|
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 | ||
|
VitalSigns posted:That's not what anyone is saying; you are a liar Oh Snapple! posted:Buzz on off. I'm "mad" because the story they spawned did exactly what it intended in providing a disingenuous as gently caress platform to attack Bernie on to dishonest as hell folks like you. The reaction here is doubly counfounding because Bernie regularly uses a media soapbox as a way to bring attention to the efforts of organizing workers and to shine a negative light on management. But when the same attention is on him, he insists that there is a "process" to follow.
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 22:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
That quote isn't saying what was claimed so E: also lmao at your crocodile tears for campaign workers when you defend the use of unpaid exploited labor VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 22:21 on Jul 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 22:18
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Isn't everyone in agreement here that they're in the right to ask for more money? And also in the wrong to ask for it from the Washington Post instead of the candidate? asking for more money is against the principles the democratic party stands for 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 22:23
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:That quote isn't saying what was claimed so LinYutang comes to the thread posting negative Bernie articles regularly because they're pro Bernie and is bringing attention to criticisms of Bernie. At least that's the pattern I noticed over the past few months. The first one was pretty bullshit though, a reddit post to a conspiracy being botted (dozens of random blog reposts from no one) about Bernie making himself rich buying his own book with campaign funds.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 22:31
|
|
|
LinYutang posted:The reaction here is doubly counfounding because Bernie regularly uses a media soapbox as a way to bring attention to the efforts of organizing workers and to shine a negative light on management. But when the same attention is on him, he insists that there is a "process" to follow. They're literally following the process now, things are proceeding as they're supposed to
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 22:32
|
|
|
You guys would all be mad if the other campaigns workers asked for more why aren't you mad that the Bernie campaign is negotiating higher wages with the union, which is what should happen in a just and good world? Why aren't you angry that the system is doing what it's supposed to????
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 22:35
|
|
|
Ranter posted:LinYutang comes to the thread posting negative Bernie articles regularly because they're pro Bernie and is bringing attention to criticisms of Bernie. At least that's the pattern I noticed over the past few months. Then your noticing apparatus is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 22:37
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:Question to the people who talk labor: isn’t working these sorts of poo poo Jobs a ladder for people with a terrible employment history? If you have huge, gaping holes in your history I can see opting to do some kind of unpaid campaign job simply to show the next employer you did something. If you have enough of an employment history to have gaps in their resume, and need a job badly enough to care about those gaps, then you're generally not in an economic position where you can afford to work for free. And it's not like being a campaign worker is going to fill in a resume gap you already have. And if it were just about being to put literally anything on a resume, there's plenty of charities that would be happy to have an extra volunteer. These unpaid jobs generally end up going to ambitious young people who aren't paying their own bills yet, or well-paid folks who can afford to take a few months off from their big-money job. Unpaid work isn't a loving anti-poverty program.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:That's not what anyone is saying; you are a liar I mean, I kinda quoted three prime examples a couple of pages ago, but whatever. Here they are again. Oh Snapple! posted:The biggest story in that article is that when hours went up and the campaign offered a 6k raise to compensate, our insane healthcare system made the raise not worth it. Nonsense posted:Nobody else is even paying their campaigns what Sanders is, much less unionizing them. Stop believing WAPO, they are a Murdoch level paper during Democratic primaries. joepinetree posted:This is nonsense. Every other campaign has unpaid positions. No other campaign is unionized. If the worst that we could say about, say, the Warren campaign was that after an increase in hours, salaried people were making a little less than 15 an hour and were asking for more and waiting for the campaign's response, I'd say that'd be pretty good. Instead, on one hand we have a very matter of fact, straight reporting that the Warren campaign uses a loophole to have unpaid staff positions, and on the other, labor "troubles roil" the Sanders campaign because he is only a lot better than every other campaign, rather than perfect.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 22:50
|
|
|
generic one posted:I mean, I kinda quoted three prime examples a couple of pages ago, but whatever. Here they are again. None of those quotes say what you claimed
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 22:56
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:I like the idea that if Bernie fails it's time to abandon the idea of democracy altogether and become the pro-authoritarian left, as if that is at all a good idea I'll break from the rest of the thread and try to engage sincerely, and I have two questions if this is reflective of your honest viewpoint. Do you think that it is a matter of survival for the US and the world to engage in transformational action on climate change? And, do you believe that a candidate besides Bernie will be willing to engage in such actions? If a person answers yes and no to those questions, then I think abandoning electoralism for direct action is an appropriate, or even a pragmatic reaction to bernie failing to achieve the executive.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 22:57
