|
7c Nickel posted:He couldn't be removed from the ballot without jumping through hoops due to dumb WFP policies. He endorsed her after he lost, didn't do any campaigning for himself and only got like 5% of the vote from confused people. The people demanding he move out of the state so she could win by 70% instead of 65% were just being stupid. The claim was NYC policies, except that was for if he wanted to get off the ballot without WFP cooperation. They offered to take him off the ballot, but he pretended that offer wasn't made and just blathered about not wanting to change his address to another state (where he actually lives anyway).
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 08:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:28 |
|
|
The offer was they would change his election to some other position he didn't actually want to run for. The idea that not wanting to deal with that poo poo was a fiendish plot was and is a stupid conspiracy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 08:59
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:The offer was they would change his election to some other position he didn't actually want to run for. The idea that not wanting to deal with that poo poo was a fiendish plot was and is a stupid conspiracy. That said, that's all the defending of WFP I'm going to do today. Or ever. You're a pea-brained lunatic though, 7c Nickel, never let anybody tell you otherwise. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 09:10
|
|
|
My Claim : Joe Crowley did not feel like putting in extra effort to help improve AOC's 100% guaranteed win percentage by a few points after having lost the primary. Your Claim : Joe Crowley tried to win the general election by staying on an extremely minor party ticket, endorsing AOC, and never campaigning. Is that correct?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 09:19
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:My Claim : Joe Crowley did not feel like putting in extra effort to help improve AOC's 100% guaranteed win percentage by a few points after having lost the primary. Nah, Joe Crowley tried to make AOC's guaranteed win be by as low an amount as possible so that all the headlines could point to it and go "see this radicalism only wins by a small amount if in far left new york, this is why we can only ever run basically republicans in every other district."
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 09:52
|
|
|
Wouldn't step one of trying to sabotage her numbers being doing literally anything besides conceding, endorsing, and not campaigning? I mean I guess your response would be that he couldn't do anything too obvious, but then I have to ask how you could even tell he was trying to sabotage it in the first place?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 10:06
|
|
|
Why are the MSNBC darlings not showing up to MSNBC's climate summit? I don't want to sound too tinfoil hat but this is just ripe for that kind of speculation. There's been a lot of pressure thankfully coming from the left about corporate media bias recently so my pet theory is some of the centrism brigade are scared of being seen as getting favored by whomever is going to be moderating at the event.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 10:33
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:Wouldn't step one of trying to sabotage her numbers being doing literally anything besides conceding, endorsing, and not campaigning? I mean I guess your response would be that he couldn't do anything too obvious, but then I have to ask how you could even tell he was trying to sabotage it in the first place? I don't think it was a coherent plan, really. Crowley was supposedly being groomed as Pelosi's successor and he got stomped and made irrelevant overnight. It was somewhere between a tantrum and a half-hearted attempt at a spoiler run before realising no one cared.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 10:38
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:He couldn't be removed from the ballot without jumping through hoops due to dumb WFP policies. He endorsed her after he lost, didn't do any campaigning for himself and only got like 5% of the vote from confused people. The people demanding he move out of the state so she could win by 70% instead of 65% were just being stupid. He could have run for, like, sheriff, to get his name off the ballot. He didn't have to move. Or run as an independent. But, yah know, spite is a powerful motivator.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 12:02
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:He couldn't be removed from the ballot without jumping through hoops due to dumb WFP policies. He endorsed her after he lost, didn't do any campaigning for himself and only got like 5% of the vote from confused people. The people demanding he move out of the state so she could win by 70% instead of 65% were just being stupid. Nah this is all a lie. Cynthia Nixon got herself removed from the WFP ballot no problem when she lost the primary. He was, at best, being a petty dickhole sore loser. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 12:48 on Sep 17, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 12:29
|
|
|
Pointing to the fact that he didn't do anything after AOC called his wretched rear end out as proof that he was never going to do anything is some silly poo poo. Crowley was a huge loving scumbag and deserving of absolutely 0 benefit of a doubt.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 13:10
|
|
|
Speaking of the Crowley/AOC race, did everyone see that Netflix documentary? (Bring Down the House? Knock Down the House? something like that). I remember after AOC's primary win hearing about how Crowley wouldn't even show up to debate her and would send a surrogate, but I had never SEEN the actual sham of a debate. It was cringe as fuuuuuuuuuck. I actually felt bad for the councilwoman who he sent in his place. She had no idea what she was talking about and AOC ran circles around her.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 14:15
|
|
|
