-
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.
"Bernie's Back Rally" today in New York with guests Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Michael Moore
- Thread starter tommy7154
- Start date
Yea, about that;
If you actually want to bring this up, that statistic is not accounting for all the other options;
You're also not accounting for the specific Primary -> General voters in the specific states that I am talking about in regards to those type of political ideology that Sanders resonated with vs. Clinton.
The largest number of #NeverHillary voters, as a share of the Democratic primary electorate, were in Alaska, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Vermont, Idaho, Nebraska, Utah and Kentucky. Other than in Vermont, where extreme loyalty to Sanders generated a large number of write-in votes for Sanders and other candidates in the general election, those are obviously really red and largely rural states. Apart from Kentucky, they were also all states won by Sanders in the primaries.
OP
OP
I know, but maybe some of them will watch it for the giggles, and maybe just one of those people will realize he's actually right. People will easily dismiss him when the media tells them to, or when someone like me posts about him, but if they just shut up and listen to him for a minute maybe they can start to agree with some of the things he's been saying.
I always love to ask not only the "Never Trump" Republicans but also the ones who claim "Biden is the one who can beat him, put him on the ticket. Or Warren, but vote for anybody who can beat him."
What if it's Bernie? If it means you can end the existential threat to democracy you're always screaming about (which is true; the damage Trump has done is beyond repair), will you vote for Bernie or sit on the sidelines and become the problem? And will you blame Bernie that Trump won as you did in 2016? He's not necessarily MY first choice these days (at the risk of contradicting myself, it is Warren) but Bernie Sanders would get my vote in a heartbeat.
It always feels like the center refuses to bend.
What if it's Bernie? If it means you can end the existential threat to democracy you're always screaming about (which is true; the damage Trump has done is beyond repair), will you vote for Bernie or sit on the sidelines and become the problem? And will you blame Bernie that Trump won as you did in 2016? He's not necessarily MY first choice these days (at the risk of contradicting myself, it is Warren) but Bernie Sanders would get my vote in a heartbeat.
It always feels like the center refuses to bend.
Now show the same numbers for the Dem runner-up in earlier elections.Yea, about that;
If you actually want to bring this up, that statistic is not accounting for all the other options;
You're also not accounting for the specific Primary -> General voters in the specific states that I am talking about in regards to those type of political ideology that Sanders resonated with vs. Clinton.
The largest number of #NeverHillary voters, as a share of the Democratic primary electorate, were in Alaska, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Vermont, Idaho, Nebraska, Utah and Kentucky. Other than in Vermont, where extreme loyalty to Sanders generated a large number of write-in votes for Sanders and other candidates in the general election, those are obviously really red and largely rural states. Apart from Kentucky, they were also all states won by Sanders in the primaries.
(Also, this may have as much to do with the Dem nominee's qualities as a candidate as it has to do with the supporters of the runner-up)
Uh, no? Do your own research lol. You brought up the voter count by yourself and claimed "issue over", while ignoring the actual topic I was talking about. If you want to defend your own point that's on you to do the leg work.
I posted clear evidence backing up the fact that Sanders message of economic inequality was in direct conflict of the identity politics that the standard Democratic nominee has represented for some years now, and those who voted for Sanders in white rural states are the type of people who very commonly reject identity politics (note, they reject non-white identity politics while very much favoring white identity politics). Not to get into "sins of our sons", but look at Sanders own son and his complete disregard to identity politics in terms of the absolute extreme version of what Bernie represents.
That doesn't mean Sanders is some closet GOP spy or something, my point is his political view is 100% steeped in pure economic class, and he constantly drags other issues into the umbrella simply because that's his wheel house. He's not a bigot or someone who "fakes" progressive ideals, but in terms of where his priorities are and what his supporters represent and say about social issues vs. economic issues, there is a clear pattern that economic > social priority.
Now, to his credit he has attempted to try and have some type of intersectional arguments in tying in social issues with his message of economic identity, but in regards to everything else the point still stands on where his message was popular, and why it was.
We are using bets now? Jesus fucking Christ. The primary is literally a game now to you. This is why shit can't get done. People too worried about polls and shit
I just don't get why some warran supporters continue bto concern troll around here, like I'm in the state of mind that having 2 progressive candidates leading in the polls being a good thing. Keeping the spotlight on the policy changes most of us on the left agree with and continuing to push the conversation left because usually a lot of people agree with us on these issues, but are being brainwashed to vote against their own interest. It's still so damn early in the cycle.
I'm quite fond of pointing out that something like 99% of the people who complain about Bernie/his supporters being insufficiently woke/intersectional refused to stand up for Omar when she was being smeared by her own party, some outright endorsing the smears and some even attacking those on the left who defended her. Speaks volumes
That is a horrible graph rofl
This is the source that details what the graph actually represents in terms of occupational support for candidates.
