|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
TyroneGoldstein posted:I'm guilty as charged on the electability line even though Sanders basically hits all my happy buttons when it comes to labor. I just could not see the general electorate going for him in the moment during the primary. Now, a good year after the fact, I'm more convinced that he would have shown better in the rust belt, but I don't know what would have happened with dropoff in other areas. I had a disturbing number of union members that would say they really liked how he stumped for common people but then they'd immediately associate him with some crap that FN and other sources had injected into their heads about the evils of Socialism. I actually had people that wouldn't know Venezuela from a hole in the wall bringing up that as a talking point about how they wouldn't quite pull the lever for him. eh, I thought either Hillary or Bernie would have won; I just didn't (and still don't, retrospectively) think Sanders' 2016 electoral victory would have had significant policy victories over Hillary. Like one man's good intentions isn't enough to change the system. Sanders' showing really reenergized the left to build the movement necessary to actually enable a 2020 Sanders to possibly get anything done, though, so kudos.
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:37 |
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:eh, I thought either Hillary or Bernie would have won; I just didn't (and still don't, retrospectively) think Sanders' 2016 electoral victory would have had significant policy victories over Hillary. Like one man's good intentions isn't enough to change the system. i don't think anyone think he would've got anything done all on his own. but you see how much his failed presidential campaign revitalized the left. imagine if he was using the bully pulpit (something obama could never bring himself to do for some reason). he would've made some huge waves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Maybe, but it's also possible that his inability to follow through thanks to Republican (and probably some Democratic) opposition might have just led to a lot of disillusionment and further damaged the left's brand in the US. I'd still take that kind of failure over a Trump win, but at least now the left gets several years to make its case to a receptive audience without all the problems that come with actually needing to govern. I think there's a reasonable argument that Sanders losing in 2016 might be better for the US left over the long term.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MaxineWaters/status/872541108114513920 https://twitter.com/nytopinion/status/872904697891475456
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i don't think anyone think he would've got anything done all on his own. but you see how much his failed presidential campaign revitalized the left. imagine if he was using the bully pulpit (something obama could never bring himself to do for some reason). he would've made some huge waves. I think it's more likely that his successful election would have been a release valve much like Obama's election did e: DSA's membership spike didn't happen during the primary or even after he lost the primary but until after the general election
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:There are many many leftists who will go on and on about how idpol is bad and terrible and will say that white working class people are totally not racist and if we only stopped focusing on 'thing' we could get universal health care. Idpol is saying "white working class" when Bernie and others actually said "the working class."
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:I think it's more likely that his successful election would have been a release valve much like Obama's election did Can confirm I wouldn't be working with local leftist groups if he had won because I would have been complacent as gently caress but now I have accepted the reality tht politics cannot save us and it is on us to protect and empower our communities
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
twodot posted:If you're have a strategy discussion on how to avoid having Clinton-like candidates win the Democratic primary, then obviously you don't include people who think Clinton-like candidates winning the primary is a good thing. How could they possibly constructively contribute to that conversation? You listen to them with polling and such to make sure you don't just lose like an idiot, but why would you invite them to the discussion? Hillary did us the service of demonstrating where the bottom of the barrel is for left-of-center voters in America. Rent-A-Cop fucked around with this message at 00:57 on Jun 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:The opinion of anyone who voted for Clinton is irrelevant. They've proven that they'll come out and vote for anything the Democratic Party throws them. They have no principles beyond party loyalty and lesser-evilism. If Hillary Clinton's campaign couldn't keep them home on election day then nothing can. These people would vote for a cheese sandwich if it had a (D) next to it. So who cares what they think? They're voting Democrat no matter what happens. there's a primary in 2020, hth
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Hillary did us the service of demonstrating where the bottom of the barrel is for left-of-center voters in America. You can go lower; Rahm Emmanuel yet lives.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
Well it looks like Corbyn is on target to be PM right now. At least the UK might be getting its Bernie Sanders.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 02:14
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:You can go lower; Rahm Emmanuel yet lives. Don't worry. California is on target. On target for JEB!
