|
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 | ||
|
Terror Sweat posted:Warren didn't shift left, the Democrats shifted right. She's still a Reagan republican, much like Obama Por que no los dos?
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 13:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:32 |
|
|
Midgetskydiver posted:There is a stark difference between knowingly saying something is false, and placing a little too much faith in one's own family members being correct about lineage. Her siblings and other family members have stated that they had a relative who was socially ostracized because everyone thought she had native blood. Turns out that was probably not the case but the belief did cause a rift in her family that was real. Warren herself mentions that the relative essentially had to elope in order to get married. This is an explanation for why you might casually bring up during a conversation "oh yeah here's a story I heard about my grandparents having to elope". She fully pretended she was ethnically Cherokee based on the absolute flimsiest of pretenses, and your attempted explanation here just emphasizes how inherently ridiculous that claim was. I don't see any nuance or evidence of good faith here, I see someone who definitely should know better and who has a very detailed understanding of the nature of evidence and proof who nonetheless was extremely comfortable misrepresenting themselves. I expect a lot more from a literal professor of law.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 14:20
|
|
|
Either she was cynically exploiting it expecting it to never be questioned or credulous enough to believe it without evidence and think it gives her legitimacy, either way doesn't make it look any better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 14:24
|
|
|
Can you imagine how this thread would treat a republican who did the same thing Warren did?
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 14:29
|
|
|
kidkissinger posted:Can you imagine how this thread would treat a republican who did the same thing Warren did? identically.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 14:31
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:identically. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 14:32
|
|
|
Once more, Warren's issues on foreign policy go way beyond I/P. She voted for Trump's military budget increase, for additional sanctions on Iran, thought trump was too easy on nk. Bernie isn't perfect, but he is the only one to have called for Lula's release, to vote against sanctions on Iran, to not sign the aipac letter condemning the Obama administration for abstaining on the settlements question... That you have people disingenuously come here and try to claim they are the same is only proof of how everyone recognizes that this is all opportunistic. Yeah, I'm sure that the guy who has railed against Bernie non stop for a year sincerely believes that Warren and Bernie are similar
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 14:38
|
|
|
Good news guys, the best candidate of them all has wandered in! https://twitter.com/tomsteyer/status/1148579342680637440?s=21
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 14:56
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Good news guys, the best candidate of them all has wandered in! please impeach
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 15:05
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Bullshit. This is pure pandering, she is not going to reverse on 20 years of stated positions and votes because some protestors cornered her. correct, she reversed 20 years of stated positions and votes back around late 2016 when she began to prepare to run and has been like this since. which is why every time this comes up people have to link that jacobin piece about her pre-2016 votes (particularly 2014, during 'protective edge' or whatever euphemism israel gave that particular set of attacks on gaza) on the other hand, that jacobin piece is actually significantly more fair to her than your take here, because it notes that she's basically been good since then and the real question is whether this is a sincerely held change in beliefs or just a necessary political re-positioning
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 15:23
|
|
|
eke out posted:correct, she reversed 20 years of stated positions and votes back around late 2016 when she began to prepare to run and has been like this since. which is why every time this comes up people have to link that jacobin piece about her pre-2016 votes (particularly 2014, during 'protective edge' or whatever euphemism israel gave that particular set of attacks on gaza) I don’t think it’s a sincerely held belief but I also don’t think Bernie’s positions on the issue are nearly good enough even though he’s better than the rest of the field. In summary, 
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 15:26
|
|
|
eke out posted:correct, she reversed 20 years of stated positions and votes back around late 2016 when she began to prepare to run and has been like this since. which is why every time this comes up people have to link that jacobin piece about her pre-2016 votes (particularly 2014, during 'protective edge' or whatever euphemism israel gave that particular set of attacks on gaza) Do you have that link handy?
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 15:28
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Do you have that link handy? it's this one eke out fucked around with this message at 15:40 on Jul 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 15:35
|
|
|
eke out posted:it's this one Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 15:44
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:Yeah, I'm sure that the guy who has railed against Bernie non stop for a year sincerely believes that Warren and Bernie are similar This is always funny. "Bernie is a racist, and a sexist, and an America-hating commie, and a Zionist, and a (((tax cheat))) and a wealthaphobe bigot, and a (((gold hoarder))), btdubs Elizabeth Warren is exactly the same as him vote Warren"
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 15:44
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Good news guys, the best candidate of them all has wandered in! Lol at that ratio, straight out of the gate
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 16:16
|
|
|
Fascinating. https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1148549603387744256?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 16:22
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:Fascinating. What's the MOE here?
