|
punk rebel ecks posted:Could you please elaborate? because fox would have jumped all over it, particularly after kavanaugh started running into trouble
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 19:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 16:52 |
|
|
Jaxyon posted:edit: I don't think the "pocahontas" poo poo sticks with anyone who wasn't already predisposed to dislike her. Raskolnikov38 posted:unless warren runs to the left she's going to be fighting for bernie's base as a more acceptable choice to centrists which isn't going to work with bernie running Ideology isn't a one-dimensional line, and people vote on things other than straight ideology. If they run on very similar platforms, except that Warren looks like someone who has actually thought about and cares about the mechanics of implementation and is fluent in policy details, that matters to a lot of people. It matters to me!
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 19:50
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Gillibrand’s main problem is all the crazy people who think she personally murdered Al Franken, who did nothing wrong. Some of those people cross over with "well a blond middle aged woman who was NY senator look at how well that work last time  " group as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
Warren's too much of a warhawk for me to ever get enthusiastic about her, but I wouldn't have to hold my nose for her to the extent I did for Hillary so  If you don't give a poo poo about our foreign bullshit I can see how she may seem like a fully viable alternative, but wonkishness doesn't cover up for that moral failing with me or others.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:someone who has actually thought about and cares about the mechanics of implementation and is fluent in policy details, that matters to a lot of people. Oh man are you gonna be pissed when you find out who the President of the United States is
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 20:06
|
|
|
Iron Twinkie posted:Hopelessly and wholly corrupt while using the full weight of their organization to favor a candidate but not technically rigging since they didn't literally stuff ballot boxes is not a distinction most people make Actually, I think it does fit the "technical" definition of rigging, and it's actually the people arguing it's not rigging who are using the more colloquial definition. In this case, I'm pretty sure that anything about the organization of a particular election that is intended to encourage a particular result constitutes rigging (and this definitely applies to the events with the DNC giving Hillary an abnormal level of control over its affairs). I personally prefer not to use the term "rigging" even if it's technically correct, just because it leads to these sorts of arguments. It's better, in my opinion, to just refer to the Clinton/DNC arrangement as being unethical and representing a conflict of interest. Badger of Basra posted:Yeah my main concern with Bernie is not his age or whatever but that our extremely terrible national media would love nothing more than to make any election he runs in SOCIALISM VS. CAPITALISM - COLD WAR PART 2 and I'm not convinced even the best candidate could overcome that. If you're convinced that even a candidate as milquetoast as Bernie is fundamentally incapable of getting elected, you may as well just give up on politics, because you're basically admitting that a good outcome is impossible. *something with no real data supporting it, but apparently it's okay to rely on gut feelings when they happen to support your preferred outcomes VitalSigns posted:No it isn't my premise, my premise is that voter preference is complicated and there are a lot of factors involved here of which age is a large and important indicator (weirdly, these factors keep getting cut out of quotes by people replying to me though, must be keyboard glitches), so when you look closer it's a lot more complicated than "gee I dunno if you look at 30-month-old polls Bernie seems bad on race, not saying he's racist, but I mean what else is there". It's all been discussed to death on these forums, and if you want we can talk again about the massive gap in name recognition at the beginning, a shoe-string campaign operation that was a protest run until it unexpectedly started growing in popularity, a well-established Democratic Party machine in southern primaries which gives huge turnout advantages to insiders vs outsiders, an initial justified wariness in Southern black voters about someone they've never heard of from a white-rear end state appealing to poor whites, the massive differential in funding which made it easier for a well-funded operation to campaign in multiple states ahead of Super Tuesday, yes Bernie's out-of-touch old man comments on race and his pivot to correct them by bringing BLM into his campaign, the trend toward Bernie among all demographics as people became more familiar with him, a trend which didn't end with the campaign but has now made him the most popular politician in the country for two years straight with a stratospheric approval rating among African Americans, etc. The race argument is important because they want something they can