Dem Presidential Primary 2020: Bernie dropped out, all hail nominee Biden

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Dem Presidential Primary 2020: Bernie dropped out, all hail nominee Biden

«‹›1728 »

joepinetree: Apr 5, 2012

It is clear that democrats are unwilling to cede even a minority position to the left even if the left plays nice and even if it might hurt their chances in November.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 18:51

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 29, 2024 10:43

Gumball Gumption: Jan 7, 2012

evilweasel posted:

there is literally nobody who believes getting trump out of office magically fixes the damage he's done. hell, given that he will certainly react to a loss by immediately starting up a campaign for 2024 that will feature, as before, racist incitement, getting trump out of office will not even stop him from doing more damage.

You shouldn't say this outloud because it makes Biden an even worse candidate. You should have no confidence or faith in that guy doing any cleanup work and his best bet for winning is in fact convincing people that everything will be better like magic instead of well, asking anyone to trust his skills at fixing this.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 18:52

Raskolnikov38: Mar 3, 2007; We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold

evilweasel posted:

there is literally nobody who believes getting trump out of office magically fixes the damage he's done. hell, given that he will certainly react to a loss by immediately starting up a campaign for 2024 that will feature, as before, racist incitement, getting trump out of office will not even stop him from doing more damage.

seems best to not vote for the rapist who won't fix anything and let trump term limit out then????

# ? Apr 27, 2020 18:53

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Endorph posted:

Read the replies to any tweet about the reade accusations

im not going fishing in a septic tank for a specific turd that you're thinking of

# ? Apr 27, 2020 18:54

Fallen Hamprince: Nov 12, 2016

As someone who was skeptical about the Biden allegations earlier: it�s clear now that further reporting has been done that the allegations are credible. Biden should drop out.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 18:56

terrorist ambulance: Nov 5, 2009

Biden is a weak presumptive candidate that was nominated by a fundamentally illegitimate process.

The issue of any one person voting for him or not comes down to personal idiosyncratic choice that doesnt matter all that much. Its trolley problem poo poo and just about as interesting.

What is probably more important is donating and volunteering for him, which progressives are not going to do and tellingly aren't even being asked to do.

A lack of committed or interested voters is going to be a real problem for Biden. He has very, very bad enthusiasm numbers. Not sure why so many libs think the solution to that is berating a small subset of the left online, especially when the best pitch they can muster is the other guy is worse.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 18:57

Raskolnikov38: Mar 3, 2007; We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold

Fallen Hamprince posted:

As someone who was skeptical about the Biden allegations earlier: it�s clear now that further reporting has been done that the allegations are credible. Biden should drop out.

goddamnit of course you lose your av when i finally learn who it was of

# ? Apr 27, 2020 18:57

SgtSteel91: Oct 21, 2010

I hate this reality that I'm having to weigh between voting Biden or not, and that I leaning towards voting for the rapist because I hate Trump more than Biden

And that's it really, no policy, not anything other than I can't stand seeing that orange poo poo on TV and twitter

Worst thing is, MSM will probably still be following him and reacting to whatever bullshit he tweets out because of ratings

Just... gently caress

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:02

Pibur: Jan 28, 2019

evilweasel posted:

so i'm just going to use this as a jumping off point, but i'm speaking more generally about all of the "hope trump gets elected" bernie "supporters"

at this point it is clear that while many people did support bernie for his policies, that is not true of the people who advocate not voting in 2020. people have been quite explicit about the goal of not voting: in the hopes that trump wins. everyone fervently denied it for a while but the mask has, generally come off. see, for example:

there is no ambiguity here: ManBoyChef is saying he wants trump to win. after all, that's the whole linchpin of this "strategy" - that trump wins and "the DNC" is forced to come crawling back to ManBoyChef (who I feel bad picking on like this because he appears to just be genuinely mislead by people in this thread, but because he is genuinely mislead made the mistake of being explicit about the goal in terms he can't walk away from instead of weasel words that clearly communicate the goal to insiders, but are deniable to outsiders).

