You're right. She doesn't poll well enough to take any delegates from anyone.
-
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.
Democratic Presidential Primaries & Caucuses |March OT| Last Tuesday was 1000 years ago, old news no one cares about (Discussion Guidelines in OP)
- Thread starter Poodlestrike
- Start date
- Status
I think Sanders supporters should be focused on positivity and the fact that we are poised to take a huge lead on Super Tuesday if everything pans out well.
There is no reason to focus on the negative stuff. It's going to happen and no one is going to remember a few delegates shaved off California.
There is no reason to focus on the negative stuff. It's going to happen and no one is going to remember a few delegates shaved off California.
Democratic socialism, every institution in America should be democratized. I'm willing to play by the rules because revolutions don't just happen by themselves and you need to do something in the meantime but I'm not ruling out a complete overhaul of the Constitution.
Short term: More socioeconomic justice in the US/worldwide, close the for-profit prisons, dismantle the MIC, dismantle the health insurance industry, solve domestic homelessness, etc
Medium term: Worker-owned industries
Long term: Democratic socialism/municipalism to get the nation ready for the oncoming climate change/automation paradigm shift
Super Long Term: Fully automated luxury gay space communism
Last edited:
I don't hate Amy, Biden or Pete, or Bloomberg.
Biden's corrupt and something has always get off about him.
Bloomberg has a host of social issues but lines up with me more on economic policy.
I don't like sanders and warren. Period. I could name a few reasons. I think they will tax the wealthy too much causing unemployment to jump massively.
No I won't vote for trump. economically he's been great for me. My retirement and ira have been great. My tax return went from around 12k a year to 15k after the tax reform.
Some of the stuff he says though... like what he said about john Mcaine for being a POW. Also think he gave too many tax breaks to big corporations.
I believe in being equally fair. If I got to pay 30% or whatever it is on my income. Than amazon should not be able to pay zero in taxes. 30% or so of their profits should be taxed.
You need a laughing man from GotS style avatar with those words floating around you.
Why would a wealth tax cause unemployment to rise? They are almost wholly unrelated.
You want to know why some people here despise her although she's a progressive? Easy: some here believe that progressive voters shouldn't have to choose, so Bernie gets all votes. The sooner she's out the more delegates Bernie gets, simple as that.
Also kinda funny that now that Biden won a state voices are suddenly popping up trying to get this thread closed.
You're trying to argue that people are being totally unfair to Warren because of some flimsy justification that basically boils down to 'she's too good for that'.
The hostility comes from the fact that Sanders supporters are frequently accused of having a cult of personality surrounding him (on the forum!) yet your post and many other posts trying to defend Warren's recent behavior don't sound any better than that.
As long as Bloomberg doesn't get the nom and nobody gets screwed in the Convention, I'll vote for whoever.
Hypothetically, if she loses bigtime on Super Tuesday, do you still want her to go into a brokered convention hoping to be handed the nomination after having won nothing? Is that the kind of persistence being valued here?
If you read nothing else here, read this:
Why are you excited about a 15k tax return, let alone a 12k one?
That just means you're giving the Government a tax-free loan. Take fewer withholdings. Your goal should be to have a tax refund of $0.
I guess that answers the question if endorsements still matter.
He's been around forever, has connections to basically all African American communities in the state, and has been a leader in that community.
It has nothing to do with Warren in particular -- if I was a Pete stan or anyone else, I'd be saying the same thing. There's too much devisiveness in here and on social media in general. We're never going to beat Trump if we can't respect each other for their choices and candidates.
And you think I'm projecting a cult of personality because I think Warren displays a lot of integrity and grit and I believe what she says? Come on...
You and me both. He's the definition of a slimy politician
This is just plain wrong. If trumps massive tax cuts for the rich didn't create more jobs than why would taxing them more increase unemployment.
Um... how about because she is less trustworthy than Bernie Sanders?