use to at least cast doubt on the idea of Sanders running while still giving the impression of doing so for a good reason. This thread is actually kind of interesting in the sense that foreshadows some of the arguments we're likely to see a bunch in 2020. My personal feeling is that they might have a harder time with the race one (since I don't think any of the other potential candidates have the sort of support Clinton had), but they'll definitely try for the age one. Another argument I think is likely is "there isn't really any difference between Sanders and Warren (or whoever)." A big reason Warren concerns me is that I feel like this argument wouldn't work with most other candidates, but enough people just vaguely perceive both Warren and Sanders as "very liberal" that it might work with her. Pinterest Mom posted:Ideology isn't a one-dimensional line, and people vote on things other than straight ideology. If they run on very similar platforms, except that Warren looks like someone who has actually thought about and cares about the mechanics of implementation and is fluent in policy details, that matters to a lot of people. It matters to me! Ideology is unequivocally more important than policy details, especially in a figure like the president (who isn't writing the legislation directly). At the end of the day, "can this be done" isn't a serious question for all the things the left desires. There is no question that we can afford and do these things, so the question of "how to precisely implement it" is basically a secondary one that can and will be addressed (or rather has already been addressed in most cases) but is not a factor in deciding whether or not to support them. For a leadership figure, the most important thing is simply establishing the actual goals you want to achieve (for example giving everyone free-at-use healthcare, or a living wage). I'm aware that the opinion you're expressing here feels like "something a smart person should think," but it falls apart under scrutiny. It's similar to "the government should be fiscally responsible and budget like a household" in the sense of being "an opinion that feels like one a smart, reasonable person should express," but is actually only used to try and shut-down attempts to significantly change the status quo (because, for some strange reason this same level of scrutiny is not applied to most elements of the status quo). vvvv That's my fault and doesn't really belong in this thread (so I removed it), though I do want to clarify that it's not some weird jab at lawyers. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Oct 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I guess that's another data point Data point for what?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:Primary was rigged, just not against Bernie specifically - Biden was who Hillary was trying to effectively shut out. It just worked out that all that setup against Biden was still useful. Did you just accuse Hillary Clinton of giving Beau Biden brain cancer? Biden was out cause his son died, it didn't have anything to do with Hillary. Raskolnikov38 posted:yeah i'm sure such a clear bias against one of the two candidates in a primary by the national party had absolutely no impact on the course of the election, particularly vis-a-vis a high level smear campaign by "senior party officials who asked not to go on record" It's been well over two years and you still can only point to them suggesting to try it months after the race was effectively over. None of those things being described happened, they were all shot down. All you have is that the DNC were tossing around ideas on how to get Sanders to drop out long after he should have, none of which were ever used. What is the actual, real life non-hypotheyical thing they did that in any way shifted votes away from Bernie? Raskolnikov38 posted:you can argue about impact and results all you want but it has been clearly demonstrated that the DNC was not acting in good faith and absolutely nothing has been done to correct or address this So unless they give wholly preferential treatment to your favored candidate, any form of dislike by anyone in the organisation that your candidate demeans and insults nonstop is unfair rigging. You feel that is a rational position? All examples you are giving come from the period where Bernie was absolutely not acting in good faith, continuing to stay in the race long after it was effectively settled, but doing so anyway despite it sowing animosity and resentment. Why engage in good faith with someone who refuses to? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Did you just accuse Hillary Clinton of giving Beau Biden brain cancer? No he did not accuse Hillary Clinton of giving Beau Biden brain cancer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
Fulcrum are you just trying to be a willfully ignorant shithead now or do you actually believe the words you type? E: poo poo, didn't realize what thread it was. I'll eat my sixer.  (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
good to see such spirited defense of noted Definitely Running candidate Hillary Clinton, here, in the 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary Thread