this is because the point is not policy. people say things and then do things that reveal their actual motivations all the time. in this thread we can see a pretty clear population of people who are lying about their motivations (intentionally or not, and i would lean towards mostly unintentionally because people tend to believe their own propaganda on this sort of thing). the policy differences between biden and trump are vast, vastly different than those between biden and bernie. we could go into that, but everyone's seen how that ends: people react emotionally and seize on one issue (generally, manufactured and not true) where they allege biden and trump are the same and they will disregard any other point. instead, i will simply refer to the man himself: bernie sanders, who knows his policies very well (and knows those of joe biden very well, a man he has worked with for years), has said this over and over. it is simply not credible that bernie sanders is this vastly mistaken about his policy differences, but a thread that managed to turn it into an article of faith that biden was in fourth place after south carolina when that is objectively not true and trivially checked (something I keep coming back to, not because it's the only example of outright denial of reality in this thread or even the worst, but because it's one where there is an indisputable objective answer that was trivially checked and yet, was not).

what motivates people in this thread who want trump to win? the same thing that motivates his base. people have recognized for close to four years that trump's base doesn't like him for his policies. trump doesn't even know what his policies are. what they like, the one constant, is sticking it to the people they hate. it's why the trump administration routinely does seemingly self-defeating cruel things: because the cruelty is the point.

this thread is now, largely, populated by people with those same motivations. you see people post "liberals hate socialists more than they hate facists!!!" all the time, when it's obviously not true. why is it posted so often? projection. people who really just hate "liberals" and want to justify it. but the people in this thread can't find their way to explicitly supporting trump. perhaps because they're simply not welcome, because they're one of the minorities he hates. perhaps because he's too open about it; people who are motivated mostly by the desire to hurt people but have retained enough of their humanity to not admit that to themselves. perhaps because it's just not socially acceptable (thank god) in their social circles.

but it's why you see nonstop "shitlibs!!!" sort of things, and elaborate revenge fantasies about invincible trump crushing the dnc and weeping liberals coming to them and begging for their votes in 2024. it's why prior to biden's win, there was a sizeable contingent of berniebros, who largely mirror the current dead-enders, spending thier time not crowing about how much good they'd do but about how liberals would be crushed and need to "bend the knee". it's why you had the whole theme of "bullying works!!!" again, this is a relatively small minority of bernie supporters (which is why he was able to do so well) - but it's the contingent that largely makes up the current dead-enders.

so we come back to it: why do policy arguments not sway the remaining holdouts? because it's not about policy. for the same reason trump's base doesn't desert him when he makes their lives worse, the people who are saying they hope trump wins over biden aren't doing it because they think that will make their lives better. they're doing it because at the end of the day they just don't care: they're angry people and they want to hurt someone for it. had their life circumstances been slightly different, they'd be wearing MAGA hats. it's why no amount of discussion of "well, you say you want X, here is how that is clearly advanced by a biden presidency and reversed by a second Trump presidency" makes a dent. people arguing for a second trump term probably have talked themselves into believing what they post. it's a rare trumpist who doesn't have an (obviously false, in the same way) explanation why they like trump. it's because a second trump presidency will hurt the people they hate, and that's all there is too it. that's a powerful motivation in all of us: wanting to see bad things happen to bad people. it is a little more powerful in angry, bitter people, and that's what we generally have here.

so that is, in essence, why i think it's largely wasted effort (as most posters in this thread will freely admit) to try and engage on policy grounds. for the people remaining, it's not about policy. it's about a revenge fantasy, it's about anger, it's about hoping trump wins. what about all the bad things that might cause to happen? the bad things are the point! if a second trump presidency wasn't so bad, it wouldn't hurt those drat liberals!!!!

fortunately, the remaining people in this thread are a small minority - which is to Bernie's credit: he built a movement of mostly good people. that the worst people on the left seized on him was, you know, worrying but one of the key points that (hilariously, by a bernie supporter busy arguing in favor of their bullying works mentality) bernie supporters made - those people are a small minority and not representative of the movement as a whole. it's why bernie supporters are much more rapidly coalecing around biden. it's why, despite the certainty in this thread that biden is blowing it and bernie supporters denying him their support will work (which you need to believe, to justify to yourself why you're hoping trump wins - after all, what's worse than being a trump supporter (but ironically, for leftist reasons) and then him losing anyway), everyone else is realizing the opposite: the party is rapidly coalecing around Biden, republicans are getting increasingly nervous, and the senate is in play.

