2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | Hickenlooper makes it to the debate
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
Thank you for explaining this. Clearly what I thought would be clear was incredibly unclear, so that's my fault. Sorry folks!
Pretty typical Bernie overall. I thought he actually made significant improvement in his ability to tie racial issues into his general message (talking about redlining, mortality rates, etc.) but he's still clearly uncomfortable when he gets a question where he feels like he's being challenged.
So for example, with the sexual harassment question, he would have been fine if he just went with his second answer (the one he said to Wolf) but he felt the need to say "out of context". And with the question about what he can do to appeal to black voters, he was clearly irked at the idea that he didn't support Clinton enough. That's fine but there's no need to go into it - just talk about what you WILL do.
The reparations question is going to trip up a lot of candidates. His policy is in line with most of the rest of them, but he needs to figure out how to word it better.
Hopefully his more diverse team will go over these things with him tonight.
So for example, with the sexual harassment question, he would have been fine if he just went with his second answer (the one he said to Wolf) but he felt the need to say "out of context". And with the question about what he can do to appeal to black voters, he was clearly irked at the idea that he didn't support Clinton enough. That's fine but there's no need to go into it - just talk about what you WILL do.
The reparations question is going to trip up a lot of candidates. His policy is in line with most of the rest of them, but he needs to figure out how to word it better.
Hopefully his more diverse team will go over these things with him tonight.
I think it's trending that way. I don't remember it being an issue last election cycle. It's going to be more prominent in upcoming elections especially with newer dems bringing up the issue.
Agreed.
Don't get your hopes too high with that.
Now you're reading a sincere apology as passive aggressive, geez
I support respiration if only because otherwise I'd be out of breath.
Edit: someone took my joke :(.
Does it matter if no one is any better than Bernie on issue? It's fine if everyone is shitty on this issue and our perception of them can be negatively effected by their poor answer.
All he had to say is that he shouldn't have been dismissive about the sexual harassment that took place and that he misspoke. I watched the CNN interview again and the answer he gave before he said that was actually pretty good and he owned up to it being completely mishandled in his campaign and apologized. Then he proceeded to give a shitty excuse that he was "busy". Instead he said it was taken out of context, which it absolutely was not. It's a shitty answer, and it's disappointing that he essentially defended it, especially when he had already given a much better answer.
The crowd literally laughed with Bernie when he joked around that he was saying the same thing as Warren despite Wolf trying to prod him. It's a complete non issue and the media will likely move on to the next thing in a couple of weeks.
When people are claiming Warren, Harris, and Castro support bona fide reparations (which of course they don't) yeah it matters
This is very true. "Everyone is shitty so it's okay that person A is shitty." I feel like we should deserve more. I feel like I should be able to talk about reparations in a genuine, intelligent way without feeling attacked as a white person because frankly, I'm not being attacked, it's about a country actually coming to terms with a horrible thing. Instead we change language in history books and try our damnedest to never talk about slavery while still having institutions that propagate systemic racism.
Bernie's been a Senator for a long time, and it's pretty clear Puerto Rico is a combination of Congressional and Presidential thing based on how they voted. Not sure what's stopped him or any of the other Congressional candidates from putting forth stuff for Micronesia or Guam or the US Virgin Islands or Puerto Rico if they wanted. Two Democratic Senators sponsored a bill in the Senate and there was another one in the House. They were referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. Why? I have no fucking clue.
Last edited:
I see the "other candidates wouldn't have done it either" fallacy has sprung up.
So far, when it comes to social issues, "wishy washy" "pragmatic" Sanders is a centrist!!!!!
I have zero plans in reading their book.
I don't really wanna read a review made by someone who's weirdly dismissive of AOC.
Presumably because he learned lessons from 2016. But I sincerely get the impression that he buys his own hype that the only reason he lost last time was because of an establishment conspiracy and all he really needs is to energize his diehards so I think you have a point. It almost feels like he thinks people bringing up race is part of the establishment conspiracy.
I gotcha. But that's because I've read enough of your other posts to know what you're getting at, it was unclear to people who would read it without that context.
I thought the exact same thing he did - "what do they mean?". And when the guy read out Warren's answer, it was literally just what Bernie said about how US society is structured.
But I agree with what you said, it'll become a non-issue until someone can actually define it.