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:unless warren runs to the left she's going to be fighting for bernie's base as a more acceptable choice to centrists which isn't going to work with bernie running I bet she's enough of a narcissistic bitch to run as a spoiler candidate for the establishment. She declined to endorse Bernie back in the 2016 primaries because she wanted to be in neoliberal Hillary's Cabinet. She's been proven to cave under pressure, and has no concrete principles. Stop calling Warren a progressive/leftist/DSA, etc. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
Slutitution posted:I bet she's enough of a narcissistic bitch to run as a spoiler candidate for the establishment. She declined to endorse Bernie back in the 2016 primaries because she wanted to be in neoliberal Hillary's Cabinet. She's been proven to cave under pressure, and has no concrete principles. Stop calling Warren a progressive/leftist/DSA, etc. what the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
it's like ya'll are just asking for weeks off
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:18
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:what the gently caress viral spiral is a bit of an odd duck, tbqh
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:23
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:what the gently caress Explain how Warren competing with Bernie in the 2020 primaries helps the left in any way at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:good to see such spirited defense of noted Definitely Running candidate Hillary Clinton, here, in the 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary Thread Are you honestly telling me you believe that, in the likely event Sanders does not gain the nomination, all of his supporters will fully accept the result, and none of them will claim the process was rigged?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
Slutitution posted:Explain how Warren competing with Bernie in the 2020 primaries helps the left in any way at all. it doesnt? it'd split the left vote. why am i misogynist for pointing this out
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:what the gently caress Remember what I was saying about misogyny being an issue with basically any woman who runs, more or less?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
I'm not the biggest fan of Warren but that is way out of line. Her not endorsing Bernie has to do with what was considered the inevitability of a Clinton presidency along with the fact that they kept a friends and enemies lists. On excel spreadsheets in rankings 1 to 7. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/01/hillary-clinton-hit-list-102067 I think its far more likely that Warren didn't want to end up on the incarnate avatar of the establisment's hit list than she had some super secret grudge against Sanders.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
It's apparently really misogynist to point out that Warren wants to personally go after the guy who nicknamed her "Pocahontas" in a general election would be bad for the left in the 2020 primaries. Like seriously?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
Warren's going to get all emotional and catty (especially around that time of the month) and it's going to ruin everything. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:34
|
|
|
Slutitution posted:It's apparently really misogynist to point out that Warren wants to personally go after the guy who nicknamed her "Pocahontas" in a general election would be bad for the left in the 2020 primaries. Like seriously? If you phrase it as her being, Slutitution posted:enough of a narcissistic bitch then yeah? Since apparently this needs to be said explicitly before you'll get it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:34
|
|
|
Slutitution posted:It's apparently really misogynist to point out that Warren wants to personally go after the guy who nicknamed her "Pocahontas" in a general election would be bad for the left in the 2020 primaries. Like seriously? This criticism is even more confusing than the first one you posted
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
Aunt Flo is going to keep liberals from coming together.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:39
|
|
|
Here's a better question: Why is Warren a supposedly better candidate than Bernie?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
I dont know why any of you expected anything but horrifying misogyny out of someone with a username.e that includes the word slut.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:50
|
|
|
it took 5 pages but we found an actual bernie bro bernie is still cool tho, and as someone who does electoral work for DSA and left/progressive candidates i really wish people wouldn’t go full nuclear when people don’t worship the man