Now, this is interesting to me considering his high support among "working class/blue collar" people, but has such stagnated polling numbers for the primary.
This board isn't nearly as progressive as you think given how many Clintoncrats and status quo Democrats we have in here.
Hillary's defense force on this board alone negates the notion of this place being overtly progressive, though her support seems to have contracted in recent months.
What is your actual definition of being progressive?
They still conduct polls over landline and the such the way they used to? Might be the polls have limited representation for the demographics polled, but this is just a hypothesis. I suspect a lot of blue collar people don't really do the landline thing. It's more of a luxury these days.
The dude supported the fucking Sandinistas in the 80s and has been trumpeting socialism as his defining feature vis a vis the other candidates for months.
That's demonstrably false: look at his issues page and you'll see Racial Equality, Women's Rights, Disability Rights, and LGBTQ+ Equality. I know there's a subset of Democrats who believe that, but they think any discussion whatsoever of class/economic issues is a distraction from social/identity issues. And those people aren't necessarily bad...it's part of politics that everyone has different priorities and I support advancing social justice just like them. The problem is that they're over represented in the donor class and the media compared to the general population, and they lead the Democratic party away from popular policies.
Lots of polls do lots of different things, but cells are used a lot now. I actually think I was trying to get polled by a research group last week, they kept calling me for like five days straight. It was only after I realized they kept repeating "we're not trying to sell you something" that it was probably some political polling station lol
Ok, how is posting "Fuck off, Bernie", then never posting again not drive-by posting? And what is your deal? You hate Bernie so much that you said you would no longer vote for AOC if she ran for president. How do hate him that much. What did he do that his very association will cause you to proudly turn on them and treat them like scum?
I think the difference is that some of current Warren supporters are indifferent to if Warren was actually able to accomplish her policy goals. It would be nice if she was able to get M4A, but they're still going to be fine without it.
Bernie supporters are on the receiving end of the ugliness of capitalism.
ok, first off you ignored what I said one line under that quote
Now, to his credit he has attempted to try and have some type of intersectional arguments in tying in social issues with his message of economic identity, but in regards to everything else the point still stands on where his message was popular, and why it was.
Two, you're ignoring that he clearly supports social issues that are progressive, but his core message and why he is popular among a group of voters (see the polling done above and how he is very popular with blue collar people) is 100% his economic message and the fact that his entire political identity is economic based.
And for the bolded, fucking yikes. Thanks for proving my point! Always nice to have clear examples of what I've been saying. Literally blaming people and "identity politics" for "moving way from the real issues"
It's a similar number generally, but considering the opponent was Donald Trump it really should not have been.
Huh. Maybe it has to do with the frequency at which scam calls are made making people unevenly hard to reach? If we're trying to formulate an explanatory basis. Maybe lower income people are more wary of being scammed and are thus more wary of strange phone numbers.
Really excited. I honestly believe Bernie Sanders can get real change done in this country.
The most progressive candidate with a message which speaks to systemic change from the ground up.
A message which has a beef with the Billionaire class.
A message which has been emulated and modified to appease by other candidates but never truly duplicated.
A message with real anger and passion which cannot be resolved by means testing and accounting.
Sanders is tapping into something with his campaign and his ideas which will change this country and the way it looks at politics.
I think he has a chance to really break through for everyone.
The most progressive candidate with a message which speaks to systemic change from the ground up.
A message which has a beef with the Billionaire class.
A message which has been emulated and modified to appease by other candidates but never truly duplicated.
A message with real anger and passion which cannot be resolved by means testing and accounting.
Sanders is tapping into something with his campaign and his ideas which will change this country and the way it looks at politics.
I think he has a chance to really break through for everyone.
I mean, you can try to logic out that polls are wrong, but really when have they been THAT wrong? Like, even 2016's general was only a percent wrong and that's because a poll affecting investigation was opened in the literal last week which didn't give enough time for polls to catch up. And, speaking of 2016, the polls were EXACTLY right for the primaries.
Fine.
Bernie->Hillary conversion was not lower than Hillary->Obama conversion
Did you? You didn't in any response to me at least. You only made an assertion without any numbers to back up that claim. But perhaps you posted such evidence elsewhere in the thread. And again any numbers for Bernie 2016 supporters are meaningless unless you can compare them to numbers for Clinton 2008 supporters.
The U.S has a huge opportunity here, and I really hope they don't squander it.
Absolutely. A lot of their yelling about "intersectionalism" in the wake of AOC/Ilhan Omar's endorsement is just preformative nonsense that I can't help but just read as noise.
That's a good point. A lot of Warren supporters I see who "pragmatic" progressives who aren't as invested in those policies and would be alright if they didn't pass or pass heavily compromised whereas Bernie supporters are a lot more invested in his policies.
Fine.