|
|
|
generic one posted:The point I was getting at is, just to sum it up, some of the posters in this thread are pretty hypocritical. If poo poo like this leaked from a unionized corporation, or other campaign, where folks were being made to work 60 hours a week, then it’d be labeled as fascism. Instead, it’s just a bunch of bitching about how the leaks happened, and how it hurts their candidate of choice, then a lot of mental gymnastics reasoning how this shouldn’t matter, because bullshit whataboutisms. No, you are poo poo posting in the laziest way. Workers agreed to a collectively bargained contract. Because of the work load, they asked for more money. The Bernie campaign offered more money, but it would have affected the price of healthcare, so the workers made a counter proposal, which the campaign is considering. It's literally the way that collective bargaining is supposed to go. How loving stupid do you have to be to think that anyone would single out bosses who engage in good faith negotiations with unions for criticism, Bernie related or not? Sure, seizing the means of production is better than unionization, but in a world of unpaid labor, that is not the enemy right now, Bernie involvement or not. "This company is engaging in good faith negotiations with a union, i bet that if Walmart was engaging in good faith negotiations with a union you'd start complaining about how Walmart treats their employees"
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:00
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/danielmarans/status/1152238442580983810?s=19 The people saying it was nothing but a WaPo hit piece were exactly right.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:00
|
|
|
bowser posted:https://twitter.com/danielmarans/status/1152238442580983810?s=19 Wow I'm really shocked that once again the Sanders supporters were the ones arguing in good faith and the people just asking questions were proven wrong 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:07
|
|
|
But what about the union's tax returns?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
Ooh tough break dude, I guess you'll have to slink away and wait for a billionaire media mogul to feed you the next dishonest hit piece you can wave around to spout your bullshit. Or you could admit you were wrong and learn something and maybe apologize to the people you lied about, but lol we all know that aint gonna happen (but I would love to be pleasantly surprised!) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
Gravel's team just texted me asking me to donate to Marianne crystal lady.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
Ranter posted:Gravel's team just texted me asking me to donate to Marianne crystal lady. since gravel can't get into the debates, i'm assuming he's investing in more pylons for marriane so she can summon a host of angels to terrify her debate opponents into submission
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:18
|
|
|
The Washington Post is bird-cage paper.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:20
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:I like the idea that if Bernie fails it's time to abandon the idea of democracy altogether and become the pro-authoritarian left, as if that is at all a good idea But, minor quibble: the entire fourth estate, the entire Democratic establishment, and every other shitbird capitalist in the country are already knives-out for Bernie. If he doesn't get the nomination it doesn't mean we've abandoned democracy - it just means that we have the unequivocal confirmation that democracy and electoralism will have no hope of actually working in this country until direct action makes it so. But, again, I like your spirit. MSDOS KAPITAL fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Jul 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:24
|
|
|
But whyyyy would Jeff Bezos not like Bernie Sanders? Someone please explain this. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:25
|
|
|
Ranter posted:Gravel's team just texted me asking me to donate to Marianne crystal lady. Marianne is good. I think they're also just returning the favor, as she did the same for Gravel a week or two ago.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:31
|
|
|
phasmid posted:But whyyyy would Jeff Bezos not like Bernie Sanders? Someone please explain this. Because Bernie is racist (everyone knows this) and Jeff Bezos is a Hispanic PoC (descended from Cuban refugees)
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:36
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I feel like there can be less and less people experiencing the misery of dead end go nowhere jobs simply due to the capitalists looking to erase margins by replacing them all with machines, and so that’s why I get nervous with any progressive candidate who drones on about making sure people’s jobs don’t get automated away. These are often the same candidates promoting the jobs guarantee, and I guess we need to make sure humans are doing jobs that don’t really need them to be there to be done in order to keep that sustainable, but to me the jobs guarantee thing is like when single payer advocate hears “Obamacare but with a public plan”. Like you're absolutely right that's what should happen as more jobs become automated and there is less to do. But what will happen under our present economic regime is that capitalists will hoard ever more wealth and power and leave anyone who isn't useful to the engine of capitalism to die. And that's before they start murdering them outright. Probably every candidate who mentions a jobs guarantee even half-seriously would push for confiscatory wealth taxes the instant they become politically viable. The ones mentioning a jobs guarantee in total seriousness will push for that before then, and work to make it politically possible. (And, Bernie is in that latter camp.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:This post is heavily dependent on a lot of people voting blue no matter who When people think it'll make a real difference, the vast majority do vote blue no matter who. 2016 wasn't the result of the principled left finally refusing to hold their nose for the dog poo poo Democratic Candidate. It was the general voting public deciding that the election was in the bag and that the worst thing Donny would do was be a punchline for 4 years.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