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Ideology is unequivocally more important than policy details, especially in a figure like the president (who isn't writing the legislation directly). At the end of the day, "can this be done" isn't a serious question for all the things the left desires. There is no question that we can afford and do these things, so the question of "how to precisely implement it" is basically a secondary one that can and will be addressed (or rather has already been addressed in most cases) but is not a factor in deciding whether or not to support them. For a leadership figure, the most important thing is simply establishing the actual goals you want to achieve (for example giving everyone free-at-use healthcare, or a living wage). Specifically re: Bernie and your second paragraph, I'm not concerned that there don't exist people in the world that can turn his priorities into legislative language, but I don't think the jump from "those people exist" to "don't worry about it" is warranted. Bernie's got access to great policy advice and experts right now, but he still put out the BEZOS bill a few weeks ago that would have been really counterproductive. The messaging and symbolism of that were great, but the actual nuts-and-bolts policy were awful, and I'm not super satisfied with "the filter from goals and ideas to policy isn't in place now, but it will be once he's in the White House". Gillibrand has made it clear she won't be outflanked from the left (by, say, being the first senator to say "abolish ICE" out loud, or by providing the legislative language for the transition to medicare for all in Bernie's bill), Warren has a lot of economist populist cred and has experience setting up the CFPB, Merkley I know next to nothing about but he endorsed Bernie last time so , so Bernie's not the only game in town for the left. All those candidates also have downsides, and Bernie's definitely got all of them beat on the affect/"I know and trust where his heart is" question, which counts for a lot, but this is a discussion I don't think you just get to dismiss.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
I really dont think Biden or Bernie have the personality to win popular opinion among the dem base in swing states. Warren sold out to hillary and did a 180 on her opinion of hillary. You cant the that back. Warren will never have the base support. Shes a fuckung weakling whod took $$ over future presidential possibility. Warren is a great ally to have in a woman led cabinet but she wont be president. Maybe sec of state. WAR CRIME GIGOLO fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Oct 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 22:57
|
|
|
So here is my dumb question: Why does Sherrod Brown never seem to come up? Progressive senator from Ohio which is kinda an important state Is he just keeping everything on the down low until he gets reelected? Or does his voice disqualify him from a serious run? Maybe a good VP for Harris/Booker if they win the nomination?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:So here is my dumb question: Why does Sherrod Brown never seem to come up? Progressive senator from Ohio which is kinda an important state Bain capital Edit, my bad, i am thinking of Deval Patrick. Sherrod Brown seems Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 23:23 on Oct 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
Sherrod Brown seems like grade A high value VP material except there's probably no way his seat stays D if he leaves. I wouldn't want him as the primary nominee tho.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:I really dont think Biden or Bernie have the personality to win popular opinion among the dem base in swing states. Warren is the only candidate aside from Sanders so far to put forward actual reforms that could solve actual problems and I think that might end up making more of a difference than people realize. That said her biggest issue isn't her credibility but a charisma gap. Emotional appeal and perceived sincerity are going to be huge next year and I'm just not sure if she's going to be able to bring enough of that to the table.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2018 02:23
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Warren is the only candidate aside from Sanders so far to put forward actual reforms that could solve actual problems and I think that might end up making more of a difference than people realize. That said her biggest issue isn't her credibility but a charisma gap. Emotional appeal and perceived sincerity are going to be huge next year and I'm just not sure if she's going to be able to bring enough of that to the table. She's very charismatic when talking about issues that appeal to her, like banking and economic policy. Problem is, she's going to get asked about foreign policy, and her answers will be boring and boilerplate and not at all to her base's liking. I'd make her Treasury Secretary in a hypothetical Democratic administration, I think. I'm selfish, though...I don't ever want her to stop representing Massachusetts
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2018 02:28
|
|
|
When I said I'd be giving people a week for making GBS threads up this thread I meant it. Post better, jerks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2018 04:09
|
|
|
Tony Gunk posted:She's very charismatic when talking about issues that appeal to her, like banking and economic policy. Problem is, she's going to get asked about foreign policy, and her answers will be boring and boilerplate and not at all to her base's liking. Warrens not warhawk by any means. I meab hilldawg was openly saying she would persue intervention in syria hillarys FP Position was very defensible. Warren would be boring. Best way to sum it up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2018 04:18
