Because Brie is implying Harris is against those things at the jump.
Just jumping out of a bush in public and screaming "You're pro cancer!" At her would the same effect more or less.
I wouldn't respond to it either.
-
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.
US PoliEra 2020 |OT5| Guidance recommends quarantining PoliERA
- Thread starter Brian McDoogle
- Start date
- Status
Because Brie is implying Harris is against those things at the jump.
Just jumping out of a bush in public and screaming "You're pro cancer!" At her would the same effect more or less.
I wouldn't respond to it either.
Harris is a goddamn senator (yes, BJG is working on behalf of a sitting senator as well but she is not the senator or speaking directly on his behalf in this case). Harris the one with power.
Nothing was stopping her from being the bigger woman and coming out in support of those things, building that much-vaunted coalition that everyone wants.
But she didn't.
I would like to read that in some kind of good faith but in reflection of Harris's work in government up until this point I find it genuinely difficult to do.
If the government won't protect the sick and the dying, what's the point of government?
Honestly? See nothing wrong here. These politicians will say whatever they have to, it's rather inconvenient she said it to Kamala though.
So if I understand you correctly, the real goal isn't to elect Bernie, because that's a lost cause already, but to keep the tone antagonistic toward everyone not already on the Bernie ship, because you are only interested in an "actual revolution", which things like compromising and coalition building don't work towards.
What is a real revolution to you? People with guns marching on the white house? Mobs putting rich people in guillotines?
In what *real way* is Senator Harris standing in the way of people getting healthcare coverage? What bills is she standing against? Has she said she wouldn't vote for M4A if it is presented after being passed by a democratic house when there is a democratic president?
Of course she hasn't. She expressed a timely statement that Sanders supporters agree with. This could have been used as an opportunity for building bridges, instead, it was framed as 'not good enough!!!'. At a Senator. Who isn't in a position to make M4A happen all by herself, and certainly isn't the only thing preventing it happening.
Which Sanders supporters should know. Because he isn't currently in a position to make such a bill happen either.
Of course she hasn't. She expressed a timely statement that Sanders supporters agree with. This could have been used as an opportunity for building bridges, instead, it was framed as 'not good enough!!!'. At a Senator. Who isn't in a position to make M4A happen all by herself, and certainly isn't the only thing preventing it happening.
Which Sanders supporters should know. Because he isn't currently in a position to make such a bill happen either.
Last edited:
Um, who exactly is supposed to be working on this proposed infrastructure?
Well, we don't necessarily have to go drastic immediately. Things like a general strike are still on the table
So people want something that they themselves aren't willing to do? Makes sense given how people are.
And how exactly do we go about organizing this nation-wide workers strike? By accusing a majority of said workers of being 'establishment shills' and 'toxic KHive supporters?' What a great unification strategy. 🙄
Who's saying that? I'm saying this one guy on Twitter kind of sucks for not being charitable.
Mmm, I love the smell of good faith in the morning
Ugh, you haven't been following the Trump Cinematic Universe.
I mean on some level you're right but I did not expect to wake up thinking I would have to argue that saying cancer is bad and expensive is actually a good thing.
People can let their masks fall if they want but the people who are now shackled to things besides their labor (i.e., material conditions) are keeping note of it.
I mean...you are....by defending antagonistic Bernie campaign tweeters, accusing people who view said tweet as antagonistic as 'toxic Kamala supporters' and now by changing the goalposts by selectively choosing one persons tweet to demonstrate...what exactly? "Both sides?"
Ya'll getting yourself tied in knots trying to defend your political table-flipping strategies.
"Both sides"? BAH. I do not think there is anything to equivocate on here.
Really, what I'm saying that letting people die of cancer fucking sucks and anyone who is trying to obscure the policy and human cost over a fucking tone argument is an asshole.
Isn't it funny that Sanders Twitter supporters seem to spend more time attacking and criticizing Democrats? Like, maybe- just maybe, if you spent time using that passion and energy towards Republicans, maybe other Democrats would be on board joining your general platform.
But the people have spoken:
But the people have spoken:
I still have no idea why an idiot that voted for Jill Stein in 2016 is a part of Sanders campaign.
Watching Sanderites continually punch themselves in the crotch with brass knuckles would be kinda hilarious, if the fate of our institutions weren't hanging in the balance.
Nobody is "letting people die of cancer". Also, you are and will be voting for Biden yes? Since he pledged to cure cancer back in June 2019.
