|
I do think Bernie should pick a woman and/or a POC for VP if they're ideologically in line with him and otherwise bring something to the ticket. Also because it will be funny watching centrists twist logic to explain how he's a racist and sexist for doing it. https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1179533413717401600?s=19  If taking out Pete is the only thing Beto accomplishes with his vanity run, I'll salute him for it.
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 14:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 11:23 |
|
|
Luckyellow posted:Which is why I maintain that Rashida Tlaib is the best choice for VP. She could help bring in the Midwest states. VPs don't "bring in" anything. It's a generally meaningless choice that can maybe hurt you but can never really help you. And going back to Warren I keep seeing people giving her the benefit of the doubt, and people doing that is going to get us Obama 2.0. She's already publicly stated that she opposes national rent control and as recently as a couple weeks ago openly lied and said that Bernie's M4A bill is a framework lacking in detail. She's running to the center but she's doing it slow enough that your dumb lizard brains aren't recognizing it as movement.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 14:35
|
|
|
Wicked Them Beats posted:VPs don't "bring in" anything. It's a generally meaningless choice that can maybe hurt you but can never really help you. LBJ is probably why Kennedy won Texas.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 14:42
|
|
|
Son of Thunderbeast posted:It doesn't, but something about Nina Turner seems to make lib brains short circuit, because the only response they have is "well I haven't heard of her and neither has anyone else Yes, let’s make the lib brains short circuit; the Democratic nominee for president surely doesn’t need any votes from liberals.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 14:56
|
|
"
|
Epicurius posted:LBJ is probably why Kennedy won Texas. That's more because he knew how to cheat like crazy than any actual Texans appeal to Texans cache.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 14:57
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:LBJ is probably why Kennedy won Texas. Well if Tlaib is willing to stuff ballot boxes for Bernie then she might actually swing some Midwestern states. Mellow Seas posted:Yes, let’s make the lib brains short circuit; the Democratic nominee for president surely doesn’t need any votes from liberals. You can safely write off the Donut Twitter set. No one needs them; they just think they're important because people give them lots of money to be wrong repeatedly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 14:58
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Yes, let’s make the lib brains short circuit; the Democratic nominee for president surely doesn’t need any votes from liberals. So you're saying we can't run a woman of colour because liberals are too racist to vote for her?
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 15:00
|
|
|
Zerilan posted:She's fine with US imperialism, with allowing Israel to bomb Palestinian schools. She was a Republican until she was 47, through the Reagan and HW years, and states that "the party left her" rather than that she made her own poo poo leftward. She's against national rent control, doesn't agree with Bernie's idea of nationalizing utilities as a climate change measure, has waffled on M4A. Given where the Overton window is in America, and given that a huge majority of the country is to her right: yes, she sure as hell is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 15:01
|
|
|
On my phone so pretend I posted that pic of Liz clapping her lovely little head off at Trump saying socialism will never happen while Bernie grouses at the orange turd directly in front of her. She is not the left.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 15:09
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Yes, let’s make the lib brains short circuit; the Democratic nominee for president surely doesn’t need any votes from liberals. I can say with 100% confidence that we don't need the votes of anyone who would not vote for Bernie because Nina Turner was on the ticket.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 15:13
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/gin_and_tacos/status/1179762218050707462?s=20 Oh gently caress politics is gonna get even dumber Son of Thunderbeast posted:It doesn't, but something about Nina Turner seems to make lib brains short circuit, because the only response they have is "well I haven't heard of her and neither has anyone else American liberals -hate- leftists of color with a burning passion. e: Mellow Seas posted:Yes, let’s make the lib brains short circuit; the Democratic nominee for president surely doesn’t need any votes from liberals. You say that, but do you remember the astoundingly racist rich white PUMA set who overwhelmingly voted for McCain over Obama after he STOLE the primary from Clinton back in 08? Obama's 08 numbers were a loving blowout and he even got about 6 million more voters in 08 than Hilldawg did in 2016. I wouldn't worry too much about the country club crew getting mad because of black leftists. Marxalot fucked around with this message at 15:25 on Oct 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 15:20
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Yes, let’s make the lib brains short circuit; the Democratic nominee for president surely doesn’t need any votes from liberals. If there's one demo that the Dems actually don't need to win a Presidential election it's upper middle class coastal liberals, hth.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Ok, so let's assume Turner is great: isn't there someone also great with a little more national recognition? I literally had only heard about her here on SA and even then only in passing to the point until this tangent I thought y'all were making a joke about some pundit. I have a great idea for someone with more name recognition - hear me out: Nina Turner, after having been named Sanders VP pick. Boom! No one has more name recognition than that, fuckers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 15:38
|
|
|
Trump is going to attack the Democratic nominee for being socialist no matter who wins. The difference is, Warren will be defensive and screaming no she isn't, while Bernard will be screaming yes he is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 15:51
|
|
|
How are u posted:I have nothing against Nina Turner, whoever she is. I just find it really amusing that SA Bernie fellows so thoroughly convinced that this person I've literally never heard of in politics is should be Bernie's ironclad choice lol. Is she "a thing" in the wider Bernie twitter world or something? Because their is a non 0 chance Bernie’s health won’t allow him to be president for 8 years and we would like a VP with his vision for the future and the tenacity to fight for it rather than a popular politician than can deliver x amount of supporters in x state.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 15:57
