Ahh this thread went to "Bernie Sanders, the only candidate to say that ALL incarcerated Americans should be allowed to vote" is The Racist Candidate. You really love to see it.
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Bernie really out here cutting ads with Joe Rogan's endorsement (SEE STAFF POST)
- Thread starter GrapeApes
- Start date
- Status
Yep, I'll continue doing me, that includes living in a country where Trump isn't my president and never could be, and maybe when you re-elect him you can turn some of that Lazer focus inwards and evaluate you doing you.
Rogan is a meathead who is wishy washy on quite a few right wing talking points. He also has expressed some pretty negative opinions on LGBTQ issues in the past. People here not liking him is not all that surprising.
Not in a "I want David Duke's vote" way but in a "By some miracle he made David Duke stop being David Duke" way
You keep parading around that privilege and silencing the voices of marginalized people. Feel proud.
Not wasting any more time on you. You're not worth it.
No fan of Rogan but this seems like it will have a major impact on people who need to get out there and vote.
Not a Rogan fan at all but I agree. This forum follows Hilary's "basket of deplorables" strategy, which definitely did her good in 2016.
No, because a fucking cookbook recipe she plagiarized to put into a book in 85' really has nothing to do with Sanders making ads from endorsements received by shitty people.
Using stupid right wing talking points and pretending that Warren was willingly masquerading as a Native to "boost" her career is literally unsubstantiated garbage that you hear on Fox and Friends, see on Breitbart and read on Trump's twitter feed.
There is a very obvious line between genuine discussion about the issues that Warren did which has actually been had on this site vs people reading leftist talking points ripped out of right wing news outlets and recycling them for their own bullshit use.
Here is a hint, attacking Warren in a thread about Sanders doing something wrong is deflection. It's common PR deflection, Deny - Attack.
User banned (2 weeks): Trolling over a series of posts
Personally I don't think you see the bigger picture and you and a handful of posters are the reason why Trump is on the road to winning again.
You not wrong, the Democratic Touch Down that was the New Deal was only passed when they made it so black people got jack from it
This seems to be a purely beneficial thing. The path to saying it's harmful for Bernie or signals Bernie's softness on racial issues needs to somehow tie together the idea that being present on a media platform that at other times has also hosted right-wing bigots is itself compromising.
I don't believe it is. This exact sort of situation happens all the time and there is rarely any outrage, so I wonder why it is taken as an obviously compromising act now but not at other times.
I don't believe it is. This exact sort of situation happens all the time and there is rarely any outrage, so I wonder why it is taken as an obviously compromising act now but not at other times.
My privilege of not being American? Ok cool.
Still hope Bernie wins.
The issue is I'm actually talking about the bigger picture and the issue of what Sanders is seemingly perpetuating regarding the status of white working class feeling "attacked" from ID-Pol / Political Correctness and the willingness to court them in order to win a primary.
We're in a primary and zero votes have been cast. This isn't about Trump, he is trying to win a primary that he is currently in second place in on a national level.
Read the link referred to in point one of the link. The data from the first talking point shows that historically, candidates with the most endorsements have won the primary every time since 1972 with the exception of two times. Now, the data will all be correlational because you can't replicate an election with/without endorsements, plus there are a multitude of extraneous variables (for example, maybe endorsements are going to already popular candidates). So you can not determine causality. However, I think it isn't correct to say that endorsements don't matter at all.
I find this mindset irritating. We have the same thing over here, with Brexit is all that matters until it becomes a self fulfilling mantra that everyone repeats. Both are vitally important of course, but having an inspiring agenda is not necessarily at odds with beating Trump. On the other hand, Democrats lost last time and they didn't have an inspiring candidate.
Also these kinds of threads are interesting.
Last edited:
I get that there are concerns when you let in a larger voter base, especially for somebody like Bernie where he does like keeping around people who work with him. But I don't think Joe Rogan podcast listeners have any real power to make that kind of change. Equally problematic groups with a lot more power and influence like billionaires or the New York Times could give their endorsement and nobody would bat an eye, because those groups are more normalized than Joe Rogan.
I do wish the campaign didn't signal boost but I don't think there is a concern that Bernie will suddenly change course on social justice causes because some Joe Rogan people voted for him.
I do wish the campaign didn't signal boost but I don't think there is a concern that Bernie will suddenly change course on social justice causes because some Joe Rogan people voted for him.
