|
Biden wasn't really DOA after New Hampshire anyway. He unexpectedly came in second in Nevada, which did a lot of damage to Pete. At the time we were roundly mocking the BIDEN'S COMEBACK BEGAN HERE punditry, but in retrospect I think that 2nd Place was almost as important as the South Carolina blowout because it showed that Pete's successes in the first two primaries were nothing but shadow-puppetry. He not only could be beaten by Biden among centrist voters, his youth and LGBTQ status did absolutely nothing to blunt Bernie's coalition. Those two facts meant Pete had no way of building momentum going into Carolina and possibly eating into Biden's support there, which meant he had no chance of Forming The Head of Centrist Voltron like he clearly wanted.
|
![]() |
|
![]()
|
# ? Jun 10, 2024 08:04 |
|
drunkenmonkeystyle posted:https://twitter.com/Davis_Hammet/status/1247982327835299841?s=20 Welp never mind guys, go out and touch everyone. Cross posted from the Kansas / Missouri thread. GOP is a death cult.
|
![]() |
|
Yuzenn posted:I thought you were railing on postin in good faith here, my man..... The quote I was replying to said "There is at least a chance that Biden will do things advantageous to the causes." Verbatim. What exactly is bad faith about my saying "There is at least a chance that our candidate will be okay." Please tell me what is "bad faith" about that. Maybe it sounds antagonistic. That's fine, that's what I'm trying to do because it's a poo poo view. If you feel that is too inflammatory, then here: quote:There is at least a chance that CANDIDATE will do things advantageous to the causes. That is not convincing at all and is dogshit argumentation. Let's try it a different way: quote:There is at least a chance that Trump will do things advantageous to the causes. quote:There is at least a chance that David Duke will do things advantageous to the causes. quote:There is at least a chance that Ted Bundy will do things advantageous to the causes. I don't care about "at least a chance." That's not motivating at all. If you feel I'm being unfair please replace the above with "Cory Booker" or "Pete Buttigieg." Doesn't matter. "At least there's a chance" is a bullshit sell. Paracaidas posted:You had asked for positive reasons to vote for Biden that weren't "Trump Bad". I quickly threw together a list of Biden platform elements that were improvements on the status quo and that could be accomplished even with a GOP Congress. For posterity, here is the link to your post: I may be wrong, but I haven't seen Biden speak on these things. If Biden has, please educate me. On top of that I'll have to also believe Biden will institute the changes, but that's not on you, it's on Biden. Paracaidas posted:an NLRB and DoL that aggressively takes action against wage theft and IC misclassification (potentially even bringing back the Perez exemption-classification changes, which were briefly the biggest win for wage employees in decades) , withhold federal contracts from any company that won't commit to not run anti-union campaigns and who doesn't have $15/hr min wage. What has Biden done to signal changes to any of this? What has Biden done to try to raise min. wage to $15+/hr? Paracaidas posted:Additionally, refunding and prioritizing OCR at Justice, continuing the creation and enforcement of consent decrees against local police departments. Creating a review process(outside of Justice!) on federal prosecutorial discretion. What has Biden done to signal changes to any of this? Paracaidas posted:Weed decrim and expunging of past convictions. Seems like he's pushing for decriminalization but really it should just be legal. I haven't seen anything, including on his official page, about expunging past convictions. I could be wrong. Paracaidas posted:Reversing Trump's rescission of the order ending federal use of private prisons. Changing grant rules to require states to end the incarceration of minors for "crimes" that would be legal but for their age ("status offenses"). Using executive orders to remove/reduce restrictions on access to resources, support, and employment based on past criminal histories. Maybe he'll do this. IDK. That would be good if he did. He hasn't made me confident that he will but it's at least a bullet point on his campaign's page. Paracaidas posted:This list is not exhaustive (literally, only two platform planks). Pointedly, it's mostly things that Biden will be able to do through executive powers alone, even if the GOP retains the Senate or regains the House. Sure that is something Biden could do but as a candidate he hasn't convinced me that he will. Again, this isn't on your, but with Biden's record I'm not confident as a voter that he will. Really, the point is that I shouldn't have to settle for one republican over an other. The Sean fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Apr 8, 2020 |
![]() |
|
Trabisnikof posted:People use the DNC when they often mean "the democratic establishment" like for example, Obama calling all the candidates who dropped out right before they dropped out. That wasn't the DNC technically but we know that Obama and Perez are on the same side of internal party politics as well. say what you like about the guy, he does a good job of holding onto his personal power. pity about the consequences for the rest of us. man, remember that time he launched an islamophobic campaign against Keith Ellison? feels like a million years ago
|
![]() |
|
Lemming posted:Yeah, and the fact that Bernie didn't get a similar boost despite crushing Nevada is part of the exact point I'm making, because the media had an interest in boosting any non-Bernie candidate, they didn't give him similar air time and positive coverage. Thank you for concisely making my argument for me! he did get a huge boost in national polls. South Carolina was just his worst early state by a huge margin. In an alternate reality where South Carolina is part of super Tuesday, we'd be talking about how Biden just suspended his race to presumptive nominee Sanders The primary system we have is hosed up and results in candidates being selected in ways that don't represent their popularity in the party at large, almost at random. You could probably construct an order of states where any of the major candidates get a massive boost going into super tuesday and run away with it the way Biden did My point isn't that the establishment Dems didn't want Biden--clearly, they did--it's that you can't call Biden's post-SC polls fake without also accepting that Bernie was never really as popular as he looked after Nevada, either. The national polls before voting started and frontrunners started getting boosted at best had him at a modest plurality.
