alternately we can quit making our best Mussolini impressionsIt's not worth the risk to support any candidate other than Sanders then.
alternately we can quit making our best Mussolini impressionsIt's not worth the risk to support any candidate other than Sanders then.
alternately we can quit making our best Giacomo Acerbo impressions
damn. glad my literal life is in the hands of people famously resistant to deciding "fascism is okay if my first choice doesn't make it" is actually an extremely immoral position to holdThis has been going on for 4 years, so it's not reasonable to say that the Bernie bros are gonna change. Best thing is to be pragmatic and vote for Sanders
This has been going on for 4 years, so it's not reasonable to say that the Bernie bros are gonna change. Best thing is to be pragmatic and vote for Sanders
most, i assume, are good peopleActually most of the Bernie supporters are decent people who will do the right thing. Not all, but most.
perhaps bernie should earn people's votes instead of expecting people to be quote-unquote pragmatic and vote for him?
I don't think he expects that at all, and internet discussion isn't reflective of reality.perhaps bernie should earn people's votes instead of expecting people to be quote-unquote pragmatic and vote for him?
I don't think he expects that at all, and internet discussion isn't reflective of reality.
I've heard similar from Biden stans (lol) like "Pete should drop out and all of his supporters need to get behind Biden!" and I'm just like "the Iowa caucus hasn't even happened yet, it's way too early for this". It's pretty annoying, you're supposed to earn votes, not bully people into voting for your candidate.perhaps bernie should earn people's votes instead of expecting people to be quote-unquote pragmatic and vote for him?
Yeah, that's fair. But I don't like the idea of trying to discredit a candidate directly because of an internet narrative they themselves aren't perpetuating.Well, it's reflective of the reality of the characters of some people on the internet.
If a candidate surrounds himself with people who do that today or did that in the past, in both paid and unpaid positions, including those that voice that people should sit out past elections or vote third party, I dunno but it seems to say something of the candidate to me and the internet narrative around them.Yeah, that's fair. But I don't like the idea of trying to discredit a candidate directly because of an internet narrative they themselves aren't perpetuating.
Actually most of the Bernie supporters are decent people who will do the right thing. Not all, but most.
I mean, Sanders himself has been vocal about how defeating Trump is the most important thing and that he'd support any candidate who gets the nomination and campaign for them. I think the Bernie or Bust crowd is much smaller then people fear it is, and largely made up of people following a reddit hype train who were not reliably democratic voters to begin with that may very well have either broken for Trump or more likely not voted at all otherwise.If a candidate surrounds himself with people who do that today or did that in the past, in both paid and unpaid positions, including those that voice that people should sit out past elections or vote third party, I dunno but it seems to say something of the candidate to me and the internet narrative around them.
I mean, Sanders himself has been vocal about how defeating Trump is the most important thing and that he'd support any candidate who gets the nomination and campaign for them. I think the Bernie or Bust crowd is much smaller then people fear it is, and largely made up of people following a reddit hype train who were not reliably democratic voters to begin with that may very well have either broken for Trump or more likely not voted at all otherwise.
Unfortunately, there are other voters to be won closer to the center. Bernie's base being so unreliable means democrats can't afford to count on them, and thus the party will need to move to the center to attract those more moderate voters. Essentially, those Bernie or Bust voters are just forcing the democrats further to the right!
Pretty much every study ever shows how much safer people when there is gun control.Just as common a theme in US history is
1. Cops showing they can't be trusted with guns/militarization of the police. ie having an unbalanced and unjustified power
2. Armed people of color being targeted by law enforcement and the government.
lol remember the stupid and racist "don't let people on the do not fly list have guns" shit Libs were saying a few years ago? I think there is a lot of justified skepticism on the gun topic from all sides on this one.
There was recently a poll that showed that only 53% of Bernie supporters would unconditionally vote for the Democratic nominee.I mean, Sanders himself has been vocal about how defeating Trump is the most important thing and that he'd support any candidate who gets the nomination and campaign for them. I think the Bernie or Bust crowd is much smaller then people fear it is, and largely made up of people following a reddit hype train who were not reliably democratic voters to begin with that may very well have either broken for Trump or more likely not voted at all otherwise.
