Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
Will Perez force the dems left?
This poll is closed.
Yes 33 6.38%
No 343 66.34%
Keith Ellison 54 10.44%
Pete Buttigieg 71 13.73%
Jehmu Green 16 3.09%
Total: 416 votes
[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

 
  • Locked thread
mcmagic
Jul 1, 2004

If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

I wasn't talking about Hillary; I was simply just responding to the dude who was mad about the idea of a house seat field being cleared for Chlesea to run.

OK. They shouldn't be clearing a seat for her but I could see the temptation to. She has a lot of name recognition.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BI NOW GAY LATER
Jan 17, 2008

So people stop asking, the "Bi" in my username is a reference to my love for the two greatest collegiate sports programs in the world, the Virginia Tech Hokies and the Marshall Thundering Herd.

mcmagic posted:

OK. They shouldn't be clearing a seat for her but I could see the temptation to. She has a lot of name recognition.

But it's not like clearing a field for a congressional race is uncommon. It's done all the time.

BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Mar 20, 2017

white sauce
Apr 29, 2012

by R. Guyovich

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

But it's not like clearing a field for a congressional race is uncommon. It's done all the time.

Chelsea is a lovely person- Bernie is a good person

In bernies instance it was a good idea

In Chelsea's instance it will be a nightmare

Hth

Ytlaya
Nov 13, 2005

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

So it's just "I don't agree with it" = Very Serious Thinking.

WampaLord's explanation wasn't good, but a better definition of "Very Serious Thinking" is thinking that is either an attempt to justify the status quo or an attempt to justify limiting a change to the status quo. This is because powerful entrenched interests generally do not want to make any big changes to the status quo (though there are exceptions depending upon the interest), so they put the weight of their influence and reputation behind the opinions they support.

"Very Serious Thinking" isn't even necessarily wrong in all cases, but it's main flaw is that it has a strong bias (in favor of the status quo) but pretends to be unbiased and rational. The dumber leftist posters in these threads may post dumb stuff, but at least they don't try to assert some ideological neutrality along with it.

Basically, "Very Serious Thinking" takes what are absolutely ideological viewpoints and asserts them to not be ideological.

mcmagic
Jul 1, 2004

If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

Chelsea is a lovely person- Bernie is a good person

In bernies instance it was a good idea

In Chelsea's instance it will be a nightmare

Hth

It really doesn't matter if she's a lovely person if her name recognition can flip a republican seat....

WampaLord
Jan 14, 2010

Ytlaya posted:

WampaLord's explanation wasn't good, but a better definition of "Very Serious Thinking" is thinking that is either an attempt to justify the status quo or an attempt to justify limiting a change to the status quo. This is because powerful entrenched interests generally do not want to make any big changes to the status quo (though there are exceptions depending upon the interest), so they put the weight of their influence and reputation behind the opinions they support.

"Very Serious Thinking" isn't even necessarily wrong in all cases, but it's main flaw is that it has a strong bias (in favor of the status quo) but pretends to be unbiased and rational. The dumber leftist posters in these threads may post dumb stuff, but at least they don't try to assert some ideological neutrality along with it.

Basically, "Very Serious Thinking" takes what are absolutely ideological viewpoints and asserts them to not be ideological.

Yes, a better summation. Very Serious Thinking gets us poo poo like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGDKCy0bWGY

mcmagic
Jul 1, 2004

If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!
The definition of "Very Serious Thinking" should be: Heard on the set of Morning Joe.

BI NOW GAY LATER
Jan 17, 2008

So people stop asking, the "Bi" in my username is a reference to my love for the two greatest collegiate sports programs in the world, the Virginia Tech Hokies and the Marshall Thundering Herd.

mcmagic posted:

The definition of "Very Serious Thinking" should be: Heard on the set of Morning Joe.

Then my point about Bernie passes that test.

white sauce
Apr 29, 2012

by R. Guyovich

mcmagic posted:

It really doesn't matter if she's a lovely person if her name recognition can flip a republican seat....

sorry to burst your bubble but if Chelsea runs that seat is going to be held by republicans until the sun goes supernova.