Gyges posted:When people think it'll make a real difference, the vast majority do vote blue no matter who. People think this less and less
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:The Washington Post is bird-cage paper. People think this less and less
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 00:08
|
|
|
the only candidate who a significant number of people would think was "no different from Trump/the status quo" is Biden. the other major candidates are all promising change of some sort. Bernie's promising major change, Warren is promising somewhat less change but in a wonky way, and Harris is promising sweeping change but she's lying about it. The problem with Hillary was her campaign was basically "everything's fine"
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 00:24
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm not sure how people find Biden electable. He even timed his apology for the whole busing/being friends with people like Strom Thurmond thing for a bigger story to occlude it. He's grown in the same pond as the other establishment democrats of high rank. How to motivate a big mass of people by promising them unadorned poo poo? Trump has been gussying poo poo up and selling it for years but Biden's doing the Hillary Clinton thing, saying everything's fine. Added to that he repeatedly tells disenfranchised voters to gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 00:32
|
|
|
Just a timely reminder that this is not the thread to talk about who you'd vote for in the general election after the primaries are over!
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 00:35
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:I like the idea that if Bernie fails it's time to abandon the idea of democracy altogether and become the pro-authoritarian left, as if that is at all a good idea Ron Paul failed and then it only took four more years of Obama for Trump to come about.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 00:51
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Ron Paul failed and then it only took four more years of Obama for Trump to come about. Rob Paul was 08
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 01:00
|
|
|
He ran in 2012 too, blimplessly
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 01:01
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Ron Paul failed and then it only took four more years of Obama for Trump to come about. by that logic in 2024 we'll elect president oprah
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 01:06
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Behind2020/status/1152730388898492416
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 01:08
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:I'm glad you like it. I don't entirely agree with this. My personal opinion is that the electoral success of candidates like Sanders is inevitable in the future, but that there are likely too many older Americans (whose brains are irreparably poisoned in terms of the way they think about politics) for it to be possible in most elections currently. So it's possible to lose now but win more in, say, 10 years. Unfortunately, in 10 years it'll be too late in a variety of ways, but the thing preventing electoral success would likely also hamper most other methods. generic one posted:It’ll be non-stop bitching about how Bernie isn’t the nominee, and how folks are gonna write in Mike Gravel as a protest vote, not vote at all, or they’ll just vote Trump because all the other candidates are succdems, so they’re basically the same. People react with hostility towards folks like you because it is very obvious that you seem to view the concerns of the left with regards to preferring Sanders to the other candidates as somehow being trivial. You people act like it's equivalent to a bratty child complaining that they didn't get a toy or something. So people (probably correctly) assume that you're a bad person for trivializing the important issues they care about.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 01:31
|
|
|
I think it's because those not on the left never truly believe us when we say "Bernie is the compromise candidate"
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 01:35
|
|
|
He whispered "ok stop" then he stopped because he couldn't do any more and they were all keeping up?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 01:40
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:When Warren was a Republican, many Democrats from the rural parts were racists and the party wasn’t 100% behind civil rights. This is just revisionism. She was a Republican during the Reagan years, not the 1960s.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 02:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 06:09 |
|
|
mormonpartyboat posted:you can see this in action by the way that nobody who sat down to learn to code has bothered unionizing Not entirely true. Many video game devs and tech workers are striving for unionization. https://www.gameworkersunite.org/ https://techworkerscoalition.org/ Its a tough process, partially because the high salaries and "heroic programmer" culture means that people have a tough time connecting unionization to material benefits... but its coming. Many of us who work with computers are actively automating ourselves out of work, so we're aware of how commodified and temporary we actually are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2019 02:32
|
|