Biscats n Gravy posted:Why are the MSNBC darlings not showing up to MSNBC's climate summit? I don't want to sound too tinfoil hat but this is just ripe for that kind of speculation. There's been a lot of pressure thankfully coming from the left about corporate media bias recently so my pet theory is some of the centrism brigade are scared of being seen as getting favored by whomever is going to be moderating at the event. I think it's more about isolating and minimizing Bernie. The new marching orders seem to be to pretend that Bernie doesn't exist and make sure not to highlight anything that might help him. If someone brings up a Bernie policy, call it a Warren policy and move on. Don't call on him at debates. Bernie's going to a climate summit to talk about one of his key issues? Oh well we have other places to be so all you get for your event is Bernie and two also-rans desperate to gain any traction in the polls.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 14:35
|
|
|
Wicked Them Beats posted:I think it's more about isolating and minimizing Bernie. The new marching orders seem to be to pretend that Bernie doesn't exist and make sure not to highlight anything that might help him. If someone brings up a Bernie policy, call it a Warren policy and move on. Don't call on him at debates. Bernie's going to a climate summit to talk about one of his key issues? Oh well we have other places to be so all you get for your event is Bernie and two also-rans desperate to gain any traction in the polls. My favorite example of this is the interview with the WFP dude over the Warren endorsement who lists off Bernie's policies as why they chose Warren as if they were hers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 14:44
|
|
|
Biscats n Gravy posted:Why are the MSNBC darlings not showing up to MSNBC's climate summit? I don't want to sound too tinfoil hat but this is just ripe for that kind of speculation. There's been a lot of pressure thankfully coming from the left about corporate media bias recently so my pet theory is some of the centrism brigade are scared of being seen as getting favored by whomever is going to be moderating at the event. Part of it is that the candidates aren't placing that much priority on climate. Let's not forget that Harris was going to skip the first climate forum too, until she saw the backlash. Now that they've attended one climate forum and released their climate policies, they feel like they've spent enough attention on climate, so now they're spending their time on other priorities. Harris and Warren will be holding campaign events in Iowa both days, for example, while Beto will be touring prisons and poor neighborhoods in LA. Klobuchar will be making campaign appearances in the Midwest, and Biden is going to be at a $1000-per-seat fundraising dinner in Chicago. The other part of it was that CNN's climate forum was a total mess that barely anyone liked. The format was terrible, the times were terrible, the moderators were terrible, and so on. As a result, the ratings were terrible and it drew few viewers even though several candidates had drawn attention to it by dropping their climate plans on the day of the forum. So viewership expectations are low for the MSNBC forum, and looking at their format, I wouldn't be surprised if it's actually worse. It's the same one-candidate-at-a-time format, except this time each candidate gets an entire hour. Also, unlike the CNN forum, it's open to any candidate who wants to participate, so all the nobodies who don't even make the debate cuts anymore will be there. Michael Bennet, John Delaney, Tim Ryan, Steve Bullock, Marianne Williamson, and even Republican candidate Bill Weld are all participating, and each and every one of them gets a full hour on stage. If you're wondering how they plan to fit this two-day event into TV scheduling, the answer is that they won't be: MSNBC will air snippets and pieces of it during their afternoon shows, but anyone who wants to see the whole things will have to watch a special livestream.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 14:56
|
|
|
Undecided rockets to first place in New York and I think this is Kamala's lowest showing ever in a statewide poll https://twitter.com/djjohnso/status/1173940651366502401 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 15:14
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/hamiltonnolan/status/1173962982910509056quote:NEW YORK—In April of 2016, I went to a huge Bernie Sanders speech in Washington Square park, which spilled out into the surrounding streets around NYU. Last night, I went to a (not quite as huge, but still big) speech by Elizabeth Warren, in the same park, under the same noble white arch. What’s the difference?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 15:26
|
|
|
Are we supposed to ignore that Warren has already promised to welcome big money after the optics of doing so during the primary are no longer a factor. To say nothing of the endless amount of slack the author seems willing to afford Warren that she hasn't earned. He also is an idiot who doesn't understand why Bernie being the movement candidate is actually important. This endless puffery for Warren is getting exhausting. Oh Snapple! fucked around with this message at 15:41 on Sep 17, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 15:39
|
|
|
eke out posted:Eat the rich in 2020. Don’t worry too much about which fork you use. except one of the forks has fused tines and is loving useless
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
I know you're unapologetically Warren and all that but stating your case with something stronger than hollow rhetoric for a woman that has already taken money and exchanged power with the rich she's supposed to eat might help your case. Real nice photo capture though, she really showed off her Obama pablum that night.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 15:47
|
|
|
it's weird seeing nolan of all people turn into one of those "they're the same!" folks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 15:48
|
|
|
It's great because when she doesn't do any of that these same people who said "she'll crush the rich just like Bernie why do you caaaaaarrrrrre which one is doing it" will say " she told you she was going to take their money, of course she has to keep their favor to get money for next time. You should have cared in the primary, nobody tricked you stop being a baby."