|
|
|
Here’s Yang effectively burying Beto https://twitter.com/majorityfm/status/1179767905149493255?s=21
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 15:57
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Yes, let’s make the lib brains short circuit; the Democratic nominee for president surely doesn’t need any votes from liberals. Well their whole mantra is "vote blue no matter who" anyway so why should we even care what they think beyond laughing at lovely takes.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 16:06
|
|
|
elizabeth warren is in many ways worse than trump, because at least trump has a history of listening to important anti-imperialist dissident voices, such as tucker carlson, on isues of foreign policy
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 16:16
|
|
|
The weird butt/beto/andy knee-diving trifecta is something to behold.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 16:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ryanlcooper/status/1179779483697582081
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 16:29
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:The issue is that it's not just about what you believe, but also what you're willing to accept. I believe that Warren would quickly acquiesce in situations where Sanders wouldn't, and that Sanders would at least continue to be a loud and vocal advocate even for ideas that couldn't yet pass Congress (which would at least make them more viable in the future through shifting public opinion). I believe that this assumption is supported by the candidates' respective histories, with Warren in particular never showing much of a commitment outside of maybe the topic of financial regulation. By this definition Bernie is a liberal since he was willing to accept Clinton by endorsing her, and there’s no reason to think he won’t endorse Warren in the end. Or even Biden if that’s how it turns out. yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Oct 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 16:40
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:I will love this thread when Bernie or Warren win and they choose the other as VP though. That won't happen for a number of reasons, first being which ever one is picked they'll need a younger running mate because 148 combined age isn't a good idea on a single ticket. The other issue is that either one of them will need the other as an ally in the Senate and while Warren may not be as good on things as Sanders is she's the one who is closest. Now it probably won't happen but it would be amazing and would go a long way towards calming doubts of the Left if Warren picked Nina as a running mate plus it would probably cause a few spontaneous heart attacks on Wallstreet. cargo cult posted:elizabeth warren is in many ways worse than trump, because at least trump has a history of listening to important anti-imperialist dissident voices, such as tucker carlson, on isues of foreign policy I honestly can't tell if this is sarcasm.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 16:46
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:By this definition Bernie is a liberal since he was willing to accept Clinton by endorsing her, and there’s no reason to think he won’t endorse Warren in the end. Or even Biden if that’s how it turns out. Bernie is a liberal but not because of that lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 16:47
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:I will love this thread when Bernie or Warren win and they choose the other as VP though.  this obviously won't happen
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 16:47
|
|
|
cargo cult posted:elizabeth warren is in many ways worse than trump, because at least trump has a history of listening to important anti-imperialist dissident voices, such as tucker carlson, on isues of foreign policy
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I’m not sure what people have against Gillum. Single payer was the leading message of his gubernatorial campaign. If you're the kind of person who doesn't subscribe to any political podcasts and keeps politics to the papers, you probably didn't know who Tim Kaine or Sarah Palin were either, because most people can't rattle off a list of the country's governors and senators from memory. Hell, I'm Extremely Online and I couldn't tell you off the top of my head who the current governors of most states are. I agree that very few people know who Nina Turner is...but most people don't know who most vice-presidential candidates are when they're first named. Name recognition isn't really a problem for VP candidates, though, since they're on a general election presidential ticket. As Palin demonstrated, people will find out pretty quickly what the VP candidate stands for (at least if they're anything more than an empty suit). So name recognition isn't really that much of a concern. And as Palin also showed us, picking a VP who appeals to a different faction of the party is not necessarily a very good plan. It depends very much on the dynamics of the race, of the party, and of the individual candidates. McCain's base hated Palin enough to offset their love for McCain (especially since he was relatively old), and Palin's base hated McCain with the seething fury that only the far right seems to be able to muster these days. I suspect that Bernie picking a conservative Dem would likely turn out similarly poorly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 16:56
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Bernie is a liberal but not because of that lol Tell it to the guy shopping around the mega-  “leftist test” that Bernie obviously fails.I’ve always agreed he’s functionally almost identical with any D candidate in terms of end results we’re actually gonna see. yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Oct 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:02
|
|
|
Marxalot posted:https://twitter.com/gin_and_tacos/status/1179762218050707462?s=20 It's inauguration day and Bernie is being sworn in and suddenly the Curb theme starts mysteriously playing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:14
|
|
|
palin was very much an eleventh hour hail mary pick out of obscurity cause McCain kept insisting he wanted joe lieberman as his vp and his campaign being like John, he's a democrat
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:15
|
|