|
![]() |
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:say what you like about the guy, he does a good job of holding onto his personal power. pity about the consequences for the rest of us. Obama should be remembered as a great villain from a leftist perspective.
|
![]() |
|
Let's be real: Bernie would have gotten destroyed in the general election. The trump apparatus _wanted_ him to be the dem candidate. In the real world where only 5 states matter Bernie was not a good candidate. You think he was going to win Arizona or North Carolina? Like it or not the best way to ensure Trump isn't re-elected is to pull white women from the suburbs. And they weren't voting for Bernie. Young people don't vote consistently enough to elect a democratic socialist. Maybe this will change as the boomers keep dying out and the millenials get older.
|
![]() |
|
Lemming posted:Yeah, and the fact that Bernie didn't get a similar boost despite crushing Nevada is part of the exact point I'm making, because the media had an interest in boosting any non-Bernie candidate, they didn't give him similar air time and positive coverage. Thank you for concisely making my argument for me! Nevada was a caucus and Iowa pretty much ruined the reputation of caucuses. The only primary up that point was NH and Bernie performed really poorly despite winning. You were never going to win the nomination with 26-35% of the vote. Counting on the opposition to make tactical errors until the end is not a valid strategy for success. People like to point at the Amy and Pete drop puts, but even that came about from them being stubborn enough to go to SC in the first place despite polling horribly there and not doing well in NV. In a normal year, they drop out after Nevada but somehow stuck around only to knife each other at the debate before SC.
|
![]() |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:That happened in 1988, 1992, and 2004. It's not totally unprecedented. Strange 1988, 1992, and 2004 did not follow how 2020 went at all
|
![]() |
|
mcmagic posted:It's completely unprecedented for the person who won Iowa and another strong candidate in NH to drop off right before Super Tuesday to consolidate behind a candidate who's campaign was DOA. The fact that rube voters fell for it doesn't mean the fix wasn't in. It was. It was obvious Buttegieg and Klobuchar were non starters, it's literally just sensible for the party to ask them to gently caress off.
|
![]() |
|
WOWEE ZOWEE posted:Has anyone done a proper Marxist analysis of Duck Tales? Flintheart Glomgold and Magica De Spell are other capitalists - in friendly competition with each other, but united in their class interest of not allowing capital to be distributed to the other classes. Huey, Dewey, and Louie are the petit bourgeois. They do not purchase any labor power, but they have a decent amount of capital at their disposal due to their capitalist benefactor. They are sympathetic to the capitalist class, and even help them to accumulate more capital. Duckworth the butler, Mrs. Beakley, Gyro Gearloose, and most other characters are the proletariat, selling their labor power to generate surplus value for Scrooge and the other capitalists to extract. The Beagle Boys are the lumpenproletariat.
