prove he's an ally, though, and that he has learned a lot. This shouldn't disqualify him, for these various reasons etc..."
You: "Bernie is bad cause he's old. Also, his ignorant statement behind closed doors is equal to Biden who has a huge history of supporting blatantly racist people/things, like segregation (busing/Strom Thurmand). In the end, Bernie is worse."
Me: "Ya know. That's kinda ageist. Also, Bernie and Biden are not nearly the same"
You: "OMG! YOUR STANDARDS! People are clearly here making ageist comments, but why can't you respect their standards?"
...hmmmmm
Let me be clear: I won't respect ageism. I won't respect racism. I don't respect bigotry. Stop making false equivalences. The ageism here is just that: bigotry.
It isn't ageism. It's facts.
You think an 88 year old president will have the mental capacity of a 56 year old one?
If you have to have a major surgery would you want an 88 year old doing the surgery?
Both Bernie and Biden would be very likely to be either mentally incapacitated or dead by the end of a second term given their current age. That isn't ageism, it's reality.
Ridiculous post trying to compare Bernie to Biden which, surprise, is completely devoid of talk of any policy. The fact that when you compare their policies and actions in office over decades, Bernie and Biden are so completely different wrecks your premise that their age, race, and gender should be what equalizes these two.
For better or worse, the presidency is literally among one of the most taxing jobs you can get. I mean, look at what happened to Obama over 8 years. Look at W. Look at Clinton. They all aged dramatically. It's a cocktail of little sleep and super high stress that never really goes away. At a certain point age does become a concern. It was rightly a concern when McCain ran (he was 71), especially once he picked Palin. Bernie is 77 going on 78. Average life expectancy in the US for a man is 76 and he's going for one of the most stressful jobs on Earth. It's just one of those things we do have to talk about given his age.
Seriously, what if he does die in the middle of his time in office? What then?
well let me preface this by saying that I like Kirblar. But he can rationalize just about anything a non-Bernie candidate does. Like w/ Joe Biden and the busing thing being one example.
Just donated, was really happy with the platform he laid out and hope to see him meet the deadline
It's almost like...you should look at people individually...instead of just based on their color, age, etc...
The post in question seemingly has very little to do with the fact that both could die.
Their combination of age, race, and gender is what disqualifies them before we even get to policies. Their combination of race/gender/age combined is completely unacceptable for me.
There is no logical reason to nominate a near 80 year old straight white male in the Democratic Party of 2020.
The best part there are candidates that champion both their policies without being 80 year old straight white males.
For example Warren is just as strong of a progressive champion as Bernie. Without a doubt. And she isn't an 80 year old straight white Dude. If you are with Biden for policies...why not Warren who is a decade younger and not a straight white Dude?
- Status