Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread
Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2020 9:50 am
It's the sixth version of The Swamp. What could possibly go wrong?
http://www.sportsfrog.net/phpbb/
It actually is. But ok.
Not really. But ok.Johnnie wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:02 amIt actually is. But ok.
my hot take is that johnnie wouldn't be saying the stuff he's saying about "moderate democrats" (a very malleable term to begin with) being diet republicans if bernie hadn't made the establishment is against me a defining piece of rhetoricBrontoburglar wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 3:11 pmsure, and rhetoric around that point would be much more useful and far less whiny
Even if that’s true, today’s well-reported NYTimes article about superdelegates looking to hand the nomination to someone who didn’t even run for President—and thus didn’t get a single vote from a primary or caucus-goer—kind of validates Bernie, doesn’t it?Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:15 ammy hot take is that johnnie wouldn't be saying the stuff he's saying about "moderate democrats" (a very malleable term to begin with) being diet republicans if bernie hadn't made the establishment is against me a defining piece of rhetoricBrontoburglar wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 3:11 pmsure, and rhetoric around that point would be much more useful and far less whiny
My hot take is its much easier to blame Sanders, again, than to associate the growing backlash against the center as a response to the loss to Trump and everything since.Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:15 ammy hot take is that johnnie wouldn't be saying the stuff he's saying about "moderate democrats" (a very malleable term to begin with) being diet republicans if bernie hadn't made the establishment is against me a defining piece of rhetoric
It all started with, how dare Bernie run against the anointed one, Hillary.mister d wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:50 amMy hot take is its much easier to blame Sanders, again, than to associate the growing backlash against the center as a response to the loss to Trump and everything since.Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:15 ammy hot take is that johnnie wouldn't be saying the stuff he's saying about "moderate democrats" (a very malleable term to begin with) being diet republicans if bernie hadn't made the establishment is against me a defining piece of rhetoric
Which again, talk to me if they're still in there with no path to the nomination after 20 or 25 or so states have voted and then we'll talk about conspiracies.
Neither Obama in 2008 nor Clinton in 2016 was able to obtain an outright majority without superdelegates.brian wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:59 am My hot take is it's way too early to be conspiracy-mongering about scenarios that are unlikely at best until way more than three states have voted.
It seems like Bernie supporters like to work themselves up in a lather over every perceived slight, no matter how ridiculous. Just have your boy win the required number of delegates before the convention like every other nominee in modern history and then he'll be the nominee.
(In a completely different setup, which changed largely because of complaining by Bernie Bots.)Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 11:11 amNeither Obama in 2008 nor Clinton in 2016 was able to obtain an outright majority without superdelegates.brian wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:59 am My hot take is it's way too early to be conspiracy-mongering about scenarios that are unlikely at best until way more than three states have voted.
It seems like Bernie supporters like to work themselves up in a lather over every perceived slight, no matter how ridiculous. Just have your boy win the required number of delegates before the convention like every other nominee in modern history and then he'll be the nominee.
Yep. Folks need to GTFO after Super Tuesday if they are obviously not viable.
Care to quantify "way more"? Need to know how shit-in-a-box good this guarantee is.
More than 8 percent of the person behind him. So assume Bernie has 47 percent of the delegates needed, Biden (or whomever) has 39 percent or less and the rest are scattered amongst anyone else. If it's something like 47/43 or something like that, then all bets are off (as arguably they should be in that scenario).
Or, you know, how dare Bernie run for the *Democratic Party nomination*, and do it by attacking Democrats so as to make them less likely to win.degenerasian wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:59 amIt all started with, how dare Bernie run against the anointed one, Hillary.mister d wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:50 amMy hot take is its much easier to blame Sanders, again, than to associate the growing backlash against the center as a response to the loss to Trump and everything since.Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:15 ammy hot take is that johnnie wouldn't be saying the stuff he's saying about "moderate democrats" (a very malleable term to begin with) being diet republicans if bernie hadn't made the establishment is against me a defining piece of rhetoric
I assume you are equally upset with the non-Sanders candidates attacking him in the last debate with GOP talking points and thus making the current frontrunner less likely to win.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 11:45 amOr, you know, how dare Bernie run for the *Democratic Party nomination*, and do it by attacking Democrats so as to make them less likely to win.degenerasian wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:59 amIt all started with, how dare Bernie run against the anointed one, Hillary.mister d wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:50 amMy hot take is its much easier to blame Sanders, again, than to associate the growing backlash against the center as a response to the loss to Trump and everything since.Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:15 ammy hot take is that johnnie wouldn't be saying the stuff he's saying about "moderate democrats" (a very malleable term to begin with) being diet republicans if bernie hadn't made the establishment is against me a defining piece of rhetoric
Are you suggesting "GOP talking points" will make Sanders less likely to win? Because if so, we have a big problem. Since the GOP will be making their own talking points for months before the election.