|
![]() |
|
Spite posted:Let's be real: Bernie would have gotten destroyed in the general election. The trump apparatus _wanted_ him to be the dem candidate. extremely solid gimmick (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
![]() |
|
cheetah7071 posted:he did get a huge boost in national polls. South Carolina was just his worst early state by a huge margin. In an alternate reality where South Carolina is part of super Tuesday, we'd be talking about how Biden just suspended his race to presumptive nominee Sanders He didn't get a similar boost, no. You saw a similar thing after NH - the media was talking about how second place or third place was actually winning. They couldn't pretend he didn't win, but they deemphasized it and didn't focus on it as much as they could. I'm not calling anything fake, I'm saying that the indications we have suggest there was a large shift that coincided with the DNC and the media's singular push to boost Biden as much as they could over the course of less than a week. My point is that this is a factor that would never, ever have done anything but work against Bernie, and there's nothing Bernie could have done to make them not do that, and it's a big factor in why he lost. I'm just arguing against the braindead "argument" that well, I guess the voters just all made their most informed decision and all decided at once to go from having no idea who to vote for to voting for Biden two days before Super Tuesday without any outside influence at all
|
![]() |
|
Pick posted:This has been a done deal for what, a month? Easy? Where was everyone I feel like I went through all of this and out the other side then instead of now. Like, when it became rather unlikely he’d be the nominee. I voted for him happily (by mail) but... it’s still crushing. The question we need to be asking seems to be more “what can we do to get more America comfortable with basic leftist policy?”. I don’t know if I have it in me to handle an issue that far back, but I know we have little choice about what kinds of bad things happen in the future.
|
![]() |
|
Spite posted:You think he was going to win Arizona or North Carolina? I think Bernie could have won Arizona, polls show he was not only winning Latinx voters handily but he was also driving their turnout. I dpn't think it was 100% though, Sinema won just as much on suburban white women as she did the latin vote. I think people were really hoping that Bernie could be the one to flip Texas because of that fact and thats how he could have beaten Trump. Alternatively the argument would got that Bernie wins every state Hillary did, Penn and Michigan come back on their own, and Bernie either wins Wisconsin or wins Arizona in its place, and that gets him over the finish line.
|
![]() |
|
Lemming posted:Why did his rivals drop out at that specific time, and endorse Biden specifically? Those are the kind of things that are obviously massively influenced by the establishment (lol Obama literally personally met with mayor rat and made him endorse Biden https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/485503-obama-spoke-with-buttigieg-after-he-dropped-out-of-2020-race-report). Both Pete and Klob's paths to victories relied on being alternatives to Biden. But while that strategy worked when Biden was cratering, South Carolina changed the race by demonstrating Biden still had extremely strong support among African-Americans—and not even Bernie, Biden's strongest rival, could break into that support. So they each faced a choice: Keep going in a campaign that was already lost, and increase the likelihood of a contested convention (Which would be devastatingly harmful to the party and a very likely possibility at that point), or drop out and increase their own political stock by backing the candidate they felt had the best chance to win the nomination. Was the DNC or media involved? Personally, I don't think so, but I also want to be pedantic and separate the organization of the Democratic National Committee from "Establishment democrats with a vested interest in seeing Joe Biden win, for political reasons or because they genuinely believe him to be the best candidate in the race (somehow)." I, personally, do not believe Tom Perez or other DNC staffers were involved in pushing Klob and Pete to endorse Biden. Were other establishment figures like Obama involved? Eh, probably. But that's also just... regular politics, and also a result of Sanders not doing enough to court their interests or assuage their fears he'd ignore their ~sage political wisdom~ and lose in November (Not that he or his supporters would have wanted him to play those kinds of personal politics, which was both the campaign's biggest strength and greatest weakness imo).
|
![]() |
|
TyrantWD posted:Nevada was a caucus and Iowa pretty much ruined the reputation of caucuses. Haha remember how all the Iowa caucuses have been rigged for years and Bernie was finally able to prove it, that loving kicked rear end
|
![]() |
|
Lemming posted:He didn't get a similar boost, no. You saw a similar thing after NH - the media was talking about how second place or third place was actually winning. They couldn't pretend he didn't win, but they deemphasized it and didn't focus on it as much as they could. Fair enough. I thought you were further arguing that, absent media/establishment nudging, Bernie would have definitely won, because I don't think the data supports that. (Though it does leave it as a possibility for sure)
|
![]() |
|
Inferior Third Season posted:Scrooge McDuck is basically the ur-capitalist, and his money bin the physical manifestation of the capitalists' extraction of surplus value. Is Goofy Lenin and if not can he be Lenin
|
![]() |
|
Spite posted:Let's be real: Bernie would have gotten destroyed in the general election. The trump apparatus _wanted_ him to be the dem candidate. White Women from the suburbs were supposed to vote Hillary in too, how'd that go? They were always going to vote for Trump. I'm not sure that Bernie would have won but he had an argument to make in the Midwest against Trump. Biden doesn't.