Yeah, I wasn't endorsing the reviewer, it was just the first thing that popped on google about the issues with Korea. (there was more on twitter at the time but twitter is of course ephemeral)I have zero plans in reading their book.
I don't really wanna read a review made by someone who's weirdly dismissive of AOC.
So he should say he supports reparations. Get the frontline of this with the black vote and it forces everyone else to move left.
Where's the bad?
They also "like" their candidates to run as a Democrat.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...quiring-candidates-to-run-serve-as-a-democrat
I wonder what candidates made them think they have to do this?
It freaks out the white independent vote who might be crucial in swing states (hell, it probably freaks out most white Democrats in general). That's the fact of the matter no matter how much we hate it.
But the time is finally coming, thankfully, where it must be dealt with.
People lying about what other candidates have said is a separate issue from Bernie and other candidates giving a poor answer.
read that back, it's not even a proper sentence that says anything, but if you're saying that i'm getting upset that other people are mad at the electoral college or that some states or areas tend to vote a certain way you haven't read what i wrote or what i was responding to. they said screw rural people. defending that is despicable and i really think you should be ashamed of yourself and what you're saying
this is just another tedious rant about how much you hate rural people. we get it, you hate rural people
why would i care what you think when you've just spent paragraphs spouting a bunch of ridiculous, bigoted nonsense?
I look forward to you pressing all candidates equally on this
Don't worry, I won't hold my breath. Notice how no other candidate has been really criticized on here despite saying virtually the same thing Bernie did?
Then he can just say "something something Ronald Reagan 1986 did a thing maybe we could do something similar I dunno we'll look into it"
Even that sort of a dodge would be better than whatever his response was.
notthisshitagain.gif
We dont need to rerun 2008.
Oh yes, because the real bigots are the ones who complain about the bigots.
Warren comes closest by actually putting out policies that target communities that were redlined in the past. I assume it'd target them regionally rather than ancestrally/racially, but it's the closest I've seen to real reparations policy from a major candidate.
As far as I know, Kamala has just cited stuff like her LIFT act, which would help black people more than other groups even though it's technically race neutral (same thing happened with ACA) -- Booker's baby bonds proposal is similar (would make a huge dent in the racial wealth gap even though it's technically race neutral).
All good stuff but Warren comes closest so far.
no, what you are doing is throwing rural queer and poc communities under the bus and it is shameful beyond belief. attacking all rural people, painting them all with the same brush as if they are a monolith of evil reprehensible people is the fucking definition of bigotry and you should be ashamed of yourself
Those rural minority communities are actively being oppressed by the white rural majorities they live alongside at both the local level and national level. Which is why many move away and don't come back. Because at least the local government not might be actively out for them in the new city.
Of course they would do this. The DNC is terrified of Bernie and other progressives who support him. They want to keep that big corporate money door open. They want an establishment candidate, so they can lose again.
This is pretty much what Bernie said. But he added some other bits like tackling how Black mothers suffer child mortality rates at a higher rate than white mothers, and added things about the difference in cancer rates.
Only the ending of which included Wolf's interjection was it simplified in that manner because they were trying to make it seem like others were doing something he wasn't.
don't even dare lecture me on the type of oppression my community faces while simultaneously defending the sentiment "screw rural people." you are throwing us under the bus. period
don't worry the Bernie Revolution will force Republicans to acquiesce
All this is about is staying as a legit Democrat, it's got nothing to do with corruption. I don't see other candidates on the left (Williams, Tulsi, Warren etc) not being full throated Democrats, do you? Why would they want a POTUS candidate they helped win the presidency switch to an (I) once in office?
Not all people who live in rural communities are bigots or conservatives. Quit being so close minded.
But all of Bernie's proposals, so far, are race neutral (like Kamala's and Booker's). They'd have the effect of improving child mortality disparities and help close the gap, which is great, but I wouldn't call them reparations because they are designed neutrally.
But what does that mean exactly? Going more to the left or what? Don't think that's a problem with Bernie for example. At least not with us voters.
I do not think or believe he would switch back to (I), if he won the 2020 election and was sworn into office.
Kirblar's not lying tho. We don't need "all" for there to be major oppression.
And not all city people are openminded liberals. But there's more in rural areas because people growing up in isolated areas with very little personal exposure to people not like themselves never get over that fear of people who aren't like them.
- Status