• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Rodderick

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,667
All politicians on some level are hypocrites, Biden and Bernie included.

I mean, is there anyone here who seriously can say with a straight face that if Biden had a reasonable lead in the polls and Bernie was asked whether a candidate with a plurality but not a majority of delegates should automatically be nominated he would say yes? I feel like there's this weird sort of idealization of Bernie where he's completely removed from the context of politics and is this pure manifestation of goodness in the world.
 

Tamanon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,723
Biden's path is viability in Cali, close in Texas, and win the South. Then Bloomberg drops.
 

thewienke

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,930
is there even a single doubt that we're getting a brokered convention into a biden nom?

search in your heart, you know this to be true.

If the delegate count is Bloomberg + Biden > Sanders then it will almost be certain.

The Sanders platform will hardly have any kind of mandate coming out of the party if that's the case.
 

Deleted member 43

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
9,271
"Someone not voting for ___ is not the candidate's fault, that vote must be earned" is an argument people would almost certainly used if a centrist pick like Biden took the nomination, or worse, someone much worse like Bloomberg. The point this poster was making was that, in the event of posters here saying they refused to vote for those two options, you would be consistent in claiming that is 100% on the candidate for not earning their votes and not the other way around.
I think there is a big difference between the standard that should be used to determine who someone supports in a primary vs a general election.

But, that's just how I feel. Others can feel differently.
 

Snowy

Banned
Nov 11, 2017
1,399

People are not perfectly rational. People that have sunk time and emotional energy into the Warren campaign may not be willing to let go, despite her paltry chances. Warren could do her stated ideals more good by getting out of their way and putting her weight behind the Leftist candidate with an actual shot, but she's instead powering forward.
 
Oct 27, 2017
936
"Someone not voting for ___ is not the candidate's fault, that vote must be earned" is an argument people would almost certainly used if a centrist pick like Biden took the nomination, or worse, someone much worse like Bloomberg. The point this poster was making was that, in the event of posters here saying they refused to vote for those two options, you would be consistent in claiming that is 100% on the candidate for not earning their votes and not the other way around.
That kind of argument is gonna be dropped like a hot rock in the general election, let's not kid ourselves.

This primary is Sanders v Biden. If you claim to be progressive and vote for anyone other than Sanders you're helping Joe Biden.

At least, that's how people like to frame general elections when someone wants to vote third party, and at this point Warren's support is akin to a third-party: never gonna win but people apparently view her as some sort of ideological protest vote.
 

Deleted member 43

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
9,271
People are not perfectly rational. People that have sunk time and emotional energy into the Warren campaign may not be willing to let go, despite her paltry chances. Warren could do her stated ideals more good by getting out of their way and putting her weight behind the Leftist candidate with an actual shot, but she's instead powering forward.
Yeah, I'm not about to say a voter is irrational because they want to vote for Warren.
 

Vector

Member
Feb 28, 2018
6,638


Bloomberg being a total paper tiger would help Biden the most, but not by dramatic margins and not enough to match Sanders nationally.
 

Deleted member 16657

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,198

All politicians on some level are hypocrites, Biden and Bernie included.

I think Sanders take on this is more nuanced than "superdelegates good then, bad now." He always wanted the whole superdelegate idea to be minimized and the second voting for superdelegates was a result of those negotiations.

The truest label of hypocrisy you can stick is the fact that he considered being supported by the superdelegates as a path to victory but he never took it. He endorsed Clinton about 2 weeks ahead of the convention.

Is the argument that Bernie WOULD HAVE done the same thing if he could have? Which is like a reasonable assumption, but still an assumption. You can't really castigate someone because they might have done the thing you're currently doing.
 

Haubergeon

Member
Jan 22, 2019
2,269
People are not perfectly rational. People that have sunk time and emotional energy into the Warren campaign may not be willing to let go, despite her paltry chances. Warren could do her stated ideals more good by getting out of their way and putting her weight behind the Leftist candidate with an actual shot, but she's instead powering forward.

The sort of "individual personal choice" approach to this issue is really silly - it should fall to the responsibility of the person as a leader to do the right thing. If Warren wasn't in this race, we would have a better chance of getting a left-wing nominee. That is the beginning and end of this issue here and all I want is for people to the honest about how things stand. Supporting Warren at this point is a dead-end.
 

Stellar

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
758
Warren supporters not voting for Bernie isn't Warren's fault, it's Bernie's. He needs to earn their votes, they are not owed to him.

Same but if anyone other than Bernie wins the nomination. Get ready for millions of bernie voters to stay home in november if that's the case.
 

Deleted member 16657

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,198
If the delegate count is Bloomberg + Biden > Sanders then it will almost be certain.

The Sanders platform will hardly have any kind of mandate coming out of the party if that's the case.

