|
Who do you wish to win the Democratic primaries? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Joe Biden, the Inappropriate Toucher |
|
18 | 1.46% |
| Bernie Sanders, the Hand Flailer |
|
665 | 54.11% |
| Elizabeth Warren, the Plan Maker |
|
319 | 25.96% |
| Kamala Harris, the Cop Lord |
|
26 | 2.12% |
| Cory Booker, the Super Hero Wannabe |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Julian Castro, the Twin |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Kirsten Gillibrand, the Franken Killer |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Pete Buttigieg, the Troop Sociopath |
|
17 | 1.38% |
| Robert Francis O'Rourke, the Fake Latino |
|
3 | 0.24% |
| Jay Inslee, the Climate Alarmist |
|
8 | 0.65% |
| Marianne Williamson, the Crystal Queen |
|
86 | 7.00% |
| Tulsi Gabbard, the Muslim Hater |
|
23 | 1.87% |
| Andrew Yang, the $1000 Fool |
|
32 | 2.60% |
| Eric Swalwell, the Insurance Wife Guy |
|
2 | 0.16% |
| Amy Klobuchar, the Comb Enthusiast |
|
1 | 0.08% |
| Bill de Blasio, the NYPD Most Hated |
|
4 | 0.33% |
| Tim Ryan, the Dope Face |
|
3 | 0.24% |
| John Hickenlooper, the Also Ran |
|
7 | 0.57% |
| Total: | 1229 votes | ||
|
the_steve posted:Yeah, if Bernie can get the youth votes to turn out, that will affect the down ballot as well. You think Bernie... will get McConnell primaried... by someone who will approve his justices? The Ninth Layer posted:So who's going to energize turnout for 2022 better? Joe Biden who will shrug his shoulders at McConnell blocking his nominations? Or Bernie Sanders raising hell about it daily? Oh, I mean, of course Bernie will be a thousand million times better at rallying the base than Biden, President Biden is a disaster on all fronts but especially electorally and very likely gets us President Richard Spencer in 2024. But "better than Biden" is an insanely low bar and not the topic (which is getting around McConnell's obstruction). Z. Autobahn fucked around with this message at 20:59 on Jul 7, 2019 |
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 20:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 14:34 |
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:You think Bernie... will get McConnell primaried... by someone who will approve his justices? Can't be senate majority leader if you ain't got senate majority Z
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 20:57
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Okay, so instead of shrugging and giving up, he... does what, exactly?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Oh, I mean, of course Bernie will be a thousand million times better at rallying the base than Biden, President Biden is a disaster on all fronts but especially electorally and very likely gets us President Richard Spencer in 2024. But "better than Biden" is an insanely low bar and not the topic (which is getting around McConnell's obstruction). Rallying the base to where we can get a Senate majority is one way around McConnell's obstruction. Were you not being sarcastic when you described this difference as "seismic?" Because to me it seems like a pretty substantial one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:03
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:Rallying the base to where we can get a Senate majority is one way around McConnell's obstruction. I think there's a pretty wide chasm between "rallies the base better than Biden" and "rallies it to the point of taking the Senate in 2022 by enough of a margin that Manchin doesn't matter". I'm probably better than Joe Biden at basketball but that doesn't mean I can play in the NBA. Z. Autobahn fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Jul 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:05
|
|
|
You know Z. Autobahn for someone who insists whenever it comes up that he's a Bernie supporter, you sure got a laundry list of reasons why voting for him is no different than voting for anyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:08
|
|
|
Is the 2020 senate map looking so bad that it's a wash?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Like Sanders is probably the only candidate who understands that America is hosed up enough that our problems will only be fixed through a combination of electoral politics and direct action (or just direct action, if he's not elected President), has helped build infrastructure to encourage exactly that, and will continue to do so in office. This is a major source of his appeal to the left. Yet whenever this fact comes up, Z. Autobahn is right there all "oh so he's no different than the rest of the field then, isn't he 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:13
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:You know Z. Autobahn for someone who insists whenever it comes up that he's a Bernie supporter, you sure got a laundry list of reasons why voting for him is no different than voting for anyone else. I've literally explained on this page why voting for Bernie is wildly better than voting for Biden. MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Like Sanders is probably the only candidate who understands that America is hosed up enough that our problems will only be fixed through a combination of electoral politics and direct action (or just direct action, if he's not elected President), has helped build infrastructure to encourage exactly that, and will continue to do so in office. This is a major source of his appeal to the left. Again, there's a difference between better than the rest of the field (which is overwhelmingly dog poo poo) and being a miracle worker who is going to give McConnell the boot and usher in True American Socialism. A Bernie presidency would have vastly better foreign policy, and would (assuming the Senate is won) manage to push through some incrementally leftist domestic policy. A Warren presidency would get you the latter but not the former. A Biden presidency would really loving suck, but he'd at least appoint non-chud justices and sign off on HR-1. A second Trump term would be utter catastrophic. A is better than B is better than C is better than D. It's not complicated or contradictory. Z. Autobahn fucked around with this message at 21:18 on Jul 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:14