|
|
|
I thought it might be nice to have a post listing big recently-proposed legislation by Senate primary contenders. This is not comprehensive (it's mainly things I've seen in the news) and also is limited to bills that the Senator is the sole/primary author of - Bernie gets credit for M4A, not all the cosponsors, etc. Feel free to look up whoever else you like and post whatever. All these bills are pretty short, so read them if the title sounds interesting! Bernie -Medicare for All: Full text; cosponsors: Baldwin, Blumenthal, Booker, Gillibrand, Harris, Heinrich, Hirono, Leahy, Markey, Merkley, Schatz, Shaheen, Udall, Warren, Whitehouse -A bill to break up large financial entities (doesn't seem to have a catchy title): Full text; cosponsors: none -Stop BEZOS Act: Full text; cosponsors: none -Workplace Democracy Act: Full text; cosponsors: Gillibrand, Warren, Brown, Baldwin, Whitehouse, Harris, Merkley, Markey, Booker, Wyden, Leahy, Van Hollen, Smith, Murphy, Stabenow, Blumenthal -Raise the Wage Act: Full text; cosponsors: 31 senators, I'm not typing them all out -United States Employee Ownership Bank Act: Full text; cosponsors: Gillibrand, Leahy, Hassan, Shaheen -WORK Act: Full text; cosponsors: Gillibrand, Leahy, Brown, Hassan, Warren, Shaheen -College For All Act: Full text; cosponsors: Harris, Warren, Blumenthal, Murphy, Gillibrand, Leahy, Murphy -All other sponsored legislation here. Gillibrand -Congressional Accountability and Harassment Reform Act: Full text; cosponsors: Merkley, Murray, Harris, Warren, Cruz [lol], Baldwin, Cortez Masto -Main Street Employee Ownership Act: Full text; cosponsors: Young, Risch, Shaheen, Booker, Collins, Cardin -Postal Banking Act: Full text; cosponsors: none -Congressional Harassment Reform Act: Full text; cosponsors: 32 senators -All other sponsored legislation here. Harris -Maternal CARE Act: Full text; cosponsors: Gillibrand, Cardin, Wyden, Blumenthal, Nelson, Jones, Merkley, Duckworth, Carper, Brown, Baldwin, Hirono, Stabenow, Van Hollen, Kaine, Casey -Rent Relief Act: Full text; cosponsors: Feinstein, Blumenthal, Hassan, Gillibrand, Merkley -All other sponsored legislation here. Booker -Food and Agribusiness Merger Moratorium and Antitrust Review Act: Full text; cosponsors: none -Stop Overdraft Profiteering Act: Full text; cosponsors: Brown -Housing, Opportunity, Mobility, and Equity Act: Full text; cosponsors: none -Federal Jobs Guarantee Development Act: Full text; cosponsors: Gillibrand, Merkley, Harris, Warren -Worker Dividend Act: Full text; cosponsors: Casey -End Employer Collusion Act: Full text; cosponsors: Warren -All other sponsored legislation here. Warren -American Housing and Economy Mobility Act: Full text; cosponsors: none -Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act: Full text; cosponsors: none -Accountable Capitalism Act: Full text; cosponsors: none -Ending Too Big To Jail Act: Full text; cosponsors: none -All other sponsored legislation here. Brown -Protecting Workers' Freedom to Organize Act: Full text; cosponsors: Gillibrand, Durbin, Merkley, Murray, Sanders, Baldwin, Booker -Corporate Responsibility Fee Act: Full text; cosponsors: Durbin -All other sponsored legislation here. Klobuchar -Register America to Vote Act: Full text; cosponsors: Feinstein, Gillibrand, Markey, Hassan -Consolidation Prevention and Competition Promotion Act: Full text; cosponsors: Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Markey -Merger Enforcement Improvement Act: Full text; cosponsors: Leahy, Blumenthal, Booker, Durbin, Hirono, Markey, Gillibrand, Baldwin, King -All other sponsored legislation here. Merkley -American Savings Act: Full text; cosponsors: none -Choose Medicare Act: Full text; cosponsors: Murphy, Harris, Booker, Baldwin, Gillibrand, Schatz, Shaheen, Heinrich, Blumenthal, Udall, Durbin, Duckworh, Feinstein, Smith -All other sponsored legislation here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2018 05:18
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:I thought it might be nice to have a post listing big recently-proposed legislation by Senate primary contenders. This is not comprehensive (it's mainly things I've seen in the news) and also is limited to bills that the Senator is the sole/primary author of - Bernie gets credit for M4A, not all the cosponsors, etc. Feel free to look up whoever else you like and post whatever. All these bills are pretty short, so read them if the title sounds interesting!  This is awesome. Thank you!
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2018 05:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 16:52 |
|
|
WRT the "Sanders only passed 3 bills and two of them were naming post offices" thing, it reminds me of back in 2010 when Carly Fiorina tried out an attack on Barbara Boxer that was basically the same thing. I feel like if you futz around with the definitions and parameters enough, you can prove any and every congressman has only passed a bunch of meaningless crap.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2018 05:24
|
|