From an unreliable pollster which uses Mechanical Turk. They've actually also had a recent poll (december) showing the exact opposite. I don't believe there's been that huge of a swing. And if it is true, then there's plenty of time to swing it back the other direction.There was recently a poll that showed that only 53% of Bernie supporters would unconditionally vote for the Democratic nominee.
When his national press secretary proclaimed that she voted for Jill Stein, when highly visible surrogates said they supported Jill Stein and that "they're both the same, so don't vote", when his senior advisor and speech writer at every opportunity in 2016 took a dump on the Dem candidate, when his pick to help craft the DNC platform in 2016 says "vote Jill Stein" and so on... I dunno, I think a lot of people are going to say "we learned it from watching you". Sanders can say "don't do that" but when he surrounds himself with people that say "go ahead and do that', well, it's conflicting, to say the least.I mean, Sanders himself has been vocal about how defeating Trump is the most important thing and that he'd support any candidate who gets the nomination and campaign for them. I think the Bernie or Bust crowd is much smaller then people fear it is, and largely made up of people following a reddit hype train who were not reliably democratic voters to begin with that may very well have either broken for Trump or more likely not voted at all otherwise.
No poll means anyone can spin it however they want.
And it looks like higher caucus turnout means that there's going to be location changes... in less than 48 hours.
I hope everyone can get everyone to their proper locations.
From an unreliable pollster which uses Mechanical Turk. They've actually also had a recent poll (december) showing the exact opposite. I don't believe there's been that huge of a swing. And if it is true, then there's plenty of time to swing it back the other direction.
lmao really living up to the avatardamn. glad my life in the nexus of approximately half a dozen marginalized groups is in the hands of people famously resistant to deciding "fascism is okay if my first choice doesn't make it" is actually an extremely immoral position to hold
this post rules because i could literally be talking about either wing
Yes I deliberately did it to show how unreliable they are.You do realize that you called Emerson unreliable and then post a poll of theirs to support your post?
How is that unreliable? You have to recognize is that one asking about deliberately voting for Trump. That's a different prop than just not voting for the Democratic nominee.
From an unreliable pollster which uses Mechanical Turk. They've actually also had a recent poll (december) showing the exact opposite. I don't believe there's been that huge of a swing. And if it is true, then there's plenty of time to swing it back the other direction.
That was the point they were intentionally making. If its unreliable and not worth considering then both polls should be deemed as such, not the one that suits a particular argument.Because it's the same pollster quoted above, which I was responding to?
Then why are you quoting a poll that sucks? Can you not find a reliable poll to support your argument?
How is that unreliable? You have to recognize is that one asking about deliberately voting for Trump. That's a different prop than just not voting for the Democratic nominee.
Or we could just use the data from last election evidencing the vast majority of Sanders voters went Hilary and he stumped for her 40 times.
nah you're making sense, we're mostly just having a hard time parsing Emerson itselfI apologize if I'm not making sense. I'm neurodivergent and I don't always communicate in a straightforward way.
I see no reason why we would expect radically different results from last time around. A far more interesting question is whether Hilary voters would show up to support Bernie in a general given they made up aIt's a premature question anyway. Acting in a tribal fashion while the primaries are still going on isn't reflective of what they'll do in the GE, or even what they'll answer in the GE if polled then.
weren't both approximately the same in terms of retention (75% for nominee, 25% literally any other choice)?
Moreover, defections from a primary to general election are common. More voters went from Hillary Clinton to John McCain in 2008 than went from Sanders to Trump in 2016; about 13 percent of Trump's 2016 voters also voted for Barack Obama in 2012
I don't understand why people would vote for Biden because everything that happening during the sham trial, at this point he's a potential poison pill. I hope Sanders wins but my #2 is Warren.