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:So no justices get approved in either scenario, but in the Bernie one, there's some inspiring rhetoric for his base. Got it. Seismic difference. It's appallingly telling that your first instinct upon hearing it suggested that a politician could continue to cooperate with and function within the popular mass movement that got him elected is to dismiss same as just "inspiring rhetoric." I'll further spell things out, since you're quite thick and apparently need the helping hand here: A Bernie presidency will see a quantum leap in social activism and popular agitation that, while it might not personally threaten McConnell's own seat, will absolutely threaten that of other Republicans and, at least as importantly, collaborationist Dems. Encouraged by an activist president, who unlike Biden or anyone else we could mention wouldn't immediately fall victim to decorum poisoning or a desperate, blind desire to be seen as bipartisan, this will also cause economic disruption in the form of mass protests and strikes that hit at the bottom lines of those donors, who though they'd surely prefer a fascist police state to keep the hoi polloi in line, will settle for leaning on their puppets to confirm some drat judges so things might quiet down again. And no, before you strawman this into it, this is not to say any of this will happen over night or without significant struggle, nor would it necessarily be wholly successful, but if for once in our lives a president actually sided actively with this, if Obama had actually walked a picket line like he said he would but mysteriously failed to do, think of the weight that'd lend to things actually getting better for loving once. It emphatically would not just be "insipiring rhetoric", you dismissive rear end. Z. Autobahn posted:I've literally explained on this page why voting for Bernie is wildly better than voting for Biden. You might give some thought, then, to why so many posters believe you to be insincere on that point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:It's appallingly telling that your first instinct upon hearing it suggested that a politician could continue to cooperate with and function within the popular mass movement that got him elected is to dismiss same as just "inspiring rhetoric." If Bernie genuinely created a popular mass movement, I'd be inclined to agree. He's currently limping into fourth in most polls and falling. What I see isn't a popular mass movement, but a fractional passionate base with a low ceiling. A Bernie capable of harnessing a popular mass movement that reshapes America through direct democracy is one who'd comfortably win the primary. The fact that he's losing ground to Warren/Harris speaks more than anything else to the overall complacency of Americans (who'd prefer leftist policy without all that revolutionary rhetoric) and to the limitations of his appeal and approach. Captain_Maclaine posted:You might give some thought, then, to why so many posters believe you to be insincere on that point. Because of a reductivist binary mentality that unless a poster sees Bernie as Divine Socialist Godking they must be a craven centrist spy?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:21
|
|
|
Nobody expects Bernie to fix the country overnight. Hell, not even in two terms. But, he is pretty much the only person willing to even try to get the ball rolling with some actual momentum and not just a half-assed nudge. What he represents is the first big step in paving the way for the Rashida Tlaib (sp?) and AOC's of the world to be able to step up and become the new normal so that we can finally drag America kicking and screaming into the 21st century.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:22
|
|
|
the_steve posted:What he represents is the first big step in paving the way for the Rashida Tlaib (sp?) and AOC's of the world to be able to step up and become the new normal so that we can finally drag America kicking and screaming into the 21st century. If Bernie got hit by a bus tomorrow, the Tlaib's and AOCs would keep fighting and growing. And they'll keep fighting and growing regardless of whether or not he wins. TBH the single most important thing that can happen to help the ascendant left is passing an HR-1 style voting rights bill which luckily even the most dogshit Dem will do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:I've literally explained on this page why voting for Bernie is wildly better than voting for Biden. Like yeah, Bernie Sanders will not do much better at the DC bullshit than Warren. Perhaps even worse. But this is a candidate who has always talked about building a mass movement, always talked about changing our federal government from the outside, always framed his candidacy in revolutionary terms, and always made it clear that his candidacy has to be about more than just him winning the Presidency, and why it has to be that way, and yet whenever it comes up all we get from you is "well you think McConnell will let Sanders appoint a Supreme Court Justice when he wouldn't let Warren?" like it's some loving master stroke.Your position on the Dem primary really does come across as "Oh I definitely like Sanders, but unlike you rubes I like him for no loving reason at all - we wouldn't have all these disagreements if your politics were as sophisticated as my own," and it's just the dumbest most annoying god-damned poo poo, Z. Autobahn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:25