All of Sanders' accomplishments were achieved inside the system, and/or because the system agreed to accommodate him. Including his Senate tenure, his party platform changes in 2016, and independent-fundraising success.
But he has no track record of success involving any kind of overturn, much less revolution - in rhetoric, staffing, or political contests.
But he has no track record of success involving any kind of overturn, much less revolution - in rhetoric, staffing, or political contests.
Ah yes, and now the good old 'I can say whatever I want whenever I want however I want because I am morally superior to you' argument.
And coming from a Stein voter, no less.
Biden was actually talking about that back when he was VP. He compared it to the Apollo program.
Interesting. I understand the idea behind striking, but you're ceding so much ground by giving up legislative and judicial that you're going to get screwed.
Yeah, but it didn't have much to do with Harris, especially given her history. Which is why the tweet you're defending... is gone.
Nobody here is having that argument though. Nobody here thinks cancer is good and cheap to treat. The fact that you think this was something you need to start picking a bone over is telling in and of itself.
Like this is ridiculous:
Kamala's lack of quote retweeting Brie is evidence of a fight? This is how you think coalition building works, attacking people on Twitter and interpreting a lack of positive affirmation via RT as evidence of a failure on the other side's part? Come on.
Kamala Harris, being the daughter of someone who died of cancer, is probably acutely aware of how bad and expensive cancer is. That she didn't feel the need to singularly respond to Brie is not evidence of a failure to acknowledge that fact or want to do something about it. As I recall, Kamala ran for president on a healthcare platform that was fairly confusing, but unless I'm missing something, did not actually call for cancer treatment to continue remaining as bad and expensive as is because the status quo is good.
I mean I'm not the one trying to argue against federal health care coverage for cancer victims. It doesn't seem like a very high bar to clear.
Again, if Harris does nothing was stopping her from coming out and saying so. I'm getting tired of arguing in circles over this point.
I'm not saying it has to be via QRT or anything like that, but I'm saying in the moment it is a very easy way to clarify her messaging.
But I'm going to be honest. I think Harris's policy is intentionally confusing because it's intended to make it harder for people to get the care they need. Same thing with the "student debt for everyone. who starts a business. in a poor neighborhood. that provides one of a handful of specific services" kind of thing. It's intentionally trying to winnow the field of recipients for public services as much as possible. The messaging isn't really failing, because she doesn't actually care.
Kamala Harris does not want people with cancer to die, good lord. And trying to challenge her on this point is not only extremely disrespectful given her family history, but also misguided at best given that she still supports Medicare for All, or at least a version of which that would satisfy many of its proponents' goals.
But I guess since it isn't exactly the same as Bernie's proposal she wants to legalize poor hunting or some shit.
The fact that anyone is attempting to draw the line at whether or not she retweeted a complete zero like Briahna Joy Gray is pathetic.
But I guess since it isn't exactly the same as Bernie's proposal she wants to legalize poor hunting or some shit.
The fact that anyone is attempting to draw the line at whether or not she retweeted a complete zero like Briahna Joy Gray is pathetic.
How can you claim to give a damn about people, if you're willing to let their rights get torn to shreds, just to prove a point. And the aca might not be perfect, but it sure as hell better than what republicans want to replace it with.
You know one thing that made me lukewarm on Bernie and even lower then Biden on my list of candidates 9 months ago when 300 people were running?
Him railing against the 'Establishment' and The Machine when he's been a US Senator in for 30 years now. Only Bernie can fix the system he's been involved in for three decades. Like, do no one see the irony in that?
The whole premise many Twitter-ites had of this 'Revolution' was flawed from the get-go.
Him railing against the 'Establishment' and The Machine when he's been a US Senator in for 30 years now. Only Bernie can fix the system he's been involved in for three decades. Like, do no one see the irony in that?
The whole premise many Twitter-ites had of this 'Revolution' was flawed from the get-go.
Stop with the straw-man arguments. It's just sad at this point.
Nobody is arguing against federal health care coverage for cancer victims. Why don't we ask those cancer patients relying on the ACA whether voting for Stein helped them out at all...
It's pathetic, needlessly antagonistic 'whataboutism' coming from someone who doesn't even have a moral anthill to die on, and you're stanning for her as if she's the only one who really cares.
I mean I agree with you that I do not believe Sanders will actually lead a real revolution. ;)
You can say that things are the way they are now because they are better than they would be if our class enemies were allowed free reign, and you'd be right.