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
Kokoro Wish posted:Well it looks like Corbyn is on target to be PM right now. At least the UK might be getting its Bernie Sanders. Not really. Labour is significantly overperforming expectations but the likely scenario is still a Tory government, although likely a coalition one. That said, I think it is pretty telling that, after going all in on Macron, most mainstream democrats are simply pretending the UK election isn't happening.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 03:52
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:Not really. Labour is significantly overperforming expectations but the likely scenario is still a Tory government, although likely a coalition one. The same data based analysis that told them Hillary would win told them the Tories would crush in this election, so it makes sense that they wouldn't talk about it. Their data is and remains bad. They have learned nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
Democrats don't have data on the UK. It's the whole "surged on the polls by taking the party left" part. There are thousands of "going left gets you slaughtered, see the UK" hot takes being deleted right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
No, you see, leftist policies aren't very popular which is why Labour disintegrated and the smart centrist Lib-Dems surged ahead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 05:58
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Like one man's good intentions isn't enough to change the system. I think this generally is where he started to lose me. And more specifically, especially this: Sanders campaigns on sunsetting nuclear power plants quote:“Sen. Sanders knows there are lots of reasons why nuclear power is a bad idea. Whether it’s the exceptional destructiveness of uranium mining, the fact that there’s no good way to store nuclear waste or the lingering risk of a tragedy like Fukushima or Chernobyl in the US, the truth is: nuclear power is a cure worse than the disease. Safer, cleaner energy sources like wind and solar will help us meet America’s energy needs while protecting the health of our people and combatting the threat of climate change.” Wanting to stop climate change isn't the same as being serious about logistical realities of replacing carbon energy. The atoms scaremongering all felt like a desperate pander for Jill Stein voters. And at the end his pie in the sky plan would be watered down from the right while he's handicapping nuclear power from the left. No thanks. Sadly, as it stands, after the Paris withdrawl backlash climate change feels like it has more chance of becoming a campaign issue than it would sitting on the back burner in a Sander's administration.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 05:58
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:Democrats don't have data on the UK. It's the whole "surged on the polls by taking the party left" part. There are thousands of "going left gets you slaughtered, see the UK" hot takes being deleted right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:I think this generally is where he started to lose me. And more specifically, especially this: Anti-Nuke is a core plank for the sort of white environmentalist that thrives in places like Vermont so it's no surprise he has that view. It's unfortunate but it's something I'm willing to compromise on. Fix global warming. Note: pollution in China does not count against your score at the end of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 06:08
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:I think this generally is where he started to lose me. And more specifically, especially this: Bernie (HWHW) is good about many things and bad about some things.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 06:09
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Think how much better Labour could have done if only they'd elected a better leader, and not swung hard and to the left! How do you defend Labour under Corbyn not winning though? I don't have a crystal ball, so I don't know one way or another, but are you predicting he's sure to win next time?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:03
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:How do you defend Labour under Corbyn not winning though? I don't have a crystal ball, so I don't know one way or another, but are you predicting he's sure to win next time? Because they kneecapped the Tories and made them take ownership of Brexit while simultaneously not being able to destroy the country through their insane unreasonableness
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:05
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:How do you defend Labour under Corbyn not winning though? I don't have a crystal ball, so I don't know one way or another, but are you predicting he's sure to win next time? Because despite being knifed in the back repeatedly by his own party and being expected to lose pretty monstrously, Corbyn and Labour pulled off a pretty stunning upset that has kicked the legs out from under the Tories. The Tories can't form a government without a coalition, most likely with the Irish DUP, which leaves them in a very weak position - especially when it comes to Brexit. Presumably in future elections the party will unite behind Corbyn after this upset. And arguably second place may be preferable here, since Labour can avoid having the stink of Brexit on them. E: Imagine if the 2018 midterms didn't quite flip Congress, but did put it within a few votes in the House and Senate. The Democrats would be hailed as come back kids with a real chance to take back the government in 2020. Nix Panicus fucked around with this message at 07:13 on Jun 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:11