|
![]() |
|
Okan170 posted:The question we need to be asking seems to be more “what can we do to get more America comfortable with basic leftist policy?”. America does want more leftist policies. The demand is already there. Neither party is selling it, though. We want it. We can quantify that we want it. The powers that be don't want it. That's who you have to convince. Oh, also those people who are all "incremental change." MLK posted:I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. The Sean fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Apr 8, 2020 |
![]() |
|
Did the threads get combined? I've been avoiding the primary thread for months now.
|
![]() |
|
Spite posted:Let's be real: Bernie would have gotten destroyed in the general election. The trump apparatus _wanted_ him to be the dem candidate. As we all know, elevating the "extreme" populist candidate to be your opposition is a sound political strategy that never ever backfires
|
![]() |
|
White suburban women did go Clinton. The only group of women within standard of error was no-college white women among one exit poll largely touted by Trump.
|
![]() |
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:I, personally, do not believe Tom Perez or other DNC staffers were involved in pushing Klob and Pete to endorse Biden. Were other establishment figures like Obama involved? Eh, probably. But that's also just... regular politics, and also a result of Sanders not doing enough to court their interests or assuage their fears he'd ignore their ~sage political wisdom~ and lose in November (Not that he or his supporters would have wanted him to play those kinds of personal politics, which was both the campaign's biggest strength and greatest weakness imo). Come on dude, when people say DNC you know that's shorthand for the Democratic establishment, ignoring the fact that Perez is literally the chair specifically because Obama pushed for it to happen. The point we're trying to make is there's literally nothing Bernie could have done to get the establishment to back him in the primary beyond surgically grafted Biden's face onto his own. They are opposed to him based on class interests, and no amount of courting would change that unless he changed his policies
|
![]() |
|
Okan170 posted:The question we need to be asking seems to be more “what can we do to get more America comfortable with basic leftist policy?”. It's either redo the entire electoral system or get a leftist candidate that is broadly popular among African-American voters and self-identified "very liberal" voters. That was how Obama ended up beating a coalition that was almost exactly the same as Biden's coalition. You just attract the African-American voters from the coalition of the older and moderate voters.
|
![]() |
|
Sanguinia posted:Biden wasn't really DOA after New Hampshire anyway. He unexpectedly came in second in Nevada, which did a lot of damage to Pete. At the time we were roundly mocking the BIDEN'S COMEBACK BEGAN HERE punditry, but in retrospect I think that 2nd Place was almost as important as the South Carolina blowout because it showed that Pete's successes in the first two primaries were nothing but shadow-puppetry. He not only could be beaten by Biden among centrist voters, his youth and LGBTQ status did absolutely nothing to blunt Bernie's coalition. Those two facts meant Pete had no way of building momentum going into Carolina and possibly eating into Biden's support there, which meant he had no chance of Forming The Head of Centrist Voltron like he clearly wanted. People were worried after NH and it turns out, accurately. The story could be derived from the NH results.
|
![]() |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It's either redo the entire electoral system or get a leftist candidate that is broadly popular among African-American voters and self-identified "very liberal" voters. It probably helps not to paint yourself a revolutionary leader. Revolutions are for the young, not the old, and as we saw there are a lot of old people who vote. Progressives need to work on their messaging.
|
![]() |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It's either redo the entire electoral system or get a leftist candidate that is broadly popular among African-American voters and self-identified "very liberal" voters. I don't think it has anything to do with moderate policy. It had to do with Biden standing next to Obama so voters liked him. They didn't care what his policy positions were and in the polling they agreed with Bernie's policies more across the board.
|
![]() |
|
gently caress Biden. He'll do nothing to help us, where-as Trump is actively attack us. The working classes are scrambling for their lives right now while lanyards WFH. We are on our own. BlueBlazer fucked around with this message at 22:56 on Apr 8, 2020 |
![]() |
|
mcmagic posted:I don't think it has anything to do with moderate policy. It had to do with Biden standing next to Obama so voters liked him. They didn't care what his policy positions were and in the polling they agreed with Bernie's policies more across the board. More than agreeing with Bernie's policies, a lot of Biden voters mistakenly thought that Biden supported things that he doesn't but Bernie sure does, including M4A, student loan forgiveness, marijuana legalization, etc.
|
![]() |
|
Majorian posted:More than agreeing with Bernie's policies, a lot of Biden voters mistakenly thought that Biden supported things that he doesn't but Bernie sure does, including M4A, student loan forgiveness, marijuana legalization, etc. I would classify this as a shrewd move by the democratic establishment and was the trap that Bernie walked into after 2016.