Strongly agree! Bloomberg will more than likely be happy to fuck off and give his delegates to Joe. He only cares about not-Bernie.
 

Deleted member 43

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
9,271
I think Sanders take on this is more nuanced than "superdelegates good then, bad now." He always wanted the whole superdelegate idea to be minimized and the second voting for superdelegates was a result of those negotiations.

The truest label of hypocrisy you can stick is the fact that he considered being supported by the superdelegates as a path to victory but he never took it. He endorsed Clinton about 2 weeks ahead of the convention.

Is the argument that Bernie WOULD HAVE done the same thing if he could have? Which is like a reasonable assumption, but still an assumption. You can't really castigate someone because they might have done the thing you're currently doing.
By that logic no one is playing the superdelegate game right now, and we have to wait until the Convention happens to cast aspersions.

Which I'm actually totally fine with.
 

LuckyLocke

Avenger
Nov 27, 2017
862
It seems more and more clear to me now that this primary is a contest between Biden and Sanders. I don't think any other candidate has a realistic shot at the nomination at this point.

As an outsider I am rooting for Sanders as I think he is exactly what America needs right now, but Biden is not that bad of a candidate I guess. All in all I believe I would prefer Biden over Bloomberg, Buttigied or Klobuchar in the white house.
 

Deleted member 16657

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,198
By that logic no one is playing the superdelegate game right now, and we have to wait until the Convention happens to cast aspersions.

Which I'm actually totally fine with.

I don't see how you came to that conclusion? Some people are clearly playing the superdelegate game and openly discussing it. Why is Warren still in this race if she's not playing the superdelegate game?
 

Stellar

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
758
It seems more and more clear to me now that this primary is a contest between Biden and Sanders. I don't think any other candidate has a realistic shot at the nomination at this point.
I mean, Warren straight up admitted she's only still in it to try and damage Bernie's momentum.
 

Deleted member 43

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
9,271
I don't see how you came to that conclusion? Some people are clearly playing the superdelegate game and openly discussing it. Why is Warren still in this race if she's not playing the superdelegate game?
Because Bernie was playing it in 2016 until he gave up and endorsed, which was right before the convention.
 

Tamanon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,723
I don't see how you came to that conclusion? Some people are clearly playing the superdelegate game and openly discussing it. Why is Warren still in this race if she's not playing the superdelegate game?

She's playing the third/fourth delegate vote game. Superdelegates aren't numerous enough.
 

SageShinigami

Member
Oct 27, 2017
30,458
Same but if anyone other than Bernie wins the nomination. Get ready for millions of bernie voters to stay home in november if that's the case.

This didn't happen last time, it won't happen this time.

But I will summarily stop caring about politics once "Uncle Joe" is elected b/c clearly things aren't going to get better.
 

RailWays

One Winged Slayer
Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
15,667
I mean, people don't really think this way or anything - a lot of people get attached to a certain candidate and stick with them regardless, even if they know it's completely pointless. I don't think many Klobuchar voters at this point are under any belief that she has an actual real shot of winning. Warren has a lot of fans who want to support her specifically and that's fine - I understand that. She has done amazing things and I respect her and her time in politics immensely.

My point is broader than that in any case. Her presence in this race at this stage is not a positive if you want a left-wing nominee and her dropping out would improve the chances of having a left-wing nominee, which I do. If the situations were exactly reversed I would also want Bernie to drop out instead. People need to be honest about what the situation is at this point.
Would it? Her vote share is so minuscule and only a fraction of that small percentage would move to Bernie if we are to believe the polling. I think she makes no impact one way or the other at this point.
 

Deleted member 16657

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,198
Because Bernie was playing it in 2016 until he gave up and endorsed, which was right before the convention.

Oh I see what you're saying. If the candidates end up dropping out and endorsing the frontrunner as Bernie did, then they're the same as 2016 Bernie and it doesn't matter.

So I guess the conclusion is, everyone running right now is about the same as 2016 Bernie. But if they don't drop out and endorse two weeks prior to the convention then they're committed and doing more than 2016 Bernie. Is that a fair summary?
 

gutter_trash

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
17,124
Montreal
ESCJdTPXkAAFNcP
 
Mar 9, 2018
3,766
Respect her, but Warren staying in the primary is pushing the primary to the right. Time to make a plan to take a plane and plainly exit the primary plane.
 

Deleted member 82

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,626
Warren is a prime contender for a "Top 10 anime betrayals" compilation at this point.

Back when she was at her peak and was thought to overtake Bernie and maybe even become the frontrunner, the general sense I got from Bernie supporters (including myself) was that they would gladly support her as a second choice. Yeah, she was a capitalist, and definitely more moderate than Bernie, but she was clearly a viable alternative for lefties like myself should Bernie falter - the only alternative, really. I can't speak for anybody else with certainty, but if Bernie and Warren's results were reversed, I would definitely be advocating for Bernie to drop out either now or after ST and endorse Warren. And if he decided to keep running to either block Warren or bet on a contested convention like she's doing, I'd call him out hard.