Bernie->Hillary conversion was not lower than Hillary->Obama conversion
As I said in the previous post, it was average. Against Donald Trump. McCain was shit, but you do know that voting for him/not for Obama had nowhere near the same implication to the average voter as not voting/voting for Trump in 2016, right?
Fine.
Bernie->Hillary conversion was not lower than Hillary->Obama conversion
Did you? You didn't in any response to me at least. You only made an assertion without any numbers to back up that claim. But perhaps you posted such evidence elsewhere in the thread. And again any numbers for Bernie 2016 supporters are meaningless unless you can compare them to numbers for Clinton 2008 supporters.
What are you talking about? Look at the top of the page, you know, the thing you just quoted.
This isn't a discussion regarding primary -> general voters. This is talking about why people voted for Sanders in terms of their political world view and the conflict of Sanders "economic discrimination" vs. the general Democratic Party message of "social inequality". The why is directly tied to the who, and the who is a set of rural voters who have felt abandoned by the Democratic party because the Democratic Party is built from the concept of social inequality due to the Democrats being a coalition of minority and repressed voters among all states with their own set of discrimination that they are fighting.
You keep wanting to turn this into an argument about the primary -> general voter flip. I didn't bring that up, I don't care about that, the topic is why Bernie is popular among a specific group of people.
You Bernie Stans are so a sanctimonious and annoying. I and a lot of the Clintoncrats as you call us actually have real progressive views, not that all or nothing bull you Bernie Stans champion. We actually understand how the American political system works.
We understand that every Democrat is not going to be ultra progressive, but as long they do their part and vote for small incremental progressive changes things well get better, it will take time but things well get better.
In this case there appeared to be some discrepancy-- just trying to figure out why that might be.
We've heard the same thing for years. Clearly it's not resonating with people outside of his core supporters as he's declining in the polls.
Maybe he and his team and supporters should dig deep and wonder why this is. Could it be people aren't turned off by the message, but Bernie himself? If that's the case, how does he plan to remedy that? I'd listen if that's what he plans to cover.
Yeah. First ones to tell you how everything is a pipe dream and we're better off compromising as much as possible.
Reaching over the table is some bullshit that'll end up hurting us as much as it already has.
I'm trying to pivot the discussion to actual data. You make nonverifiable claims trying to read the minds of Bernie supporters without posting any data to support those claims one way or another. I'm trying to bring in some data so we at least can have some substance to the discussion, and not base it on just pure guesswork
If you can find any data whatsoever to support your claim, that shows what you say to be true to a higher degree for Bernie supporters than for previous Dem runner-ups I would be happy to discuss it.
A progressive should, generally speaking, support the following:
Pro-civil rights including the preserving of those rights and the expansion of those rights to protect newer designations of individuals such as the LGBTQ communities.
Anti-plutocracy including extensive campaign finance reform, overturning Citizens United, etc.
Moderate, non-hawkish, foreign policy.
Socialized non-profit healthcare.
Advocation for the strengthening and rebuilding of collective bargaining through unionized labor.
Fighting against social class stratification and extreme income inequality.
Decriminalization if not outright legalization of drugs to effectively end the corrupt and demonstrably ineffective War on Drugs. (This one is admittedly tricky as even some progressives think drugs shouldn't be legalized)
Granted those are very broad beats and not every candidate will always tick every box but centrist, corporatists like Clinton clearly check very few of these boxes or their support wavers depending on the political climate.
The irony of calling yourself progressive and then advocating for incremental policy change...lol
Yea, I know you're trying to pivot, but the thing you're pivoting to has nothing to do with the topic. And when I actually did bring the topic into the discussion with evidence on a State by State Primary -> General voting pattern, it clearly supports the point of a subset of voters who found Sanders message resonating, but the general message of the Democratic party to not resonate.
Soooo, maybe actually acknowledge the existence of the things I've posted instead of pretending they don't exist if you want to keep quoting me.
Why the hell are you calling yourself a Clintoncrat? Is she running right now?
And your "small change" is nonexistent. It's usually just platitudes while any person who suffers gets nothing.
Given the attitudes you're seeing, what tells you this board is progressive??? Look at what news outlets and voices are supported and which are criticized. Look at policies that are supported and which aren't. Look at preferred candidates.
It all leans center.
Warren wasn't the preferred candidate at the start of the primary.
I don't think it's all Warren supporters or all Bernie supporters. I still love you
On this board? Yeah, she was by most posters at the start. Not by me, but I didn't even have a preferred candidate. Still don't.
The fact that you call yourself a Clintoncrat is honestly embarrassing and telling. It's not about policy. It's about a bizarre tribal team loyalty.
"We" lol.
Clearly you understand politics. Thanks for Trump by the way. And for the Supreme court. And for losing thousands of seats nationally. You really really understand politics. I can't take all this winning.