Wicked Them Beats posted:And going back to Warren I keep seeing people giving her the benefit of the doubt, and people doing that is going to get us Obama 2.0. She's already publicly stated that she opposes national rent control and as recently as a couple weeks ago openly lied and said that Bernie's M4A bill is a framework lacking in detail. She's running to the center but she's doing it slow enough that your dumb lizard brains aren't recognizing it as movement. It's odd how her "run to the center" has coincided with her increase in the polls. Although of course we don't know whether this is reflecting the desires of the electorate or the pollsters feeling comfortable adding +15% to her "real" results rather than +5% when she was more left-wing -- although not so much to remove % like Sanders. She's not really wrong about M4A being a framework as of now. Consumer aspect is quite clear (free everything at point of sale) but that's easy. Still lack of clarity about what will be covered, formularies, price controls, reimbursement, etc. Also funding mechanisms beyond payroll tax. May not be necessary for the presidential campaign and details can be handled if legislation was ever legitimately considered by congress.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Given where the Overton window is in America, and given that a huge majority of the country is to her right: That's not how this works, my dude. Particularly when a lot of Warren's stances are actually to the right of the Democratic Party base. Bill Clinton may have been to the left of the median voter in the 90's; he was in no way a leftist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
LinYutang posted:Because she's been a minor figure in Ohio politics. Best I can tell she hasn't won a competitive election in over a decade; she lost 60-36 the last time she went up for a major office. She's only particularly known in Bernie-supporter circles since she is an important figure in his organization. I'm pretty sure she's never won a competitive election. She was appointed to fill a state legislator post, was unopposed for reelection one time, and then got steamrolled in her only contested election (for Ohio Secretary of State). I know Nina Turner ticks all the boxes for the people posting in this thread, but there have to be other acceptable options of people who have accomplished more than she has. predicto fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Oct 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:33
|
|
|
predicto posted:I'm pretty sure she's never won a competitive election. She was appointed to fill a state legislator post, was unopposed for reelection one time, and then got steamrolled in her only contested election (for Ohio Secretary of State). Why does someone have to have accomplished more than Turner has to be a good VP candidate, exactly? And what sorts of accomplishments count, in your opinion? (I'm not calling you out, I genuinely want to know)
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:35
|
|
|
Most successful VP candidates have had no real national presence and their experience or lack thereof has been irrelevant. There are three qualities a good VP candidate should possess: 1) Not come across as stupid, crazy, unhinged, or extremely incompetent 2) Not undermine or contradict the candidates core narrative. 3) (Optional) Appeal to groups that want to see themselves represented, if possible. Remember, our recent-ish successful VP candidates have been: Quayle, Gore, Cheney, Biden, Pence The only bad VP choice has been Palin. Turner is fine, bordering on good, from a campaign strategy perspective. From a leftist, actual-role-of-the-vp perspective of "getting good things done even if Bernie dies" she is also good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:42
|
|
|
New poll from California, with the full document being here https://twitter.com/PPICNotes/status/1179614592625991680  But we all know the real question being asked here  Lol Yang is gonna overtake Pete in another month
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:44
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Why does someone have to have accomplished more than Turner has to be a good VP candidate, exactly? And what sorts of accomplishments count, in your opinion? (I'm not calling you out, I genuinely want to know) Because you need to win, and voters care about experience. Well, at least non-Trump voters care. Tim Kaine may not have been a nationally known figure, but he was a US Senator and a Governor, which provides the typical only-slightly-invested-and-not-terminally-online voter with some reassurance that he had a clue what he was doing. Gore and Biden and Pence and Quayle and Cheney and so on all did that. Why can't the left find other acceptable potential vice-presidential possibilities instead of digging in on one extremely obscure possibility and pretending that any questioning of that choice is a fascist betrayal based on racism? I genuinely fear that if Bernie chose her, she might have an Admiral Stockdale effect on his election chances.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:54
|
|
|
predicto posted:Why can't the left find other acceptable potential vice-presidential possibilities instead of digging in on one candidate and pretending that any questioning of that choice is a fascist betrayal based on racism? Because the left as it exists is a nascent movement that was completely shut out of power (among other, worse things) for decades until Bernie ran in 2016?
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:55
|
|
|
overmind2000 posted:New poll from California, with the full document being here That is downright embarrassing for Kamala Harris. So sad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:57
|
|
|
predicto posted:That is downright embarrassing for Kamala Harris. So sad. Pretty much a catch-all for any news on her for the last two months or so.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 11:23 |
|
|
predicto posted:Because you need to win, and voters care about experience. Well, at least non-Trump voters care. Tim Kaine may not have been a nationally known figure, but he was a US Senator and a Governor, which provides the typical only-slightly-invested-and-not-terminally-online voter with some reassurance that he had a clue what he was doing. Gore and Biden and Pence and Quayle and Cheney and so on all did that. Why can't the right accept that maybe people want a -different- senator (Nina Turner was a senator too) and not their preferred pick of someone who can't be credibly relied on to fight for issues of social or economic justice? Maybe people just want to see a little bit of change in this increasingly backwards and right wing country? We've already tried electing politicians that actively work against the interests of the American people for the past several decades. Look where we're at now. e: OAquinas posted:Pretty much a catch-all for any news on her for the last two months or so. It's looking even worse for poor Beto https://twitter.com/Zach_Graumann/status/1179611906912313344?s=20
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2019 18:02
|
|