|
Who do you wish to win the Democratic primaries? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Joe Biden, the Klansman |
|
8 | 0.91% |
| Bernie Sanders, the Hand Flailer |
|
578 | 65.76% |
| Elizabeth Warren, the Plan Maker |
|
185 | 21.05% |
| Kamala Harris, the Cop Lord |
|
4 | 0.46% |
| Cory Booker, the Super Hero Wannabe |
|
0 | 0% |
| Julian Castro, the Twin |
|
3 | 0.34% |
| Kirsten Gillibrand, the Franken Killer |
|
3 | 0.34% |
| Pete Buttigieg, the Troop Sociopath |
|
9 | 1.02% |
| Robert Francis O'Rourke, the Fake Latino |
|
2 | 0.23% |
| Jay Inslee, the Climate Alarmist |
|
4 | 0.46% |
| Marianne Williamson, the Crystal Queen |
|
19 | 2.16% |
| Andrew Yang, the $1000 Fool |
|
19 | 2.16% |
| Tulsi Gabbard, the Muslim Hater |
|
8 | 0.91% |
| Amy Klobuchar, the Comb Enthusiast |
|
1 | 0.11% |
| Just like in real life, nobody voted for Hickenlooper |
|
2 | 0.23% |
| Jeffrey Epstein, the MCC Most Hated |
|
9 | 1.02% |
| KKKillary KKKlinton |
|
16 | 1.82% |
| Some other idiot not in this list |
|
9 | 1.02% |
| Total: | 879 votes | ||
|
Pinky Artichoke posted:100% of the proceeds to Moms Demand Action and March for Our Lives. He's still using a tragedy to promote his campaign by turning a moment of seemingly genuine humanity into a tshirt catchphrase. Conveniently paired with his name. Ultimately it just validates everyone who saw that moment for the hollow, calculated attention grab that it was. Oh Snapple! fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Sep 3, 2019 |
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 16:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 10:46 |
|
|
Turning a response to a tragedy into a commodity to be bought and sold is the height of neoliberalism so it's not surprising, but it is emblematic of the mindset that got us to where we're at today
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:16
|
|
|
Also it’s an incredible indictment against House Democrats like Beto. What’s Beto’s call to action as he runs to be our leader? “poo poo is hosed man.” That’s a call to inaction if I’ve ever heard one. Right up there with “things won’t change” Biden.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:38
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Also it’s an incredible indictment against House Democrats like Beto. What’s Beto’s call to action as he runs to be our leader? “poo poo is hosed man.” A Gen Xer channeling the Millennial zeitgeist. I’d almost respect it except the gimmick leftist gamer account running for President is on basically the same wavelength and is way funnier than Beto is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:40
|
|
|
Manchin isn't giving up his senate seat to run for governor, which is a shame because I really wanted to see Richard Ojeda run for it instead. We don't have any primary polls for that state regarding the democratic primary but Ojeda is going to primary him regardless so maybe something will come out of that. It's probably for the best that Ojeda gave up his brief and pointless presidential run to do this instead because it'll probably have more of an impact than his run did. I'll admit this is kinda borderline in terms of what the thread is about but it's still about an upcoming national primary (or at least will be about one in a few months). zetamind2000 fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Sep 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:45
|
|
|
overmind2000 posted:Manchin isn't giving up his senate seat to run for governor, which is a shame because I really wanted to see Richard Ojeda run for it instead. We don't have any primary polls for that state regarding the democratic primary but Ojeda is going to primary him regardless so maybe something will come out of that. It's probably for the best that Ojeda gave up his brief and pointless presidential run to do this instead because it'll probably have more of an impact than his run did. Manchin just won in 18. He's not up till 2024.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 17:57
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1168932416540557316
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:04
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Manchin just won in 18. He's not up till 2024. Ah, sorry. I'm quite tired and got the dates jumbled up in my head. He would have had to leave the senate now to run for the governor's seat in 2020. On that note I'm surprised Manchin hasn't made a run for president this cycle, he'd probably do better than the 10 lowest polling candidates. zetamind2000 fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Sep 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:05
|
|
|
Pinky Artichoke posted:100% of the proceeds to Moms Demand Action and March for Our Lives. The Beto defender has logged on
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:07
|
|
|