To be honest, I don't think some would care if she stayed in. At least I don't, that's her choice. She'd have to answer to that to the progressive base. The issue I have is she is going out of her way to criticize Bernie Sanders, when she can just focus on the others. Did Bernie criticize her at debates or when giving a speech or through twitter, in comparison to what she has done to him?
Oh that's right, the only thing I can remember is Bernie repeating what she said herself... a....*gasp* a CAPITALIST! 😩 that asshole!
even setting aside that she has like 8 delegates, it just seems kind of bizarre to suggest that she's stealing bernie's votes, imo. if people choose to vote for her, instead of him, it seems like it's because they thought she made a more compelling case than he did. if bernie wants those votes instead, he should make a more compelling case for himself, to those voters, imo.
I have no idea why you would believe this. You could look at Eisenhower's presidency after World War II where, although he loathed high taxes, he refused to budge because he also loathed the national debt. You could look at https://www.thebalance.com/unemployment-rate-by-year-3305506 and see it didn't affect unemployment. Rich people even though back then they had less money and the rates were very high (some were like 92%).
Thanks for your response.
Agree wholeheartedly with ... I think a chunk of this, for what it's worth. All of the short-term. Some worker-owned industries would be fine, but I struggle to see how it'd scale properly. You lose me in the democratic socialism, but have my bear-riding cossacks for devolving things to the municipality.
As far as climate change/automation paradigm shift... fuck it, I'll support whatever works.
Especially if it takes to automated gay luxury space, even if it's communism.
I don't understand why what you wrote is supposed to be an unreasonable opinion.
What the heck is Warren going to do with the few delegates that she picks up? It seems like a total waste of time to me unless she knows things we don't and there's actually a good chance for her at the convention.
Ever since he brought on the Clinton folk into her campaign, she's had zero integrity and consistency. Accepting the help from SuperPACs despite pledging to not accept SuperPAC money isn't showing integrity, especially after you let Harris and Beto pull out because of insufficient funding.
You started out with that question so well, so I will address that portion. If she loses bigtime on Tuesday, I will have to look hard at whether I want to continue supporting her. I think she will have a tough time justifying staying in if she doesn't get a good delegate haul. I'm not really a big brain delegate strategist so I have no idea if there's any other reason for her to stay in other than to push the agenda leftwards.
The problem for me is that I believe she's probably the only one who could survive the general election crucible and beat Trump, so I'm not sure where I'd go. Obviously I will support whoever wins the nom.
It was the first quote I came across, but it accurately sums up my understanding of Marx's position on revolution. I'm not really interested in dragging out some books or textbooks in some box somewhere to fight with you on the internet.
I mean what is your understanding here? Since that seems to be condescension.
Also, what is your understanding of modern democratic-socialism? Because on the surface you seem to be ignoring that the whole of modern socialism is largely predicated on critiques and reconciliations around Marx/Engels and more recent texts?
Which I will note again, I am not really a supporter of, but I think it is disingenuous to not engage in fair and accurate context with even those I have some fundamental disagreements with.
I don't think Warren will be much of a factor on Super Tuesday, she's been underperforming since NH, and that'll probably continue.
I don't know, walking into the convention after having won approximately zero states is a great way to make your case as to why you should be the nominee.
I don't know, walking into the convention after having won approximately zero states is a great way to make your case as to why you should be the nominee.
But something like 47% of all homeless in the country are in California. I'm not strictly saying it's dems fault.
The wealthy own all the businesses. Increasing the tax on them and the tax on their businesses too much will hurt unemployment
The latter is of course not surprising considering South Carolina is more populous than the previous two states combined.
Meanwhile, now we know Biden does well in states Trump will fucking crush in the General!
You're free to believe what she says, but when you frame criticism of her very questionable decisions as people being horribly unfair to someone who 'persists' out of pure ideological devotion and who can't possibly be playing politics... I don't see how that's any different than what the most egregious Sanders supporters here might do, and yet we don't endlessly push this cult of personality narrative that sounds just as demeaning as what you're accusing of people of doing to Warren
I think Bernie has had this effect that the more he gets attacked by others he gets more support. I think all the talking heads, guest on news shows, and politicians particularly his running mates disavowing of his policies have only made him appear more in the news and possibly actually make people aware of his ideas as opposed to the typical layman that only really knows Democrat or Republican and the 'general' ideals of both.
