|
Oh Snapple! posted:Ultimately? It's not for voters, it's for narrative building. Thus the director making multiple CNN appearance to endorse Warren's leadership as evinced by loving selfie lines.
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 22:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:29 |
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:Ultimately? It's not for voters, it's for narrative building. Yeah, it's so that pundits and the like can go around saying that Warren is actually the real leftist and that Bernie clearly can't recover from this. Also this poo poo is a very revealing microcosm of how things actually work when the libs are in charge, in case somebody hadn't already noticed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 22:18
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:Ultimately? It's not for voters, it's for narrative building.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
It makes no sense to keep the numbers secret unless management overrode the workers. If it's a legit vote for warren why not release the numbers showing warren has real working support?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 22:29
|
|
|
They’ve already put the worst-case scenario in people’s heads, so at this point why not just release the numbers? I bet they will, if pressure keeps up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 22:33
|
|
|
If they still don't release the numbers you know it's because the entire leadership voted in lockstep for Warren.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 22:38
|
|
|
every other developed nation on earth has universal healthcare and it's a joke we have ONE candidate agitating for it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:There's really no point in arguing with someone so clearly either ignorant or operating in bad faith as you The non-snarky point is that Bernie is not actually interchangeable with these movements and it would be really bad for progressive politics to be that heavily tied to him or any individual politician’s fortunes. The politicians will reflect the movements, not the other way around.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
Majorian posted:That's a weird characterization, given that people have repeatedly explained to you how Bernie would at least have a chance of getting his policies enacted. It's almost as if you're ignoring them purposefully and deliberately. The recent posts on this topic has been that Bernie will either steal funding like Trump’s wall gimmick, which ignores that shifting around a few billion is literally a thousand times easier than a few trillion and that SCOTUS will still be around in 2021. And then there was the claim about “normalizing” the “conversation” that was so weak-sounding it could come from a Clinton campaign staffer. In 2008.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
So no matter who is elected, nothing will be done in time to stop the climate crisis?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 22:50
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:So no matter who is elected, nothing will be done in time to stop the climate crisis? No, but what happens with implemented US policies two years from now will depend 95% on the party in power instead of individual candidates and will on its own not be nearly enough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 22:59
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:No, but what happens with implemented US policies two years from now will depend 95% on the party in power instead of individual candidates and will on its own not be nearly enough. So the President has zero influence in their own party when it's in power?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:04
|
|
|
Salean posted:It makes no sense to keep the numbers secret unless management overrode the workers. If it's a legit vote for warren why not release the numbers showing warren has real working support? Membership weren't the only people voting. They might have an embarrassing number of online votes from potentially dubious email addresses drowning out their actual membership or swinging the total.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:05
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:If they still don't release the numbers you know it's because the entire leadership voted in lockstep for Warren. If they don't release the numbers that should be mocked openly until no one even cares what they endorse ever again. A secrete vote tally is so incredibly hosed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:07
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:So the President has zero influence in their own party when it's in power? What climate policy will Congress pass under Bernie and no other candidate?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:10
|
|
|
eviltastic posted:Membership weren't the only people voting. They might have an embarrassing number of online votes from potentially dubious email addresses drowning out their actual membership or swinging the total. Didn't the rules say you have to be a dues-paying member or someone who actually volunteered.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:10
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:What climate policy will Congress pass under Bernie and no other candidate? Every other candidate's policy is less ambitious so by definition Bernie's policy will not pass under any other candidate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:12
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Didn't the rules say you have to be a dues-paying member or someone who actually volunteered. per wfp2020.org: quote:Here’s how the vote will work: I am not sure what "previously engaged with us" means, and parsed the bit about affirming their values being enough to make the cut.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:12
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Every other candidate's policy is less ambitious so by definition Bernie's policy will not pass under any other candidate. Congress can actually pass things on its own you know, but you’re right. Bernie 2020 “I alone can fix it.” yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Sep 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:14
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:What climate policy will Congress pass under Bernie and no other candidate? Considerably more, if Bernie brings a lot of Dems into Congress on his coattails. That's more likely to happen with a movement candidate than with a "Oh gee, I'm basically just gonna do what the Clintons did in the 90's" candidate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:19
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Considerably more, if Bernie brings a lot of Dems into Congress on his coattails. That's more likely to happen with a movement candidate than with a "Oh gee, I'm basically just gonna do what the Clintons did in the 90's" candidate. Where will these candidates on his coattails come from? The last coattails candidate was Oba — I mean he who shall not be named in D&D.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:23
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/reidepstein/status/1174808543586701312
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:30
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/danielalapidous/status/1174771957620981760Main Paineframe posted:Buttigieg just released his healthcare plan. I’m glad we’re at the point (at least, before the general) where Pete is getting poo poo for his terrible policies and being self-serving and not being queer NO YOU FOOL STOP SAYING THAT
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:31
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Where will these candidates on his coattails come from? Same place they came from with Obama: through creating a movement that's really popular, and activates young voters. The trick is to not disband that movement the instant you get elected, of course! quote:The last coattails candidate was Oba — I mean he who shall not be named in D&D. Mmmm indeed, there are no Obama fans in D&D, and you're definitely not allowed to mention his name here. That is a non-idiotic thing to believe. mediaphage posted:NO YOU FOOL STOP SAYING THAT Sssssh!!! Let her do it! At this rate someone will make a "Fight Song" video for her. Majorian fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Sep 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:32