overmind2000 posted:Ah, sorry. I'm quite tired and got the dates jumbled up in my head. He would have had to leave the senate now to run for the governor's seat in 2020. He would not have given up his seat and would have been able to appoint his own replacement. The other Senate seat is up and it's currently held by a Republican so Ojeda should make the longshot for that one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 18:24
|
|
|
overmind2000 posted:Manchin isn't giving up his senate seat to run for governor, which is a shame because I really wanted to see Richard Ojeda run for it instead. We don't have any primary polls for that state regarding the democratic primary but Ojeda is going to primary him regardless so maybe something will come out of that. It's probably for the best that Ojeda gave up his brief and pointless presidential run to do this instead because it'll probably have more of an impact than his run did. Why do you prefer Ojeda to Manchin? As far as I am tell they both suck but at least Manchin didn’t vote for Trump.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 19:55
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Why do you prefer Ojeda to Manchin? As far as I am tell they both suck but at least Manchin didn’t vote for Trump. Ojeda was literally the only person I could think of in terms of either successfully primarying Manchin or capturing the seat in his absence. That might speak more to the relative lack of visibility nationwide for West Virginia democrats, though, than them not having better candidates to run. I'd support anyone with a better record than Ojeda but I can't think of anyone else running right now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 20:02
|
|
|
overmind2000 posted:Ojeda was literally the only person I could think of in terms of either successfully primarying Manchin or capturing the seat in his absence. That might speak more to the relative lack of visibility nationwide for West Virginia democrats, though, than them not having better candidates to run. I'd support anyone with a better record than Ojeda but I can't think of anyone else running right now. Manchin had a progressive primary challenger who did ok but it’s WV so who knows how she’d do statewide
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 20:17
|
|
|
goethe.cx posted:Manchin had a progressive primary challenger who did ok but it’s WV so who knows how she’d do statewide
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 20:28
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Why do you prefer Ojeda to Manchin? As far as I am tell they both suck but at least Manchin didn’t vote for Trump. No he just votes for GOP bills and to confirm whichever nazi gently caress Trump wants confirmed, but obviously that is a lesser crime than casting a vote for Trump in a state he was always going to win.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
Unoriginal Name posted:gently caress insurance companies. They are leeches on the American people, thriving on the fear of pain and death. Hang every executive from a loving lamppost so that no one tries to monetize suffering ever again. they are pretty much an economic burden and people are baffled that we save trillions of dollars on universal healthcare, and that is one of the primary reasons why. removing them from the equation means people have spending power, number go up bing bong so simple Cerebral Bore posted:No he just votes for GOP bills and to confirm whichever nazi gently caress Trump wants confirmed, but obviously that is a lesser crime than casting a vote for Trump in a state he was always going to win. joe machin should just lose on the basis that he's a massive whiny self-entitled prick getting frustrated at ineffectual government 
Lastgirl fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Sep 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 21:08
|
|
|
Not sure a guy who, when actually given a position to prove himself in government, decides to needlessly quit in order to make a vanity run for president that he suspends around two weeks later, allowing the governor to fill his seat with a lobbyist, is deserving of any time of day for future political bids.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 21:13
|
|
|
Yeah that's a much bigger indictment of Ojeda than the reflexive "but Trump voter" poo poo that pays no mind to Manchin's wretched career.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
I came back from my long weekend to see this loving mush brain babbling again and leading by 20 points in the polls still LOL
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 22:46
|
|
|
https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-ove...-alternative-a/ Okay can we talk about Warren and her "No-First-Use" nuclear weapons position? I get it that No-First-Use makes sense from a risk reduction in deterrence perspective but what about No-First-Use if one of our allies gets attacked in an existential way (nuclear or conventional?) Then having that First-Use capability in our backpocket could change the calculus of the belligerent. This is one area where I can't stand with Warren despite how sensible her other policies are (yes even her "access to healthcare vs. healthcare" dodge).