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:How do you defend Labour under Corbyn not winning though? I don't have a crystal ball, so I don't know one way or another, but are you predicting he's sure to win next time? Corbyn was sabotaged by Blairite centrists who all along thought he was too left wing to be electable (Blair himself refused to endorse him). At the start of the campaign he was up against what was at that point the most popular prime minister since the 70s. And then, in five weeks, things went from Tories gaining a historical majority to having to form a coalition government that is not expected to last long.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:33
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:How do you defend Labour under Corbyn not winning though? I don't have a crystal ball, so I don't know one way or another, but are you predicting he's sure to win next time? Because Labour gained about 10pp from the last election and closed a 20% polling lead in six loving weeks?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:36
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:Because despite being knifed in the back repeatedly by his own party and being expected to lose pretty monstrously, Corbyn and Labour pulled off a pretty stunning upset that has kicked the legs out from under the Tories. The Tories can't form a government without a coalition, most likely with the Irish DUP, which leaves them in a very weak position - especially when it comes to Brexit. Presumably in future elections the party will unite behind Corbyn after this upset. That's all punditry of the expectations game though, and I don't see how it predicts what an election in five years will look like. I'm interested in what kind of votes can any particular iteration of Labour expect to pull in. There's not a lot of evidence to show the U.K. is all that left a place to begin with. Yes you can always expect voters to eventually get sick of their ruling party and throw the bums out but there's some actual policy gains that flow from being in the driver's seat 55% of the time vs 30% too, and that's probably even more true in the US given our appointments system and structural gridlock. So how much of the gains are Corbyn and how much is Torres shooting themselves in the foot is a valid question. Same basic issue in the US is how sustainable is the Bernie moment. Yeah there are a lot of infrequent voters who probably would have turned out for him in the rust belt, but will they stick around if he wins? Will they really build a coalition around other candidates on a Sanders platform? Or will they just gently caress off when Democratic Socialism becomes part of the system. That's not clear to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:45
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:That's all punditry of the expectations game though, and I don't see how it predicts what an election in five years will look like. I'm interested in what kind of votes can any particular iteration of Labour expect to pull in. There's not a lot of evidence to show the U.K. is all that left a place to begin with. Yes you can always expect voters to eventually get sick of their ruling party and throw the bums out but there's some actual policy gains that flow from being in the driver's seat 55% of the time vs 30% too, and that's probably even more true in the US given our appointments system and structural gridlock. So how much of the gains are Corbyn and how much is Torres shooting themselves in the foot is a valid question. Corbyn managed to get young voters to actually turn out to the tune of 72% and won them by an absurd number (something over 40% IIRC). The future of the U.K. is pretty loving red, mate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:51
|
|
|
lol if you think Conservatives/DUP is lasting five years. Or one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:53
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Corbyn managed to get young voters to actually turn out to the tune of 72% and won them by an absurd number (something over 40% IIRC). The future of the U.K. is pretty loving red, mate. There's no way the Democrats don't look at this and go "oh, poo poo, people actually turn up for universal programs." If they don't they're absolutely damned to all hell.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:57
|
|
|
Taintrunner posted:There's no way the Democrats don't look at this and go "oh, poo poo, people actually turn up for universal programs." If they don't they're absolutely damned to all hell. "The democrats are a waste" They will either ignore the results, blame it on sexism, or use the 'well Labour didnt win!' line.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:59
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Because Labour gained about 10pp from the last election and closed a 20% polling lead in six loving weeks? I'm not a big believer in momentum and beating expectations or whatever. I'm asking about fundamentals. Polling swings just mean lovely news cycles for the other side and the old polls didn't capture what was already going on. The real strength of weakness is in the final vote tally, not whether it met some benchmark. What I want to know is can someone not only get the votes in that final tally but keep it together for 10+ years, which I don't think labour has really done. (And US Dems haven't done in forever to be fair). And yeah they did beat their 2015 vote share but so did May so the jump is to quite as impressive when we consider some of it is just drop off from smaller parties...