No one likes the Clintons, no one likes Chelsea, no one likes venture capitalists. It will be a very dumb idea in a long list of dumb ideas that the Dems have come up with

mcmagic
Jul 1, 2004

If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

sorry to burst your bubble but if Chelsea runs that seat is going to be held by republicans until the sun goes supernova.

No one likes the Clintons, no one likes Chelsea, no one likes venture capitalists. It will be a very dumb idea in a long list of dumb ideas that the Dems have come up with

I'm inclined to agree with you but it depends on what the polling says.

Raskolnikov38
Mar 3, 2007

We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold

lmao democrats are literally the worst, sorry JC I guess it's taken already

white sauce
Apr 29, 2012

by R. Guyovich

mcmagic posted:

I'm inclined to agree with you but it depends on what the polling says.

:cripes:

Ytlaya
Nov 13, 2005

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

sorry to burst your bubble but if Chelsea runs that seat is going to be held by republicans until the sun goes supernova.

No one likes the Clintons, no one likes Chelsea, no one likes venture capitalists. It will be a very dumb idea in a long list of dumb ideas that the Dems have come up with

That isn't really true. I mean, I don't like Hillary Clinton (though I would still vote for her over any Republican), but there are a bunch of people who do like her, even if I disagree with them. Clearly not enough people to win an election, mind you, but they do exist.

Also, Hillary isn't really much worse than your average Democratic politician, so I'm not sure how useful it is to focus so much anger specifically on her. It would make more sense to target the majority of Democratic politicians in general.

mcmagic
Jul 1, 2004

If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

Who cares if she's a back bencher in some house district if she flips a seat?

Kilroy
Oct 1, 2000

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

The Dem field was cleared for Bernie to run for Senate in Vermont the first time.
There were three other candidates in the Democratic primary in 2006, which Bernie ran in and won. I don't know why you keep bringing this up as some sort of gotcha when this is now the third time I've pointed out that you're just completely wrong.

http://www.ourherald.com/news/2006-09-07/Front_Page/f02.html

quote:

In his attempt to be the Democratic candidate for U. S. Senate, U.S. Rep Bernard Sanders is faced by four little known candidates: Larry Drown of Northfield, Craig Hill of Montpelier, Peter D. Moss of Fairfax, and Louis W. Thabault of South Burlington.

Dr. Fishopolis
Aug 31, 2004

ROBOT

mcmagic posted:

Who cares if she's a back bencher in some house district if she flips a seat?

Because the media would not treat her as a back bencher. She's Chelsea Clinton, in public office, during the Trump administration. Unless she does a 180 on her family's political legacy, she will be a very public symbol for third way centrism at a time when that is not something the Democrats, or America, can afford.

BI NOW GAY LATER
Jan 17, 2008

So people stop asking, the "Bi" in my username is a reference to my love for the two greatest collegiate sports programs in the world, the Virginia Tech Hokies and the Marshall Thundering Herd.

Kilroy posted:

There were three other candidates in the Democratic primary in 2006, which Bernie ran in and won. I don't know why you keep bringing this up as some sort of gotcha when this is now the third time I've pointed out that you're just completely wrong.

http://www.ourherald.com/news/2006-09-07/Front_Page/f02.html

Four little known candidates with no institutional support, when there were a number of high profile candidates who didnt run, after Democrats made it clear Bernie was the preferred candidate.

white sauce
Apr 29, 2012

by R. Guyovich

Kilroy posted:

There were three other candidates in the Democratic primary in 2006, which Bernie ran in and won. I don't know why you keep bringing this up as some sort of gotcha when this is now the third time I've pointed out that you're just completely wrong.

http://www.ourherald.com/news/2006-09-07/Front_Page/f02.html

BI Now? Completely wrong? Color me shocked

Raskolnikov38
Mar 3, 2007

We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

The Dem field was cleared for Bernie to run for Senate in Vermont the first time.

well at least they learned their lesson and didn't put a republican into office like the democrats did in 88 by splitting the vote

white sauce
Apr 29, 2012

by R. Guyovich

Ytlaya posted:

That isn't really true. I mean, I don't like Hillary Clinton (though I would still vote for her over any Republican), but there are a bunch of people who do like her, even if I disagree with them. Clearly not enough people to win an election, mind you, but they do exist.

Also, Hillary isn't really much worse than your average Democratic politician, so I'm not sure how useful it is to focus so much anger specifically on her. It would make more sense to target the majority of Democratic politicians in general.