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 22:56
|
|
|
People who think Ojeda would be a good replacement for Manchin must come from the same smoothbrain planet as the people who wanted Tim Ryan to replace Nancy Pelosi
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 23:02
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:People who think Ojeda would be a good replacement for Manchin must come from the same smoothbrain planet as the people who wanted Tim Ryan to replace Nancy Pelosi I can't imagine anyone who runs with a D next to their name being worse than Manchin.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 23:15
|
|
|
Howard Phillips posted:https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-ove...-alternative-a/ If our allies were attacked with Nukes, that meets the "we didn't use them first" metric I thought. If the attack was conventional, you really want to escalate to nuclear retaliation? Maybe the problem here isn't Elizabeth Warren's policy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 23:17
|
|
|
Howard Phillips posted:https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-ove...-alternative-a/ No first use is longstanding policy, it just isn't law (and should be.) Anyone advocating for first use of nuclear weapons is a sociopath.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2019 23:53
|
|
|
Howard Phillips posted:https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-ove...-alternative-a/ I appreciate her political drive to kill the poor but cannot abide her absent thirst for annihilation
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:09
|
|
|
all of our nuclear weapons should be destroyed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:13
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I came back from my long weekend to see this loving mush brain babbling again and leading by 20 points in the polls still LOL ‘Help! Help! Who Am I? Where Am I? Who Are You People?’ Says Biden In Embarrassing Campaign Gaffe
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:21
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:all of our nuclear weapons should be destroyed. I think we should be careful here not to just ask the monkey paw to destroy all the nukes though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:21
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:all of our nuclear weapons should be destroyed. If elected I will shoot half our nuclear weapons at the other half of our nuclear weapons.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:22
|
|
|
Howard Phillips posted:https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-ove...-alternative-a/ I can't believe I have to say this. E: "But we won't really blow up the world, we'll just say we would in order to make other countries do what we want" Madman Theory doesn't work. They will know it's a bluff and they won't do what we want, then what. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 00:25 on Sep 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:22
|
|
|
I would highly recommend "The Doomsday Machine" by Daniel Ellsberg if you want to see why "no-first-use" is the only sane policy
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:30
|
|
|
Nukes don't really accomplish anything in war that conventional bombs won't unless targeting population centers, and I'm ok with candidates not wanting to kill more civilians. Even Trump mildly knows this with his "I could win the war tomorrow if I kill 10 million Afghans" bit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:33
|
|
|
The US does not have a NFU policy. The only countries that do are China and India. The USSR also had a NFU policy for about a decade or so.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:33
|
|
|
NFU seems obvious at first glance but once you start digging into the brinkmanship and deterrence calculations you quickly start to untangle why it's so complex.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:43
|
|
|
Howard Phillips posted:NFU seems obvious at first glance but once you start digging into the brinkmanship and deterrence calculations you quickly start to untangle why it's so complex. right please studiously detail why it's very important to our strategic interests to murder millions upon millions of people without a provocation in kind
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:48
|
|
|
Howard Phillips posted:NFU seems obvious at first glance but once you start digging into the brinkmanship and deterrence calculations you quickly start to untangle why it's so complex. Not really, no. "Don't be the first ones to use a nuke" sounds like an extremely straightforward position with, as far as I can tell, no downsides whatsoever.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:57
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:right please studiously detail why it's very important to our strategic interests to murder millions upon millions of people without a provocation in kind It's not that. Honoring a NFU for a superpower like the US means a couple of things. Ceding a fuckton of geopolitical power/pressure, abandoning allies that are relying on your defensive umbrella to not pursue nuclear deterrence themselves (see Japan or South Korea for example), and changing your posture and weapon development so that they accomodate said NFU. For example, getting rid of low yield warheads, tactical weapons etc. NFU though is the only way forward for humanity getting rid of nuclear weapons, eventually. If the US can deal with the fact that it is not and should not be the "worlds police", adopting a NFU policy would be extremely good for the future of this gay world.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 00:57
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:It's not that. Honoring a NFU for a superpower like the US means a couple of things. Ceding a fuckton of geopolitical power/pressure, abandoning allies that are relying on your defensive umbrella to not pursue nuclear deterrence themselves (see Japan or South Korea for example), and changing your posture and weapon development so that they accomodate said NFU. For example, getting rid of low yield warheads, tactical weapons etc. "No First Use" doctrine doesn't preclude the use of nukes if a US ally is nuked. If Russia decides to nuke, I dunno, Belgium, nuking Russia wouldn't violate No First Use. A lot of what it comes down to involves size and strength of conventional forces. Brezhnev was willing to declare a NFU policy for the Soviet Union for the same reason that the US wasn't....the size of the Warsaw Pact armies was substantially greater than that of NATO. So if it came to WWIII and a war in Europe, the Soviets were fine with relying on conventional army strength, while the US wanted an ace in the hole in case it was overwhelmed. Here's a good article by Nina Tannenwald at Brown about why it makes sense for the US to now adopt a no first use policy. https://tnsr.org/roundtable/its-time-for-a-u-s-no-first-use-nuclear-policy/
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 01:11
|
|
|
the_steve posted:‘Help! Help! Who Am I? Where Am I? Who Are You People?’ Says Biden In Embarrassing Campaign Gaffe So because this is the Onion, that means this will literally happen in the next 6 months or so
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 01:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 10:46 |
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:right please studiously detail why it's very important to our strategic interests to murder millions upon millions of people without a provocation in kind You wouldn't start a war with a country that doesn't have a nfu policy. Because they might nuke you for just losing a conventional war. MAD truly is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 01:24
|
|