|
|
|
As an aside, its been interesting watching AOC basically hammer the same messages as Bernie (at least on Twitter), but get roughly 2x or 4x the RTs/likes (based on a very cursory overview, not any kind of statistically-valid data gathering). Social media isn't a good barometer of anything, but I wonder if that hints at the idea that people are more receptive to leftist messages coming from a "non-Bernie", given how poisoned the post-2016 discourse around him has become.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
If anything Bernie is hampering the mass movement by decentering the conversation away from inspiring young politicians like AOC, Buttigieg, and Tlaib
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:32
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:As an aside, its been interesting watching AOC basically hammer the same messages as Bernie (at least on Twitter), but get roughly 2x or 4x the RTs/likes (based on a very cursory overview, not any kind of statistically-valid data gathering). Social media isn't a good barometer of anything, but I wonder if that hints at the idea that people are more receptive to leftist messages coming from a "non-Bernie", given how poisoned the post-2016 discourse around him has become. She's also not running, so she's not being attacked like a presidential candidate would be.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:34
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:If Bernie genuinely created a popular mass movement, I'd be inclined to agree. He's currently limping into fourth in most polls and falling. What I see isn't a popular mass movement, but a fractional passionate base with a low ceiling. We weren't talking about his odds, we were talking about how he'd accomplish anything once in office, though given that things were getting sticky for you I can see why you'd try to shift the narrative. If Bernie was elected, necessarily it would be with a popular mass movement behind him because he's Bernie and that's how he has always and will always operate, and to somehow believe that President Bernie, who again you yourself brought up as being powerless to get anything past Archfiend McConnell, wouldn't bring that weapon to bear early and often demonstrates either a deep misunderstanding of who he is and what he stands for, or considerable dishonesty about same. quote:Because of a reductivist binary mentality that unless a poster sees Bernie as Divine Socialist Godking they must be a craven centrist spy? Or, and stay with me here because this is tricky, it's because you mouth support for Bernie whenever called on it but then immediately go back to finding fault with his candidacy in every possible fashion, interpret his position in the worst imaginable light, and in most other ways act like the living incarnation of "better things aren't possible" centrism.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:35
|
|
|
Its interesting how rather than engage with the content of z. autobahn's posts, Bernie stans instead resort to ad hominems, dismissing them as "boring", "tedious", a "stick-up-the-rear end contrarian", "tealeaf-reading politico-wannabe" etc. I wonder why that is?
Calibanibal fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Jul 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Not really. You seem to agree he's better at rallying the base, but you also apparently think that doesn't matter because Mitch McConnell et al. So all you've really done is assert that Bernie is better. Which is not wrong, but I'm at a loss for why you think that, since whenever it comes up and people list the reasons you waddle in here with your Deep Concern and Political Realism. I mean, I fundamentally do not believe Bernie is going to launch a mass movement or general strikes or issue forth a revolution or radically transform anything. I just... don't, and I don't know how you can look at what's happening with his support and possibly think that. It was wishful thinking months ago and it's crossing into denialist fantasizing. The revolution's not happening. Maybe in 8 years when the generational turnover has gone further, climate change is hitting harder, and the leader of the movement is somehow with a wider reach like AOC. But it's not happening now. It just... isn't. So beyond that, I don't support Bernie for "no reason at all". He's the best on foreign policy, for one, which is no small thing because that's a place where a President can have the most impact. And even on domestic, I think he'd push through some reasonable incremental improvements and policies, as opposed to someone like Biden, who'd preserve the status quo or be actually regressive. I support Bernie because I think he'd nudge us a step further than anyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