I mean, obviously I wasn't literally saying that 0 people like her, but the vast majority of the electorate are sick of the Clintons and the corruption they represent

WhiskeyJuvenile
Feb 15, 2002

by Nyc_Tattoo

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

Four little known candidates with no institutional support, when there were a number of high profile candidates who didnt run, after Democrats made it clear Bernie was the preferred candidate.

this erasure of Roque De La Fuente will not stand

Yeowch!!! My Balls!!!
May 31, 2006

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

Four little known candidates with no institutional support, when there were a number of high profile candidates who didnt run, after Democrats made it clear Bernie was the preferred candidate.

You don't even know what you're arguing anymore beyond how much you hate Bernie Sanders, man.

Should the Democratic Party make use of the fact they have the most popular politician in America right now in order to help win votes, y/n.

BI NOW GAY LATER
Jan 17, 2008

So people stop asking, the "Bi" in my username is a reference to my love for the two greatest collegiate sports programs in the world, the Virginia Tech Hokies and the Marshall Thundering Herd.

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

BI Now? Completely wrong? Color me shocked

I wasn't, but keep tilting at windmills dude.

white sauce
Apr 29, 2012

by R. Guyovich

Ze Pollack posted:

You don't even know what you're arguing anymore beyond how much you hate Bernie Sanders, man.

Should the Democratic Party make use of the fact they have the most popular politician in America right now in order to help win votes, y/n.

:byodood: NO!

BI NOW GAY LATER
Jan 17, 2008

So people stop asking, the "Bi" in my username is a reference to my love for the two greatest collegiate sports programs in the world, the Virginia Tech Hokies and the Marshall Thundering Herd.

Ze Pollack posted:

You don't even know what you're arguing anymore beyond how much you hate Bernie Sanders, man.

Should the Democratic Party make use of the fact they have the most popular politician in America right now in order to help win votes, y/n.

I don't hate Bernie at all. Just pointing you guys come up with poo poo but never seem to care if Bernie broke or breaks them so long as you can complain about "Centrists" or "Clintons" or someone you disagree with.

I already said we should use him.

Main Paineframe
Oct 27, 2010

Dr. Fishopolis posted:

Because the media would not treat her as a back bencher. She's Chelsea Clinton, in public office, during the Trump administration. Unless she does a 180 on her family's political legacy, she will be a very public symbol for third way centrism at a time when that is not something the Democrats, or America, can afford.

Wait, wouldn't this be a good thing? It's an opportunity for a centrist - a Clinton, no less - to lose to a leftist in a hilarious, humiliating fashion. The party can run Chelsea, and the party can support Chelsea, but ultimately it's up to the voters to decide who wins. And if the left can't even overcome a political nobody running entirely on the strength of their (widely-unpopular) name and connections in a safe blue district, there's not much hope for the revolution.

Agnosticnixie
Jan 6, 2015

Main Paineframe posted:

Wait, wouldn't this be a good thing? It's an opportunity for a centrist - a Clinton, no less - to lose to a leftist in a hilarious, humiliating fashion. The party can run Chelsea, and the party can support Chelsea, but ultimately it's up to the voters to decide who wins. And if the left can't even overcome a political nobody running entirely on the strength of their (widely-unpopular) name and connections in a safe blue district, there's not much hope for the revolution.

They're not loving going to put a Clinton in anything less than a cleared field in a safe seat. Just pray it's not a senate seat.

Doctor Butts
May 21, 2002

What do you have against Chelsea Clinton's politics?

Agnosticnixie
Jan 6, 2015

Doctor Butts posted:

What do you have against Chelsea Clinton's politics?

Third way centrism writ large, her first public appearance in the primaries was as a very serious person there to explain why the public option was a pipe dream that would never happen, she's married to a venture capitalist, she is a venture capitalist. She's literally everything wrong about liberal upper class types.

white sauce
Apr 29, 2012

by R. Guyovich

Doctor Butts posted:

What do you have against Chelsea Clinton's politics?

Ogmius815
Aug 25, 2005
centrism is a hell of a drug

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

Chelsea is a lovely person- Bernie is a good person

In bernies instance it was a good idea

In Chelsea's instance it will be a nightmare

Hth

My team good so backroom deals are good.