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:No, but what happens with implemented US policies two years from now will depend 95% on the party in power instead of individual candidates and will on its own not be nearly enough. Ir candidate policies make no different, i guess we should all endorse Bernie, since he is the one who excites usual non voters the most. eviltastic posted:Membership weren't the only people voting. They might have an embarrassing number of online votes from potentially dubious email addresses drowning out their actual membership or swinging the total. What a load of bullshit. Overall results were 61 to 35. If there's a split, it wasn't a close split. And so your argument is that they may have been defrauded to such an extent to create this large split, and instead of addressing it directly or pointing out that they were the victims, they decided to obfucate first and then attack people next, all for what?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Same place they came from with Obama: through creating a movement that's really popular, and activates young voters. Seems to me that fresh Dem reps voted with Obama when their districts aligned and buckled when their districts weren’t that blue, so, pretty much like every administration. And I guess I just missed all the D&D Obama love in 2019, idk.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:38
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:And I guess I just missed all the D&D Obama love in 2019, idk. you'd get a lot of poo poo saying negative (but true) things about obama - it's why uspol was split into two threads for awhile.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Seems to me that fresh Dem reps voted with Obama when their districts aligned and buckled when their districts weren’t that blue, so, pretty much like every administration. Good thing Bernie's agenda is so popular in districts across the country then. quote:And I guess I just missed all the D&D Obama love in 2019, idk. Which, in your mind, is the same thing as not being allowed to even say his name here. Got it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:47
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Congress can actually pass things on its own you know, but you’re right. So an electoral mandate for the Green New Deal by electing a President that supports it will have no effect on who subsequently gets elected to Congress? So if Congress is more progressive than the President that doesn't matter? It's not like, say, that has ever derailed a major initiative before .
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:48
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:On a quick skim I don't think I hate it, but Medicaid For All* is better and simpler and you're correct that simplicity is itself an administrative virtue. Is this, like, an unpopular opinion or something? Medicare is not actually that great while Medicaid is really, really good. Medicare can potentially be monstrously expensive and the way it's set up funnels people into cheaper (private) Medicare Advantage plans that have all the massive headaches associated with any other private plan. The only issue I see with Medicaid for All branding is that Medicaid is associated with poor people and also Americans might try to take it away if they understood that really poor people have better health coverage than most employer sponsored plans offer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:51
|
|
|
If you really believe Bernie has anywhere near the votes for his plan, that’s fine. Most people don’t think that though so we’re not going to catastrophize over that particular point.Majorian posted:Which, in your mind, is the same thing as not being allowed to even say his name here. Got it. “Your obvious joke was not literally true. Checkmate, libs.” 
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ryanobles/status/1174808217966260231 Looks like Biden has the "billionaire casino magnate" demo locked up
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:55
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Your obvious joke was not literally true. Checkmate, libs.” I mean, when you're arguing that you're somehow a poor oppressed martyr for liking Obama on D&D... DaveWoo posted:https://twitter.com/ryanobles/status/1174808217966260231 Reminds me of this delightful totally-non-oligarch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwHK7rDKiIw&t=134s
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:55
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Is this, like, an unpopular opinion or something? Medicare is not actually that great while Medicaid is really, really good. Medicare can potentially be monstrously expensive and the way it's set up funnels people into cheaper (private) Medicare Advantage plans that have all the massive headaches associated with any other private plan. medicare is broadly popular because even the lowest of low info voters understand that it keeps their parents / grandparents from dying in the street medicaid is, yes, associated with the poor and so therefore shameful to an infuriatingly large proportion of the population I think branding Medicaid For All as Medicare For All is probably correct, and also it vexes me
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:56
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:If you really believe Bernie has anywhere near the votes for his plan, that’s fine. Most people don’t think that though so we’re not going to catastrophize over that particular point. So it doesn't matter who gets elected president because we won't meaningfully address climate change no matter what?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:medicare is broadly popular because even the lowest of low info voters understand that it keeps their parents / grandparents from dying in the street Yeah, as long as the people writing the legislation understand that it should be more like Medicaid and less like Medicare, it's all good imo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:So an electoral mandate for the Green New Deal by electing a President that supports it will have no effect on who subsequently gets elected to Congress? Do you mean president Bernie leads to a bunch of AOCs getting elected in 2022? That’s not really how midterms work, buddy. quote:So if Congress is more progressive than the President that doesn't matter? It's not like, say, that has ever derailed a major initiative before . Climate is a huge issue not because of Bernie but because of the movement. No Democratic President will be able to resist the movement if it gets a plan through Congress. And frankly, even in the best case scenario, Congress won’t end up left of Pete or Harris, let alone Warren. Where this thread often goes wrong is claims like “Bernie singlehandedly put MFA/climate/inequality on the map”. Bullshit he did. The message was always out there, the audience (voters, especially younger voters) is just more receptive. Bernie himself is just fortunate to be a little younger than Mike Gravel. yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Sep 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2019 00:06
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Do you mean president Bernie leads to a bunch of AOCs getting elected in 2022? That’s not really how midterms work, buddy. OK so no matter who the president is, we won't do anything meaningful to address climate change?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2019 00:07
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/igorbobic/status/1174809707774693376
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2019 00:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:29 |
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:medicare is broadly popular because even the lowest of low info voters understand that it keeps their parents / grandparents from dying in the street Bernie: Medicare For All Butt: Medicare For All Who Want it GJB: Medicare For All But Technically It's More Like Medicaid
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2019 00:11
|
|