Earlier this week, Mike Bloomberg’s literally published (and then deleted) an entire sequence of completely fictitious Sanders quotes about dictators. Sounds like a false attack to me.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 11:56 amAre you suggesting "GOP talking points" will make Sanders less likely to win? Because if so, we have a big problem. Since the GOP will be making their own talking points for months before the election.
I'm talking about false attacks that will make people on the left or center less likely to vote for him that are *different* from what the GOP will be saying.
I'm sure calling moderate Democrats pieces of shit is a great strategy to get them to vote for your candidate of choice! Sanders doesn't need those people who actually vote! He's going to win with that other old reliable voting force, the young people!Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:07 amNot really. But ok.Johnnie wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:02 amIt actually is. But ok.
And I'll stop being a child and just say you're being a bit of an asshole in this thread. There are people here who consider themselves "moderate."
Not sure how you'd take being called a piece of shit.
Maybe take it down a notch.
You will never hear me defend Bloomberg or someone making false attacks against Sanders or any other candidate.Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:00 pmEarlier this week, Mike Bloomberg’s literally published (and then deleted) an entire sequence of completely fictitious Sanders quotes about dictators. Sounds like a false attack to me.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 11:56 amAre you suggesting "GOP talking points" will make Sanders less likely to win? Because if so, we have a big problem. Since the GOP will be making their own talking points for months before the election.
I'm talking about false attacks that will make people on the left or center less likely to vote for him that are *different* from what the GOP will be saying.
Again, you're conflating "against the Dems" and "against the party leadership", which is a very different framing of his run. He's a very, very solid voter of Dem policies and the 3rd most reliable anti-Trump vote in the Senate.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 11:45 amOr, you know, how dare Bernie run for the *Democratic Party nomination*, and do it by attacking Democrats so as to make them less likely to win.
I don't know if that distinction can really be drawn so clearly. I think an attack on Democratic Party leadership includes Democratic Party politicians and the people who support or agree with them.mister d wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:09 pmAgain, you're conflating "against the Dems" and "against the party leadership", which is a very different framing of his run. He's a very, very solid voter of Dem policies and the 3rd most reliable anti-Trump vote in the Senate.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 11:45 amOr, you know, how dare Bernie run for the *Democratic Party nomination*, and do it by attacking Democrats so as to make them less likely to win.
Cool with me. I get the hostility. Shit needs to change.Johnnie wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:16 pm Look, FWIW, I like all you guys a lot. And ultimately we all fall in the realm of "best for everyone."
My real, true anger resides in millionaires and billionaires who think they know what's right for me and lean on the same mindset of politicians from years and years ago that is just bullshit.
So the moderates I really hate are the ones holding power telling me how to live, if that makes any sense.
If this is how you feel than you should also understand how Democratic politicians’ attacks on Sanders from the center could likewise be viewed by his supporters (young people, working class voters, Latinos, etc.) as an attack on them. And maybe then be more understanding of why these groups are not enthusiastic about centrist Dems rather than just reflexively blaming them every time the GOP wins the Presidency.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 1:31 pmI don't know if that distinction can really be drawn so clearly. I think an attack on Democratic Party leadership includes Democratic Party politicians and the people who support or agree with them. ...mister d wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:09 pmAgain, you're conflating "against the Dems" and "against the party leadership", which is a very different framing of his run. He's a very, very solid voter of Dem policies and the 3rd most reliable anti-Trump vote in the Senate.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 11:45 amOr, you know, how dare Bernie run for the *Democratic Party nomination*, and do it by attacking Democrats so as to make them less likely to win.
So, an attack on the Democratic "establishment" based on the premise that they oppose single payer or $15 minimum wage because they want people to die or are in the pockets of billionaires and corporations or are Republicans lite is necessarily an attack on me and what I believe.
That all depends on who's framing it, right? Like I said, he votes with the party / politicians / people who support more than most.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 1:31 pmI don't know if that distinction can really be drawn so clearly. I think an attack on Democratic Party leadership includes Democratic Party politicians and the people who support or agree with them.