|
![]() |
|
Majorian posted:More than agreeing with Bernie's policies, a lot of Biden voters mistakenly thought that Biden supported things that he doesn't but Bernie sure does, including M4A, student loan forgiveness, marijuana legalization, etc. "Uncle Joe is my boyfriend Obama's BFF so he can't believe that I should die on the street if I can't afford health care!" It's why the rape allegation has no legs too. It's also why Biden might win!
|
![]() |
|
bird cooch posted:Did the threads get combined? I've been avoiding the primary thread for months now. Primary's over. It's all one thread now. We have another 7 months of this whiny bullshit to look forward to.
|
![]() |
|
mcmagic posted:White Women from the suburbs were supposed to vote Hillary in too, how'd that go? They were always going to vote for Trump. I'm not sure that Bernie would have won but he had an argument to make in the Midwest against Trump. Biden doesn't. And what happened in 2018, specifically with suburban white women? It is not 2016. I'm not saying I like any of this. I do not like Biden and I think he's half gone mentally. But I really, really do not want another 4 years of Trump. This is the cold reality in my opinion: young people do not vote enough and baby boomers are terrified of the word socialism. The baby boomers are a conservative, frightened generation and like it or not you have to get their votes to win. Personally I think our economy is super busted in general and is running on smoke and mirrors. So we are hosed until the baby boomers all die and we can figure out how to handle a world where there aren't enough jobs for everyone. Saagonsa posted:As we all know, elevating the "extreme" populist candidate to be your opposition is a sound political strategy that never ever backfires The core of the republican strategy has been "racism" for like 50 years at this point. Trump did not diverge from it at all. The american left is a conglomeration of many disparate groups that would not be in the same party if GOP could stand non-white people.
|
![]() |
|
mcmagic posted:I don't think it has anything to do with moderate policy. It had to do with Biden standing next to Obama so voters liked him. They didn't care what his policy positions were and in the polling they agreed with Bernie's policies more across the board. It doesn't have to do with policy specifically. But, you need a leftist candidate who is going to be attractive to African-American voters and maintain the "very liberal," less religious, and college educated demographic that makes up a disproportionate amount of voters in Iowa, NH, and the upper Midwest. There's multiple ways to get those two demographics on your side and it doesn't matter specifically which way you do it, but it has to happen. Unless you have a major reform of the electoral system or major demographic changes, then you can't be getting blown out in the African-American vote and win a Democratic primary.
|
![]() |
|
![]()
|
![]() |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It doesn't have to do with policy specifically. But, you need a leftist candidate who is going to be attractive to African-American voters and maintain the "very liberal," less religious, and college educated demographic that makes up a disproportionate amount of voters in Iowa, NH, and the upper Midwest. I don't think there is a candidate alive who could've materially beat Obama's VP among black voters in the south.
|
![]() |
|
Majorian posted:More than agreeing with Bernie's policies, a lot of Biden voters mistakenly thought that Biden supported things that he doesn't but Bernie sure does, including M4A, student loan forgiveness, marijuana legalization, etc. Exit polls showed a large chunk of voters that favored those things voted for Biden, but that doesn't necessarily mean they thought Biden supported them. They could have just prioritized those issues lower. It's like how 65%-80% of voters support stronger gun control laws, but the pro-gun control candidate doesn't get all of those votes.
|
![]() |
|
![]()
|
# ? Jun 10, 2024 08:04 |
|
The Sean posted:America does want more leftist policies. The demand is already there. Neither party is selling it, though. Yes but I’m saying the depressing thing really is that it is no longer a choice we even have. However, I have said frequently that I’ll happily vote for anyone but Biden, and I would unhappily vote for him. As a minority and LGBT person this makes me sick to my stomach, and seriously question if progressivism is even possible in this country. This isn’t about Biden not being the best candidate, that ship sailed on Super Tuesday. I’m not dumb enough to think that even at his worst-and Biden has been pretty poo poo- he is still not as destructive to the country and it’s people as Donald Trump. And that is now our only choice. Best case, we have to figure out how to move progressive policy forwards under a tepid Biden administration, and worst case, Trumps second term will utterly end any possible progressivism utterly. This isn’t a case against incrementalism, this is literally a binary choice. I hate it, and it might be the last time I vote, but we don’t really have an option here. Maybe it is a matter of choosing which concentration camp I’m headed into, but we’re already past the point where we have anything BUT that choice, and one of the camps has gas chambers.
|
![]() |