I had the impression that the reverse wasn't as true for a chunk of the Warren base, though it's just my perception, but Warren herself always made it sound like she would clearly be on Bernie's side when push came to shove. That he and she were natural allies from the get-go, and that whoever got the edge would get the other's support for the sake a pushing a truly progressive agenda. That their main goal would be to make the US a better place to live. After all, Bernie did encourage her to run in 2016. I mean, look at this:



But nope. At this point, one wonders if her failings are still mostly due to bad campaigning and bad advice from her staff, or if she always had it in her to play the career game like most politicians, country be damned. I used to be in the former camp and sweep her mistakes under the rug of political incompetence, but I'm not so sure anymore.

A disappointment through and through.

[EDIT] That poll someone posted below shows, unlike my perception, that Warren supporters still would largely support Sanders if she dropped out. It doesn't change my overall message, but let's be accurate.
 
Last edited:

Snowy

Banned
Nov 11, 2017
1,399
The sort of "individual personal choice" approach to this issue is really silly - it should fall to the responsibility of the person as a leader to do the right thing. If Warren wasn't in this race, we would have a better chance of getting a left-wing nominee. That is the beginning and end of this issue here and all I want is for people to the honest about how things stand. Supporting Warren at this point is a dead-end.

As I've said elsewhere, I'm convinced she has brain worms from surrounding herself with Hillary and Kamala staffers. Chilldawg's people have always hated Bernie, and the #KHive has shown that Kamala apparently attracted the most weirdly reactionary chunk of the Dem electorate.
 

Rodderick

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,667
Are you one of the experts who talked about how Bernie had no POC support and it was all white dude bros? Because this post smells straight out of 2016

I mean, young voters are historically unreliable and there hasn't been an observable increase in youth turnout in these primaries thus far.
 

LukeOP

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,749
I think people are overestimating how many voters Biden will get when Buttigieg and other drops from the race.
 

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,102
I mean, Warren straight up admitted she's only still in it to try and damage Bernie's momentum.
This is absolutely not what was reported. The reporter talked to Warren "supporters" and someone "close to the campaign" said that South Carolina was about blunting his momentum. That's not Warren saying it, and that's not necessarily someone in the campaign, otherwise that's what would have been reported. And saying South Carolina was about blunting his momentum that doesn't mean you're in it to damage him. It's a technical assessment of what a poor state for Sanders would do to him. Even were that the sentiment within the campaign it was likely the sentiment before South Carolina happened because the quote came the night of the primary. The campaign itself said their path hinged on Biden collapsing, too. That doesn't mean they're in it to damage Biden either, that's just part of the campaign and path assessment.
Respect her, but Warren staying in the primary is pushing the primary to the right. Time to make a plan to take a plane and plainly exit the primary plane.
With as many other candidates still in, it does not. With Warren there's another candidate pushing progressive ideas. Think about a debate stage with just Bernie against 4 people saying his ideas are well out of mainstream. If you want to push the Overton window left then another progressive doggedly defending progressive ideas and attacking the others is good.
 

Stellar

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
758
This is absolutely not what was reported. The reporter talked to Warren "supporters" and someone "close to the campaign" said that South Carolina was about blunting his momentum. That's not Warren saying it, and that's not necessarily someone in the campaign, otherwise that's what would have been reported. And saying South Carolina was about blunting his momentum that doesn't mean you're in it to damage him. It's a technical assessment of what a poor state for Sanders would do to him. Even were that the sentiment within the campaign it was likely the sentiment before South Carolina happened because the quote came the night of the primary. The campaign itself said their path hinged on Biden collapsing, too. That doesn't mean they're in it to damage Biden either, that's just part of the campaign and path assessment.

This post might have worked in a universe where the dem establishment hadn't already made it extremely clear that their goal was to stop bernie. To the point of publicly admitting they were going for a brokered convention. This "technically she didn't" game is only fooling you and no one else.
 

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,102
This post might have worked in a universe where the dem establishment hadn't already made it extremely clear that their goal was to stop bernie. To the point of publicly admitting they were going for a brokered convention. This "technically she didn't" game is only fooling you and no one else.
What the hell do you mean? This isn't a technically she didn't say that, it's that she literally did not say that. Someone "close to the campaign" said something that was still not at all what you stated.
 

Tamanon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,723
Are you one of the experts who talked about how Bernie had no POC support and it was all white dude bros? Because this post smells straight out of 2016

Tell you what, the first election young voters actually vote in numbers close to any other age demographic, I will stop being annoyed at them. Until then, I'm done being disappointed by them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.