That is way I don't believe in allies, someone claiming to be ally just tells me first sign of trouble I am going to turn around and see them ducking for cover
TheHunter brought up that Warren was "good on race" as a reason to pick her over Bernie, who wants all incarcerated people to be able to vote and has a large coalition of minority support, which is why I responded, because that claim is obviously not true.
But it is about Trump??? He's the frontrunner for all of this. you think attacking the system on your moral standard is gonna change anything with making sense? That is not how this works. You are not being realistic
So moderates and "centrists" who don't throw minorities under the bus but aren't socialist revolutionaries "bad'
Joe Rogan types who use the n word and throw minorities under every bus but might get us the white house "good"
Gotcha.
Or
Bernie Sanders is willing to court people who clearly aren't socially liberal in order to win a primary and there are concerns about those people gaining influence in the party, which paired with Sanders own words about his hate for "ID-Pol" paints a picture that makes people uncomfortable with his wing of the party gaining a foothold and more influence over literal bigots who like populist economics that help themselves.
Yup, this and the whole ableist shit going on in left twitter recently is really showing how few leftists who claim to be allies truly give a shit about marginalised groups.
It's okay to be glad Rogan endorsed Bernie, I know I am. But Bernie signal boosting him is something people are more than valid in being mad about.
Just want to point out that centrists do exactly that all the time.
We keep inching towards populism but forget the social parts.
That's why the centrists was in quotes.
I meant twitters version of centrist.
Lets get that nice fella David Duke silence and your browns better shut the fuck up!
Yeah it's like the definition lol
but even so it has nothing to do with my post 🤯
As much as I hate Rogan, I don't hate him enough to say this is a bad thing. His listeners are of two kind:
1) The alt-right dipshits who wouldn't have voted for a democrat anyways.
and
2) The blind loyalists defenders who are at least a little liberal and ignore all of Rogan's alt-right enabling tendencies who, with this endorsement, might be further swayed to vote democrat.
Then again, it's not like Rogan is committing here. "Probably" isn't some brave stance, but being wishy-washy is Rogan's thing so....
1) The alt-right dipshits who wouldn't have voted for a democrat anyways.
and
2) The blind loyalists defenders who are at least a little liberal and ignore all of Rogan's alt-right enabling tendencies who, with this endorsement, might be further swayed to vote democrat.
Then again, it's not like Rogan is committing here. "Probably" isn't some brave stance, but being wishy-washy is Rogan's thing so....
The moderates and centrists who would be squeeing if someone like John McCain was still alive and endorsed Biden, even though McCain did far more to hurt minorities than Rogan ever will?
I had no clue a few posters on Era would be the thing to cinch a Trump second term. Goddamn progressives, never just shutting up and letting things be shitty!
Who was talking about Twitter centrists? Like Joe Rogan fans???
I legit have no clue what you're trying to say lol
No the "moderates" and "centrists" who aren't revolutionaries but still support leftward movement.
Wasn't Hillary endorsed by Henry Kissinger?
It's more important which people will be part of the Cabinet. It should be a progressive and diverse Cabinet.
It's more important which people will be part of the Cabinet. It should be a progressive and diverse Cabinet.
This is quite smart on Bernie's part. Like it or not, Rogan's podcast is the biggest in the world. There are a ton of undecided voters that listen and it's a great way to reach them. Rogan's an idiot, but this is politics. I'm glad Bernie is not making the mistakes others made in 2016 (cough, Hillary avoiding Howard Stern, cough). The fewer votes for Trump the better.
You know what would actually have been cool?
If Sanders went on his show, challenged him on his bigotry and actually produced left wing arguments against Rogan's casual transphobia, racism and other common white "bro" dude drivel.
If Sanders went on his show, challenged him on his bigotry and actually produced left wing arguments against Rogan's casual transphobia, racism and other common white "bro" dude drivel.
If those people voted for Bernie that would be "good" too, if that answers your question.
If you need to attack someone else to defend your position on a candidate of your likings actions, then you're not actually doing anything other than deflecting.
Oh, did I miss when was he cancelled on here?
You disagree with his take?
Do you really think Bernie gave any thought to de-radicalizing the audience of Joe Rogan? That seems highly doubtful.
If you want to support someone who provides a platform for bigots and grifters then that's your choice. But don't act shocked when people think a certain way about you when you do. If you support terrible people then people are gonna look at you a certain way.
- Status