I'll never really understand people who feel like the greatest threat is the second best option rather than the conservative wing of the party that is doing its damnedest to avoid social responsibility or civil rights.twodot posted:The theory goes, if insurers aren't allowed to charge extra or deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, then people will simply refuse to have health insurance until they are aware that there is an expensive bill coming, where they will then immediately apply for insurance the day before, and stick the insurer with large bills while paying small premiums. If that were to happen then the business of health insurance becomes pure risk for insurers, and they would just decline to offer insurance since there is no premiums they could set that would offset their costs, therefore we need an individual mandate that makes sure that people don't wait until they know that there's an upcoming large bill to get insurance, and that makes the insurance industry happy. In practice, all of that appears to have been just made up theory crafting (except for the part where insurance companies love to be gifted a captive audience by the federal government, that part is definitely true). That reminds me of how flood insurance has developed in America. People who live in high-risk areas were required to buy flood insurance to make sure that disasters don't leave as much devastation. Companies didn't want to deal with the risk though, so the government worked out a system where payouts of flood insurance would be funded by the federal government instead of coming out of the insurance companies' pockets. So you have these people who are in homes in high-risk flood areas (trapped because nobody wants to buy a constantly flooding house), required to pay money to companies that do nothing while the US federal government has to constantly shell out money to rebuild these houses that are only going to flood again. Basically, if you think health insurance is a good thing that people should have, the government needs to fund it, and if the government's funding it, there's no point in letting corporate profiteers act as worthless middlemen. MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Sure, just bear in mind when you do that Obama campaigned on closing Guantanamo and didn't do poo poo either, as soon as the GOP gave him an adequate excuse not to. He was still trying well into 2015 to close Guantanamo. A small town even volunteered to take the detainees, but were countered by their state government. Congress and state governments blocked him at every turn. He failed, but he at least managed to reduce the amount of detainees from 126 to 41. Not a success, but a reminder of how our system was severely broken long before Trump came around.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:38
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:If Bernie got hit by a bus tomorrow, the Tlaib's and AOCs would keep fighting and growing. And they'll keep fighting and growing regardless of whether or not he wins. TBH the single most important thing that can happen to help the ascendant left is passing an HR-1 style voting rights bill which luckily even the most dogshit Dem will do. And there is every reason to believe they will do that if the leader of the party is Biden or Harris, or most of the rest of the field. Z. Autobahn posted:If Bernie genuinely created a popular mass movement, I'd be inclined to agree. He's currently limping into fourth in most polls and falling. What I see isn't a popular mass movement, but a fractional passionate base with a low ceiling. There is deep institutional resistance to any leftist candidacy - you realize this, right? Did you see the article I posted about the NYT a few pages back? Like our entire political infrastructure - fourth estate, bureaucracy, literally the whole thing - is knives loving out for Bernie, and all you have to say about it is "well he's not cruising to the Presidency so I have my doubts any of this weirdo mass action poo poo is actually going to work okay." gently caress you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:39
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:Its interesting how rather than engage with the content of z. autobahn's posts, Bernie stans instead resort to ad hominems, dismissing him as "boring", "tedious", a "stick-up-the-rear end contrarian", "tealeaf-reading politico-wannabe" etc. I wonder why that is?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:41
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:I mean, I fundamentally do not believe Bernie is going to launch a mass movement or general strikes or issue forth a revolution or radically transform anything How good of an understanding do you think you have of American politics (how high is your confidence in your own punditry)? Did you predict Trump's victory in the Republican primary and in the general, for instance? We need 5 Senate seats, not a radical Constitutional convention. Across the 2020 and 2022 election cycles, it's not unthinkable or unreasonable to think that a mass movement of motivated voters could swing those seats. But keep on with the cool rhetoric, I love it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:51
|
|
|
teacher_man posted:not a radical Constitutional convention. lol what
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:51
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:There is deep institutional resistance to any leftist candidacy - you realize this, right? He not only realizes that, but is counting on it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:52
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:He not only realizes that, but is counting on it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 21:59
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:The reporter on the NYT's Bernie Sanders beat consistently fails to identify her sources as corporate lobbyists This is the daughter of some rich folk who married the son of some other rich folk. They met at Brown.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:04
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:It could be the difference that takes us the Senate in 2022. The liberal mind depends on not understanding this though
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Like Sanders is probably the only candidate who understands that America is hosed up enough that our problems will only be fixed through a combination of electoral politics and direct action (or just direct action, if he's not elected President), has helped build infrastructure to encourage exactly that, and will continue to do so in office. This is a major source of his appeal to the left. People keep yelling horseshoe theory at me for my completely correct and good takes, when their own centrist cuck posting is the literal definition of fishhook theory wherein centrists side with fascists instead of leftists. Curious. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:13