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 16:31
|
|
|
kidkissinger posted:What's the MOE here? Economist/YouGov OH you mean MARGIN of error.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 16:36
|
|
|
kidkissinger posted:What's the MOE here? 29%
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
Your Boy Fancy posted:Fascinating. Oh I see the "Bolsonaro will be good for business" folks are still at it. kidkissinger posted:What's the MOE here? 10% https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1148549604360839168 https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1148577115593465856 Here's the whole set of tweets.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
lol 10% MOE
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 16:42
|
|
|
Midgetskydiver posted:There is a stark difference between knowingly saying something is false, and placing a little too much faith in one's own family members being correct about lineage. Her siblings and other family members have stated that they had a relative who was socially ostracized because everyone thought she had native blood. Turns out that was probably not the case but the belief did cause a rift in her family that was real. Warren herself mentions that the relative essentially had to elope in order to get married. Having a native ancestor several generations ago does not make you native unless you're going by the one-drop rule, which is extremely problematic for a variety of reasons. Not only because of blood quantum issues, but also because many actual implementations of the one-drop rule specifically did not apply to people who claimed native ancestry, because so many prominent Southern families had long claimed descent from famous Native Americans. For example, Virginia's Racial Integrity Act, which imposed a one-drop rule as part of an effort to impose "racial purity" for eugenics reasons, had a clause typically called the "Pocahontas Exception" that said whites with a Native ancestor a few generations back would still count as white. This was because basically the entire Virginian aristocracy claimed to be descended in some way from Pocahontas*, and therefore would have been classified as "non-white" if not for that exception. *The claims of descent from Pocahontas were, in fact, a point of enormous pride for Virginian aristocrats. Not only was she the daughter of a major chief (and therefore an "Indian princess"), but her only grandchild had married a wealthy British aristocrat who was one of the early settlers of Virginia. As such, descent from Pocahontas was considered a sign of top pedigree, as it meant being a descendant of Native "royalty", British aristocracy, and one of the richest and most influential families in the early days of the Virginia colony.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 16:42
|
|
|
i like bernie and donated to him last time and will again this time but if he bows out of the race im just gonna go with warren for future donations, she's the most likely person bernie will endorse seeing as the other options include a cop, some racist old white dudes, the alt right's favorite flavor of reasonably attractive twink boy toy of the month, and mystical anti-vaxxer from space who's only saving grace is being very well read on Marx alternatively, just bet on a warren/bernie or a bernie/warren campaign once one of them takes the nomination, they'll name whoever doesn't get the nomination the VP, and then everyone wins
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i'm oklahoman too Yeah I'm sure your situation was exactly like hers and now you're pure enough to run for President. Congrats!
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:09
|
|
|
Midgetskydiver posted:Yeah I'm sure your situation was exactly like hers and now you're pure enough to run for President. Congrats! I also lived in Oklahoma as a kid, yes almost every white kid has a family story about a Native ancestor, no everyone doesn't go around claiming they're Cherokees and getting themselves listed as minorities in academia and employment because "they want to meet others who endured the struggles" that they didn't, ya know, actually endure as white bread kids from the suburbs of Oklahoma City or whatever the gently caress her excuse was. Do you not get the difference between "hey my family has an interesting story" and "hey I'm a minority, it's cool Harvard go ahead and name-drop my white rear end as an excuse to not hire PoC because my great great grandmother Sacajawea told me I'm a woman of color" VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Jul 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:13
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i'm oklahoman too My family was from Oklahoma and my grandfather stayed on a reservation for a short time. My familial history claimed to be part/strongly native hard in my mom's generation and I heard it my entire life as us claimed to be part Native. I never really did because I was the next generation and things were different and less reliant on oral history by the time I was old enough to care. We're a different generation than her and have more cultural knowledge, and I know my age (40) puts me right at that cusp. I can easily see why she would think she was part-Native in good faith because my parents' whole generation did; but it's also extremely dumb for how she *currently* handles it in a completely different, more knowledgeable era, and her response to Trump shows it would probably hurt her bad in the general. Lying is still probably the wrong word, though. Also, my DNA is double hers for Native, so take that, margin of error.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:lol 10% MOE The raw numbers are even funnier.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
eke out posted:correct, she reversed 20 years of stated positions and votes back around late 2016 when she began to prepare to run and has been like this since. which is why every time this comes up people have to link that jacobin piece about her pre-2016 votes (particularly 2014, during 'protective edge' or whatever euphemism israel gave that particular set of attacks on gaza) Hahaha "Israel is totally right to bomb schools and hospitals" oh man 2014, wow what a wild year. What a goof! Wait, am I going to be probated for Ironic racism for that? Let me clarify: Jesus loving christ what the loving gently caress is wrong with you shitstains? That isn't a mealy mouthed admission that Israel is an american ally doing bad things, its a full throated lust for the death of foreign children and invalids.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The raw numbers are even funnier.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
Lol, did people not have taste buds in the 70s?