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 15:50
|
|
|
It's also amusing that he started off with quote:Warren had come to roll out her plan to end government corruption which is so insanely stupid to proffer as your first and foremost commitment as president, especially when you've made it clear you won't do anything meaningful about the judiciary that would act as the premier bulwark against most of what she's proposed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 15:51
|
|
|
Biscats n Gravy posted:Why are the MSNBC darlings not showing up to MSNBC's climate summit? I don't want to sound too tinfoil hat but this is just ripe for that kind of speculation. There's been a lot of pressure thankfully coming from the left about corporate media bias recently so my pet theory is some of the centrism brigade are scared of being seen as getting favored by whomever is going to be moderating at the event. In addition to what Main Painframe said, most of those MSNBC darlings actually don't want anything to do with talking about climate change. Remember that Biden fought to get the DNC to nix a climate change debate. They don't want to have to answer questions about why their plan is dogshit and they don't want to put forward a non-dogshit plan because they're afraid of not getting the totally reasonable Republican who is seriously not voting for Donny vote.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 15:53
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:especially when you've made it clear you won't do anything meaningful about the judiciary that would act as the premier bulwark against most of what she's proposed. fyi warren supports court packing, maybe you're thinking of Bernie, who does not?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 15:56
|
|
|
Corsair Pool Boy posted:Well that's strange, tonight MSNBC listed Bernie as not calling for impeachment. Just an oversight I'm sure. Last I saw Bernie tweeted for "all constitutional means" or something else cagey that didn't use the word impeach.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 15:57
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:especially when you've made it clear you won't do anything meaningful about the judiciary that would act as the premier bulwark against most of what she's proposed. ???? There are a lot of things to criticize Warren on but her judiciary, finance, and corruption reform plan are about on par with Bernies in terms of aggression. It's social programs and GND where she's worse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:00
|
|
|
eke out posted:fyi warren supports court packing, maybe you're thinking of Bernie, who does not? For your information Warren has never said she supports court packing beyond some vague support of the idea, and her last word on this subject was finding ways to work around the court. But yeah no it's not like you can actually defend your own candidate, loop around to Bernie Sanders again, or complain about the ~bros~ since that's really more your field of expertise.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:01
|
|
|
overmind2000 posted:Undecided rockets to first place in New York and I think this is Kamala's lowest showing ever in a statewide poll Biden is still going to win and we're all going to die.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:03
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Biden is still going to win and we're all going to die. Nono, Biden is going to die and we're all going to win.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:03
|
|
|
https://dmlnews.com/video-biden-brags-about-his-time-in-the-hood/ Sometimes Biden's campaign seems like a parody.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:07
|
|
|
i legitimately cannot grasp supporting warren over sanders. i can't grasp supporting the others either but i know those supporters are either stupid, uninformed, or monsters. warren supporters have their hearts in the right place most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:08
|
|
|
Bernie needs a way to lure in the undecided. These are the moderates who don't want far left policies, but don't like Biden. His best bet, without sacrificing his values, is probably to appeal to their greed. Yangs continued existence has proven this. I wonder what would happen if, after Yang has dropped out, Bernie starts pushing the UBI.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:10
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:i legitimately cannot grasp supporting warren over sanders. i can't grasp supporting the others either but i know those supporters are either stupid, uninformed, or monsters. warren supporters have their hearts in the right place most of the time. If Warren was several steps closer to Bernie I'd probably be there. Bernie is worryingly old and has a couple of painfully dumb plans, like the rotating supreme court.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:i legitimately cannot grasp supporting warren over sanders. i can't grasp supporting the others either but i know those supporters are either stupid, uninformed, or monsters. warren supporters have their hearts in the right place most of the time. Some people see support for Palestinian genocide and recoil, others see it then pretend they didn't.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
Gyges posted:In addition to what Main Painframe said, most of those MSNBC darlings actually don't want anything to do with talking about climate change. Remember that Biden fought to get the DNC to nix a climate change debate. They don't want to have to answer questions about why their plan is dogshit and they don't want to put forward a non-dogshit plan because they're afraid of not getting the totally reasonable Republican who is seriously not voting for Donny vote. The reason Biden doesn't want to talk about climate change is that he is taking oil money, plain and simple.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:12
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:Some people see support for Palestinian genocide and recoil, others see it then pretend they didn't. Bernie is only a little better in this regard. His entire statement on it is pretty mealy-mouthed. I wouldn't hold it up as a strength.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:15
|
|
|
If our movement was going to be destroyed by not-quite-the-right person becoming President then it wasn't going to succeed in the first place. This poo poo is bigger than Bernie. Get your family, friends, coworkers onto the GND. Get them for a living wage, for rent controls and death to landlords, for abolishing billionaires, for crushing car culture, for ending Christian hegemony, for ending white supremacism. Get them for local and state office, get them for unionization, get them to engage and participate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:15
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:Bernie is only a little better in this regard. His entire statement on it is pretty mealy-mouthed. I wouldn't hold it up as a strength. sadly we'll probably never get a candidate who's right on israel but warren's take was super bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:28 |
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:Bernie is only a little better in this regard. His entire statement on it is pretty mealy-mouthed. I wouldn't hold it up as a strength. My opinion is that Bernie being the best we've got on the matter is an incredible indictment of the party. The fact that he is monumentally better in comparison is depressing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 16:18
|
|