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:She's also not running, so she's not being attacked like a presidential candidate would be. Yeah, AOC isn't being attacked by the nazis or by her own party's speaker right now at all, good point 
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:15
|
|
|
crazy cloud posted:cuck so have you bought your MAGA gear yet or what because you seem to be dropping the pretending-to-be-leftist thing pretty fast
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
teacher_man posted:How good of an understanding do you think you have of American politics (how high is your confidence in your own punditry)? Did you predict Trump's victory in the Republican primary and in the general, for instance? 5 Seats gets you the Joe Manchin Senate, which is basically my whole point. MSDOS KAPITAL posted:HR-1 will help the Democrats. It will not necessarily help leftists. It will not stop the DNC, DCCC, DSCC, and all the rest, from freezing out and loving over the left. I disagree with this. Expanding voting access to the young/working class will benefit leftists in the long (and maybe even short) run, no matter what the DNC tries. MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Also, you don't get to mention AOC and then also dismiss the leftist populism that Sanders has helped to nurture since 2016. If Sanders hadn't run for President in 2016, AOC would still be tending bar. Our Revolution obviously wouldn't exist, and while maybe Justice Dems would still be around they would have 1/10th of the influence they have now. And that is precisely because of the nascent mass movement that he is a part of. You are doing the thing where the left is doing better now than it has in most of our lifetimes excepting maybe VideoGameVet who 100 years old, but you're complaining anyway because it hasn't won yet. Leftism isn't ascendant because Bernie run, it's ascendant because an entire generation has been completely hosed over by rampant inequality and the institutional collapse of capitalism, and because the Boomers who represent the last passionate adherence to the cult of American exceptionalism are dying off. Bernie was a catalyst that accelerated what was happening, but the material conditions of America are what are driving leftism. It will outlive him and surpass him, regardless of what happens in 2020. MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Also it's funny that he's talking about strikes when Sanders is literally directing campaign volunteers to go to various labor strikes in solidarity with the workers there. And I'm pretty sure Our Revolution has been getting involved with those as well including the hugely successful WV teacher's strike last year. We've actually seen a resurgence of labor activity since 2016. I mean, yeah sorry Bernie Sanders hasn't just called for a nationwide general strike for shits and giggles and then conjured it into existence, but I know that you know about the other stuff, and so your comment about general strikes specifically without mentioning that, says a lot actually. I brought up strikes because the dude responding to me brought general strikes as a positive outcome to Bernie's presidency which is, on a side note, one of the most hilariously bonkers things posted itt in a while, lmao, you strike when the opposition is in power, initiating a massive strike while you're in charge is a suicidal own-goal crazy cloud posted:People keep yelling horseshoe theory at me for my completely correct and good takes, when their own centrist cuck posting is the literal definition of fishhook theory wherein centrists side with fascists instead of leftists. Curious. holy loving poo poo are you literally using alt-right terms to accuse me of siding with fascists Z. Autobahn fucked around with this message at 22:24 on Jul 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:21
|
|
|
eke out posted:so have you bought your MAGA gear yet or what because you seem to be dropping the pretending-to-be-leftist thing pretty fast I toxxed for trump in 2015 thank u, next
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:23
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:Bernie stans turned out in droves for Trump in 2016 Except they overwhelmingly voted for Clinton. It's 2019. How did this talking point come back up?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
cuck isn't an alt right term settle down maureen dowd and complete your transformation into a corncob
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Except they overwhelmingly voted for Clinton. ya got Calibanibal'd
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:25
|
|
|
Luckyellow posted:Isn't it technically correct that the left wing activists is the donor base for Bernie? Donor base, yes, but not donor class, which is the pundit’s polite term for the wealthy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:ya got Calibanibal'd is this a synonym of tedium?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 14:34 |
|
|
crazy cloud posted:People keep yelling horseshoe theory at me for my completely correct and good takes, when their own centrist cuck posting is the literal definition of fishhook theory wherein centrists side with fascists instead of leftists. Curious. crazy cloud posted:I have said it before, when it was more controversial, but if Biden is the nominee I will canvass gotv for trump
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 22:32
|
|