Do you think your opinion might change if you weren't one of the 150MM?Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 1:31 pmI think adopting a single payer healthcare system in this country at this time is a bad idea. Not because I want more poor people to die or am in the pocket of billionaires and corporations or am a "Republican lite", but because we already have a system in this country in which private insurance covers 150 million people and switching to an entirely new system would be a fucking disaster. As far as I know, no one has ever done it. There are other ways to get universal healthcare that make more sense given our current system.
I agree here. Living wage isn't universal and $15 can be too high or too low depending on area.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 1:31 pmI also think a nationwide, no-questions-asked $15 minimum wage is a bad idea. Not because I want more poor people to die or am in the pocket of billionaires and corporations or am a "Republican lite", but because I am aware of several small businesses that would struggle if they were forced to pay every employee $15 per hour.
But so what? Dismissing people who want M4A as blind idealists or unable to grasp economic nuance is an attack on me and I'm fine with it. Diverging opinions on deadly serious subjects should be uncomfortable for us and worth upsetting or even losing an across the aisle buddy for politicians.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 1:31 pmSo, an attack on the Democratic "establishment" based on the premise that they oppose single payer or $15 minimum wage because they want people to die or are in the pockets of billionaires and corporations or are Republicans lite is necessarily an attack on me and what I believe.
noJoe K wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:42 amEven if that’s true, today’s well-reported NYTimes article about superdelegates looking to hand the nomination to someone who didn’t even run for President—and thus didn’t get a single vote from a primary or caucus-goer—kind of validates Bernie, doesn’t it?Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:15 ammy hot take is that johnnie wouldn't be saying the stuff he's saying about "moderate democrats" (a very malleable term to begin with) being diet republicans if bernie hadn't made the establishment is against me a defining piece of rhetoricBrontoburglar wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 3:11 pmsure, and rhetoric around that point would be much more useful and far less whiny
I don't think Sanders' voting record really matters that much for the issue I'm concerned about, because that is not what he stresses on the campaign trail or in ads or bumper stickers. It's "Billionaires Can't Buy Bernie," not "Bernie Votes with the Dems 97% of the Time". In his campaigning, he stresses his opposition to and disagreements with the Democrats. You have to dig to find out that he is basically a Democrat for voting purposes.mister d wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 2:01 pmThat all depends on who's framing it, right? Like I said, he votes with the party / politicians / people who support more than most.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 1:31 pmI don't know if that distinction can really be drawn so clearly. I think an attack on Democratic Party leadership includes Democratic Party politicians and the people who support or agree with them.
Do you think your opinion might change if you weren't one of the 150MM?Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 1:31 pmI think adopting a single payer healthcare system in this country at this time is a bad idea. Not because I want more poor people to die or am in the pocket of billionaires and corporations or am a "Republican lite", but because we already have a system in this country in which private insurance covers 150 million people and switching to an entirely new system would be a fucking disaster. As far as I know, no one has ever done it. There are other ways to get universal healthcare that make more sense given our current system.
I agree here. Living wage isn't universal and $15 can be too high or too low depending on area.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 1:31 pmI also think a nationwide, no-questions-asked $15 minimum wage is a bad idea. Not because I want more poor people to die or am in the pocket of billionaires and corporations or am a "Republican lite", but because I am aware of several small businesses that would struggle if they were forced to pay every employee $15 per hour.
But so what? Dismissing people who want M4A as blind idealists or unable to grasp economic nuance is an attack on me and I'm fine with it. Diverging opinions on deadly serious subjects should be uncomfortable for us and worth upsetting or even losing an across the aisle buddy for politicians.Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 27, 2020 1:31 pmSo, an attack on the Democratic "establishment" based on the premise that they oppose single payer or $15 minimum wage because they want people to die or are in the pockets of billionaires and corporations or are Republicans lite is necessarily an attack on me and what I believe.
From my perspective, the reason a party stalwart representing the last half-century of Democratic politics is losing to an independent, anti-establishment outsider is pretty straightforward. After all, millions of Americans are suffering from the consequences of a generation’s worth of bad decisions made by the political establishment, both Democratic and Republican. The communities torn apart by deportations, those jailed by the rise of mass incarceration, the families reeling from the toll of the war in Iraq, young people trying to live their lives under the yoke of crushing student debt, and everyone suffering from skyrocketing inequality after the financial crisis now simply understand that these crises required the willing complicity of leaders in both parties, including even prominent Democrats like Joe Biden.