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:28
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:Lol, did people not have taste buds in the 70s? that's actually pretty fancy and involved for midwestern cuisine
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
hey can i ask why y'all are playing right into the GOP's hands by sticking to the issue they very specifically exploited to cause division within the ranks here on the left? like, come on, it's obvious whether warren considers herself native american and whether it's true or not doesn't loving matter right now, or ever really worry about that poo poo if she makes it to the debate against trump because nobody on the left is going to bother pulling that card unless they're trying to throw things in favor of the repubs by the way, parroting the GOP's obvious as gently caress hitpiece about warren is really dumb so stop doing it thanks
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:32
|
|
|
https://www.instagram.com/p/BzpsvEehosZ/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:34
|
|
|
End of Evangelion timeline confirmed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:34
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:Lol, did people not have taste buds in the 70s? By midwest standards, that's practically Michelin star.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:Lol, did people not have taste buds in the 70s? This is wayyyyy to little salt
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:38
|
|
|
Iamgoofball posted:hey can i ask why y'all are playing right into the GOP's hands by sticking to the issue they very specifically exploited to cause division within the ranks here on the left? like, come on, it's obvious Funny how that was the line used in 2016 and weirdly enough it backfired then like it would backfire now. "Shhhh don't mention our weaknesses during the primary that's unfair" is a losing strategy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:32 |
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:the point about warren's dumb 23 and me goof isn't that she lied about being part cherokee it's that she's easily bullied by trump The local Native American tribe where I live in Massachusetts has been fighting for federal recognition for a while. Recently an important bill to that end was introduced into the senate by Elizabeth Warren. It was a non-controversial bill, the real issues having been decided before hand. Trump, presumably having seen the words "Native American" and "Elizabeth Warren" flipped out and made a stupid incoherent tweet opposing the bill, saying it was somehow bad for Native Americans. There were Republicans calling him out for being irresponsible and loving up the whole process. Getting Trump to make a dumb tweet that pisses off everyone who actually understands the issue is not a huge accomplishment, but this is an example of Trump's obsession with this issue not exactly being to his benefit to him. Warren hasn't responded to anything Trump has said in a long time. After getting called out for her her dumb genetic test, she listened to the backlash and seems to have learned. Even that test was a misguided attempt at laying the issue to rest, not part of a pattern of Warren engaging with Trump's juvenile barbs. Going forward I have every expectation that Warren will focus on the issues, rather than Trump and Trump's framing of her, while I expect Trump to put more and more effort into doubling down on his attacks. I do not think this will be to Trump's benefit in a general election. Ytlaya posted:As has been mentioned before, at best, even with the most naive and positive perception of Warren as a politician reasonably possible, Warren is a strictly inferior version of Sanders who is worse on several issues and has a far less consistent and reliable background. Evidence of hardcore Sanders supporters throwing shade in this thread aside, I think Warren can appeal to people who want things like Medicare for All, a wealth tax, and to break up tech giants, same as Sanders can, but she can also appeal to former Clinton voters and others who are put off by Sanders style. A pragmatic Biden supporter or an identity-focused Harris supporter are more likely to be won over by Warren than Sanders. If Sanders starts surging in the polls at other candidates expense, I'll reconsider this position, as it would be awesome if he won the nomination, but currently it's Warren who's got that going on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 17:54
|
|