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:59
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Same basic issue in the US is how sustainable is the Bernie moment. Yeah there are a lot of infrequent voters who probably would have turned out for him in the rust belt, but will they stick around if he wins? Will they really build a coalition around other candidates on a Sanders platform? Or will they just gently caress off when Democratic Socialism becomes part of the system. That's not clear to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 07:59
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:I'm not a big believer in momentum and beating expectations or whatever. I'm asking about fundamentals. I mean loving hell "gee guys I don't know I mean obviously we can win by putting forward a credible leftist platform, but can we, having achieved a majority, continue to hold that majority when we revert to centrist bullshit after our victory 
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 08:03
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Corbyn managed to get young voters to actually turn out to the tune of 72% and won them by an absurd number (something over 40% IIRC). The future of the U.K. is pretty loving red, mate. Obama had some pretty good numbers too. It got him a second term but not too much to show from Congress.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 08:05
|
|
|
Like, you have a crusty old literal socialist who got on the leadership ballot mostly by accident, who's been backstabbed by his own party since before he was elected leader and monstered in the press for two years straight pulling off the biggest electoral upset since 1945. How the gently caress do you look at this and still manage to go "hm, maybe moving to the left is bad"?yronic heroism posted:I'm not a big believer in momentum and beating expectations or whatever. I'm asking about fundamentals. Polling swings just mean lovely news cycles for the other side and the old polls didn't capture what was already going on. The real strength of weakness is in the final vote tally, not whether it met some benchmark. What I want to know is can someone not only get the votes in that final tally but keep it together for 10+ years, which I don't think labour has really done. (And US Dems haven't done in forever to be fair). Cerebral Bore posted:Corbyn managed to get young voters to actually turn out to the tune of 72% and won them by an absurd number (something over 40% IIRC). The future of the U.K. is pretty loving red, mate. If we go by conventional wisdom Labour has literally pulled off the impossible. They've got everything going for them right now. EDIT: yronic heroism posted:Obama had some pretty good numbers too. It got him a second term but not too much to show from Congress. Yeah, Obama pissed that away by running to the centre after he was elected. I don't think that crusty old literal socialist Jeremy Corbyn will do that, much like crusty old literal socialist Bernard Sanders wouldn't have. Cerebral Bore fucked around with this message at 08:10 on Jun 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 08:06
|
|
|
*Releases a manifesto people actually like, immediately shoots up 15 points in the polls* Gee I dunno guys I was hoping for more, maybe we should go back to a platform that everyone hates?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 08:14
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Obama had some pretty good numbers too. It got him a second term but not too much to show from Congress. I like how you're so used to the Democrats that you can't even conceptualize sincerity anymore Kilroy posted:I mean loving hell "gee guys I don't know I mean obviously we can win by putting forward a credible leftist platform, but can we, having achieved a majority, continue to hold that majority when we revert to centrist bullshit after our victory Basically this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 08:14
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Obama had some pretty good numbers too. It got him a second term but not too much to show from Congress.  You're so loving worried about whether a leftist platform can really, truly be successful while totally ignoring Labour getting their asses kicked in 2015 and Democrats getting mauled up and down the ballot for the last ten years. But yeah, Labour's performance here isn't quite convincing enough because they didn't win a majority. Never mind that the members of the party who think exactly like you have been more concerned with getting Corbyn out of power than beating the Tories - I mean Blair didn't even endorse him for gently caress's sake - and "serious people" were predicting the collapse of the party just six weeks ago. And now, having embraced a leftist platform, they are revitalized and have outperformed basically every expectation of the Serious People.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 08:15
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Okay, how about this for fundamentals: when the Labour manifesto leaked is when they start to really turn around in the polls. When you say "obviously we can win" first ya need to actually, y'know, win. I'm open to being convinced by some wins on the board, but seems to me that until there's an actual labour majority this is spin and we have no idea how poo poo will play out. Corbyn or someone similar will get another shot, but what happens then? Can he hold on as long as Blair? He'll actually need time to get poo poo accomplished and entrenched. It's a fair question. I don't know the answer, and I don't think we can know from a six week stretch of campaigning and whatever-the-hell swingy UK polling numbers we happen to see. yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 08:25 on Jun 9, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 08:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:37 |
|
|
Kilroy posted:Stop concern trolling you loving idiot. You're transparent as a glass jar filled with the principles of centrism. Chill bro. The very serious people haven't convinced me either. They have to own their loving losses. Both sides of this pissing match need to own their results. How is Blair not endorsing a better excuse than your hated Hilldawg fans whining about Bernie bros? Trump had plenty of Republicans not endorse him but still managed to get the votes he needed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2017 08:23
|
|