But people won't find that a great point of comparison when it turns out that there was nothing aside from political will (fed by a widespread but foolish belief in the merits of austerity politics) stopping the government from putting life-saving measures in place for a decade or longer. Like in the face of a $2T emergency stimulus bill.
Warren had a bigger accomplishment under her belt (the CFPB) before she even entered Congress than Bernie's gotten in his entire career. She also got major concessions on this most recent stimulus bill that Bernie was more than happy to take credit for.
Same thing as AOC, there's a Congressperson who's willing to put in the work, build relationships and get shit done. The progressive movement will be so much better off once it no longer lives or dies by whatever St. Bernard does or says, though if I'm being realistic, he'll probably just be replaced by some other charlatan while AOC turns into another Pelosi - remarkably shrewd, popular with the base, but hated by the general electorate and a small sliver of people who won't shut the hell up on the internet.
I don't know how you square the circle on these two lines. "It doesn't HAVE to be via QRT but the fact that she didn't proves something was stopping her from coming out as anti-cancer." Give me a break.
If Harris wants to winnow the field of recipients for public service, proposing a Medicare for All bill and just generally being a Democrat is a very weird way to go about it.
(Harris' policy is confusing because she is plainly not super well versed in talking about healthcare, not because she is deliberately trying to deprive people of care)
The problem with Bernie world's conflict based outreach is that it's almost always antagonistic towards Democrats and barely anyone else. It feels like Briahna only ever tweets negative stuff against Republicans because she's obligated as a campaign staffer.
This is awful strategy in trying to get the nomination in a party where people like their leaders. It only appeals to apolitical folks who hate politicians and other non voters. AOC and other sane leftists realize that you have to speak to the center and that means attacking leadership when there's an obvious flank to take. Stuff like Nancy going in magazines and shading the squad for months or children going to protest climate change in people's offices.
Shit like attacking other Dems over cancer being expensive is completely nonsensical conflict and not likely to win many people over.
This is awful strategy in trying to get the nomination in a party where people like their leaders. It only appeals to apolitical folks who hate politicians and other non voters. AOC and other sane leftists realize that you have to speak to the center and that means attacking leadership when there's an obvious flank to take. Stuff like Nancy going in magazines and shading the squad for months or children going to protest climate change in people's offices.
Shit like attacking other Dems over cancer being expensive is completely nonsensical conflict and not likely to win many people over.
Last edited:
I'm saying it hadn't been a messaging priority for her as a pres. candidate. But she's still a senator. She has a huge number of potential outlets where she can explain and clarify her positions including support for expanding medicare to everyone. Not just Twitter, but Twitter is one with a short lead time.
And to be clear: If she does, I will support that. I want the people to whom we have ceded power to be champions of good policy!
As a cancer survivor.... please stop. Disingenuous arguments don't help me. Stop trying to weaponize my suffering to make a cheap political attack on a person I view as a strong ally.
Last edited:
But she literally just did this last year! She proposed a whole policy about expanding Medicare to everyone!
Nothing is to be gained from interacting with BJG though. Her tweet wasn't in good faith (you say you don't think Harris cares about this issue; I'll say I don't think BJG cares. She wanted a barb to use for a hot take on Twitter.)
What possible gain is there from going down to that level? Like someone said upthread, she could've jumped out and screamed "you love cancer" at Harris, and it's just as vapid as her tweet. Harris gains not one vote from it. Sanders isn't going to gain a vote from it either. It's the definition of anti-coalition building.
Non rhetorical: who do you think sees that interaction and says "I gotta work with this Sanders team now." I literally can't think of a single demographic of people who liked Harris and didn't like Sanders who would now be swayed into liking Sanders.
I said it before. Every single staff member of the Sanders campaign should be run out of politics forever. The sheer incompetence is baffling. They somehow ran a campaign worse than Joe Biden, the Cleveland Browns of Dem primary candidates.
Honestly the straight forward reporting of these pandemic pressers, more and more looking like the 2016 Trump rallies being streamed on national news without breaks or comment make it feel like the media learned absolutely nothing. Even if you want to argue that it's the executive and there's an obligation to make sure it's heard, the way this has rolled out and the level of misinformation/conspiracy these pressers put out daily make it terrifying to see outlets lacking any kind of flexibility.
Chomsky probably sitting around thinking "I mean my models of human physiology might be wrong too but at least I was right on this one"
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair
Brie's entire persona is built on being passive aggressive toward everyone for no reason.
- Status