Chelsea on bad team, so hypothetical backroom deals are skullduggery.

Me no hypocrite! Just make sense. Good smart.

Kilroy
Oct 1, 2000

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

Four little known candidates with no institutional support, when there were a number of high profile candidates who didnt run, after Democrats made it clear Bernie was the preferred candidate.
Such as? Who were these high-profile folks who were going to crush it in the Democratic primary, but dropped out after getting a note from the DNC that read "no thanks, we'll take the socialist?"

white sauce
Apr 29, 2012

by R. Guyovich

Ogmius815 posted:

My team good so backroom deals are good.

Chelsea on bad team, so hypothetical backroom deals are skullduggery.

Me no hypocrite! Just make sense. Good smart.

My team lose horribly to orange fascist

Me wanna run daughter of loser

Me smart

galenanorth
May 19, 2016

Dr. Fishopolis posted:

Because the media would not treat her as a back bencher. She's Chelsea Clinton, in public office, during the Trump administration. Unless she does a 180 on her family's political legacy, she will be a very public symbol for third way centrism at a time when that is not something the Democrats, or America, can afford.

Any speech from the floor would experience the same effects as her children's books. Normally, there are people that get degrees in children's literature and people still cross their fingers when submitting to these companies, but celebrities in general are exempt from that, because they have their brand to sell it, people click the articles announcing them, etc. She gets to talk about a lot of inspiring people and how young people should go out there and be inspired, and it comes with an air of a valedictorian victory lap speech and trying to make it look like she's done inspiring things herself. She would get an Associated Press article with every 5 minute floor speech, whereas with every other representative they'd just say something like "I yield my remainder of my time" and it's back to business, and most of the clicks on every article would be from people worried about a third way dynasty in some sort of self-fulfilling prophecy.

WhiskeyJuvenile
Feb 15, 2002

by Nyc_Tattoo

Agnosticnixie posted:

Third way centrism writ large, her first public appearance in the primaries was as a very serious person there to explain why the public option was a pipe dream that would never happen, she's married to a venture capitalist, she is a venture capitalist. She's literally everything wrong about liberal upper class types.

single payer, not public option

Ogmius815
Aug 25, 2005
centrism is a hell of a drug

Tight Booty Shorts posted:

My team lose horribly to orange fascist

Me wanna run daughter of loser

Me smart

I don't want to run Chelsea Clinton for anything. That doesn't matter. But I'm tired of Bernie poster's transparent double standard when it comes to party politics.

Kilroy
Oct 1, 2000

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

I wasn't, but keep tilting at windmills dude.
I'm pretty sure you were (and again, for the third time as well), but if you've got some inside info on someone who had that seat on lockdown and gave it up after the DNC asked them for a favor, then you may be on to something here. Shame I can't find anything about it in any source which mentions the 2006 Democratic primary for Senator from Vermont.

white sauce
Apr 29, 2012

by R. Guyovich

Ogmius815 posted:

I don't want to run Chelsea Clinton for anything. That doesn't matter. But I'm tired of Bernie poster's transparent double standard when it comes to party politics.

Lol your idea of what constitutes a double standard is hilarious my dude

MooselanderII
Feb 18, 2004

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

I don't hate Bernie at all. Just pointing you guys come up with poo poo but never seem to care if Bernie broke or breaks them so long as you can complain about "Centrists" or "Clintons" or someone you disagree with.

I already said we should use him.

Aren't you the guy who couldn't wrap his mind around the phrase "Medicare for all"?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BI NOW GAY LATER
Jan 17, 2008

So people stop asking, the "Bi" in my username is a reference to my love for the two greatest collegiate sports programs in the world, the Virginia Tech Hokies and the Marshall Thundering Herd.

Kilroy posted:

Such as? Who were these high-profile folks who were going to crush it in the Democratic primary, but dropped out after getting a note from the DNC that read "no thanks, we'll take the socialist?"

http://archive.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/07/13/party_shuns_vermont_democrats_in_race/?page=full

MooselanderII posted:

Aren't you the guy who couldn't wrap his mind around the phrase "Medicare for all"?

My argument was that nationalized healthcare won't look like medicare so why call it that.

  • Locked thread