It is to a degree similar to the "Trump effect" in my opinion that happened in 2016 where he dominated a LOT of the news cycle and it seemed to only help him. Like there was a time where he was getting 3 or 4 :1 coverage over Hillary and any other candidate running at the time, I don't know if Bernie is anywhere close to that but I wouldn't be surprised especially with him doing so well right now.
It is to a degree similar to the "Trump effect" in my opinion that happened in 2016 where he dominated a LOT of the news cycle and it seemed to only help him. Like there was a time where he was getting 3 or 4 :1 coverage over Hillary and any other candidate running at the time, I don't know if Bernie is anywhere close to that but I wouldn't be surprised especially with him doing so well right now.
At this point I'm looking forward to Warren eating shit in her own state. I hate that it's come to this, but she's gone full Anakin—and she thinks Sanders underestimates her power.
Gay space without communism is like a car without wheels.
Gay space without communism is like a car without wheels.
Last edited:
You do realize that is because many states' entire homeless policy is putting homeless people on a Greyhound with a one way ticket to California, right? And that the main reason homeless go to California is because the weather is nice enough that they will not die from being exposed to the elements most days of the year.
There are additional reasons (insane housing costs) for California's large population of homeless, but a lot of it is the policy of other states/municipalities and weather related. Ideally the federal government would be assisting California with this issue but Republicans are happy to let homeless people die. You say you care about the homeless, so maybe...stop voting Republican?
I know. But if I got the extra 300$ on my check I would spend more on useless junk throughout the year. Thus save less.invest less.
I don't know how you can possibly say that you want her to pull the platform left and then turn around to say you don't know who else you would support when there is another candidate whose policy positions are the same as--if not more left than--hers still in the running.
These are honestly the kind of posts (and not necessarily from you, in particular) that make me wonder about what Warren's supporters here are looking for.
Welcome to democracy! You thought that those who don't win or get at least second in the first 2-3 primaries should get the f out? Then you're wrong, especially if by any chance your candidate is in the lead after a mere fraction of primaries.
I noticed you ignored my response but I am not letting this go either.
1.) The one person most interested in assuring your union position you are refusing to vote for?
2.) There is no strong evidence, and actually more evidence to the contrary, that taxing the ultra wealthy would massively harm employment. In fact, what most studies show is that in a situation such as ours, redistribution would actually jolt demand and promote production. As rich people holding cash in banks because they have so much they don't know what to do with all of it isn't the most efficient way to grow an economy and sustain it.
I mean what generates more jobs and growth? One rich guy buying one large mansion and one Lamborghini, or several dozen regular joes buying an economy car and a three bedroom house? Keeping in mind all the downstream opportunities that come with it? From parts/maintenance/assembly line/fuel purchases/car washes/accessories/lawn care/insurance etc.
lmao that isn't remotely true. Around 26% of total homelessness is located in California not 47%.
Homelessness is mostly caused by:
- Unaffordable housing, fueled by speculation, poor planning and gentrification
- Uneven employment, fueled by contract work
- Poor access to support, whether it be family or government services, much less a problem for people working in the same communities they grew up in or in smaller communities
In all of these cases, its mostly a symptom of capitalism running rampant. In the case of New York, the Republicans dealt with this "issue" by shipping homeless people out.
I disagree with that.
If you seriously believe that than you think half the country are just serious pieces of shit. Of course there's dems in the wild who are as well.
So you think 60-80 percent of the country are just downright terrible people?
The sheer level of undecideds in general is kind of crazy in this cycle.
It's not. It's really bad regarding housing because of the property tax cap. But at a minimum, the state expanded medicaid, which is a hell of a lot more than many others have done.
- Status