Significant? You are talking about Bernie > Hillary and Hillary > Obama primary to general voters, right?I see no reason why we would expect radically different results from last time around. A far more interesting question is whether Hilary voters would show up to support Bernie in a general given they made up a significantly larger portion of voters that refrained from supporting the eventual primary nom than Sander voters did to Hilary.
i mean, i'm mostly arguing in favor of accuracy in numbers: ANES showed 79.5-15.7-4.8 (or 79.5-20.5) in 2008 and 77.0-10.8-12.2 (or 77.0-23.0) in 2016The Bernie voters who defected to Trump, explained by a political scientist
A new study found that about 12 percent of Sanders voters from the primary supported Trump in the general election.www.vox.com
If were going to argue that a contigent of bernie voters are going to be a problem with not supporting the eventual Dem nom thats more than reasonable. To make it out like they will be a huge problem or one of the major problems is blatantly ridiculous, at least unless were going to start seriously discussing that Hilary voters have been a bigger problem in this regard than his supporters have been. Bernie and his voters largely showed up to support Hilary.
Difference in scale. Every potential candidate will be attacked for sure, but I think Sanders is less vulnerable to Trump's brand of smear tactics than Biden would be.If Bernie wins, by November we're going to be up to our eyeballs in the Jane Sanders Burlington College corruption scandal, with Trump calling it the worst thing that's ever happened. "Can you imagine if I tried something like that? The Fake News would be going crazy. Crazy Bernie and Calamity Jane make Crooked Hillary and Sleepy Joe look like saints."
I've got no problem voting for Bernie in the GE, but this is how it's going to be for whoever the Dem nominee is.
Sure I'll rephrase and remove significantly.Significant? You are talking about Bernie > Hillary and Hillary > Obama primary to general voters, right?
So then we should be talking about both groups since they both ostensibly have a problem supporting the eventual nom (or agree its not the biggest problem worth worrying about).i mean, i'm mostly arguing in favor of accuracy in numbers: ANES showed 79.5-15.7-4.8 (or 79.5-20.5) in 2008 and 77.0-10.8-12.2 (or 77.0-23.0) in 2016
in complete agreement on this point! (...and ironically my original back-and-forth with Cash in here ended with me saying exactly this)So then we should be talking about both groups since they both ostensibly have a problem supporting the eventual nom (or agree its not the biggest problem worth worrying about).
If Bernie wins, by November we're going to be up to our eyeballs in the Jane Sanders Burlington College corruption scandal, with Trump calling it the worst thing that's ever happened. "Can you imagine if I tried something like that? The Fake News would be going crazy. Crazy Bernie and Calamity Jane make Crooked Hillary and Sleepy Joe look like saints."
I've got no problem voting for Bernie in the GE, but this is how it's going to be for whoever the Dem nominee is.
Ah I didn't see that. My bad.in complete agreement on this point! (...and ironically my original back-and-forth with Cash in here ended with me saying exactly this)
all good
Ehhh that scandal was pretty weak to me, besides out of all the candidates Biden would be the easiest to bring out dirt.
Ehhh that scandal was pretty weak to me, besides out of all the candidates Biden would be the easiest to bring out dirt. Though I'm pretty sure out of the my 2 (Sanders is my first and Warren is my second choice) Warren has the least dirt. Though to be fair Sanders just has the longer consistent voting record though that's just because he's served the house and Senate longer
Or we could just use the data from last election evidencing the vast majority of Sanders voters went Hilary and he stumped for her 40 times.
Not to mention that the Rogan endorsement probably wouldn't be that big of a deal in a state like Iowa, regardless of person feelings on the matter.
A number of them are probably privileged enough to not care about a second Trump admin, or are dumb enough to believe in left accelerationism.That's what I would assume, although it is certainly disconcerting to see so many Bernie supporters on the board assert that Bernie supporters are untrustworthy and would allow Trump to get re-elected. A few of them have even said explicitly that they themselves would refuse to vote and thus allow Trump to get re-elected. It's distressing coming from people who claim to be on the left, given that an opposition to racism and sexism is fundamental to the leftist movement. Do they see something within their movement that we don't?