i mean, i posted that long Washington Post article for a reason: it is an article of faith among people in this thread that biden is going to be a historic wipeout. but nobody, outside the small group of dead-enders that this thread has some representatives of, actually believes that. everyone running in a senate seat that could put mitch back in the minority is popping champagne over biden. republicans are depressed and worried.

nothing is guaranteed, of course: there's a long time until the election. but me, personally? i don't spend my time worrying about biden losing because of the people in this thread not voting for him. i'm pretty optimistic, all things considered, about november. part of that is "no loving sense spending the next half year in a panic when, if needed, there will be plenty of time for that in October" thinking while there's, you know, a global pandemic. i could be wrong, of course, i certainly was wrong in 2016.

but my worry doesn't really revolve around people in this thread. there's always diehards and holdouts. i mean, most people in this thread don't remember the clintonis44 hilarity in 2008. what people may also not have realized is you know who most of those people who remained when it became mockably hilarious supported in 2016? it wasn't clinton. as long as the republican party is the party of hate and grievance, there's always going to be some angry people looking for their rationalization to switch. that minority happens to be loud here. but biden still has a strong national lead; he has state-level leads in all the key swing states; and the thing that matters most for a successful democratic presidency (control of the senate) is, while still less than 50%, trending in the right direction.

the people pleading with people in this thread aren't people like me, generally. they're people who actually like you and don't want you to be the kind of person who supports trump. they - perhaps foolishly - still believe you are a good person, still believe you mean what you say about what you believe in. i mostly don't. you're still better than outright trump supporters - but that is probably more of a "there but for the grace of god go i" sort of thing, and i'd sort of expect you to make the same transition "reluctant" republicans made into die-hard trumpists. the people appealing to your better nature are doing it because they still care about you.

i don't. i have, more or less, written you personally off. i'm not saying that to be mean, but more to be open and honest about where i'm coming from: no sense in appearing falsely polite. i more want to knock down the obvious nonsense that people are spouting to make it harder for you to con people who are sad into falling for the dark side, as it were. spouting conspiracy theories about how evil centrist voltron robbed you of what you really wanted, bernie sanders, through forcing everyone to withdraw in favor of the guy in fourth place is about trying to make sad people angry people who will follow you down a bad road. going "you know, you can look up what place he was in, and it wasn't fourth. why on earth would you listen to these people" isn't going to flip an election. but it might avoid a few people becoming bitter, angry people radicalizing themselves into trump supporters.

drat, I don't know what to say except

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:03

yronic heroism: Oct 31, 2008

Trabisnikof posted:

To me there seems to be 3 positions on Biden:

1. Biden's family of corruption, heinous personal acts, and support for policies that will do great evil and potentially doom this nation are too much for you to be willing to support him.

2. Biden's family of corruption, heinous personal acts, and support for policies that will do great evil and potentially doom this nation aren't too much but there exist theoretical actions, policies, or beliefs that are too heinous for you to be willing to support him.

3. Biden's family of corruption, heinous personal acts, and support for policies that will do great evil and potentially doom this nation aren't too much and there exist no action so heinous for you to be willing to stop supporting him.

I think a segment of this thread are like myself in category #1. I think some people are in #2 and some in #3.

I think that the value difference between #1 and #3 is so vast that there is little ground for agreement. I think because of the ghoulishness of the argument, few people who are #3 are willing to argue to the #2 people that they're wrong on moral grounds.

So the main space for discourse on Biden is centered around a debate over where to draw the line on heinous personal acts, histories of corruption, and support for bad policies when selecting, endorsing, and supporting a leader.

That's why it is a reasonable question to ask someone who supports Biden where they draw the line, and if it would ever be possible for something corrupt, heinous, or evil Biden did or supported to make them change their mind.

Why should voting be a morality play about which candidate gets rewarded by winning? That makes for a nice Ron Howard movie but you have to buy into a cult of personality. Let�s say they are all bastards. Lincoln was a bastard, FDR was a bastard, LBJ was a huge bastard.

None of that answers what the best way to vote is based on how people�s lives will improve or worsen, what is really achievable (hint: not third party candidates), or really anything that a rational adult should care about. Your whole framing assumes we can�t make utilitarian judgments and relies on personal feelings.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:03

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Gumball Gumption posted:

You shouldn't say this outloud because it makes Biden an even worse candidate. You should have no confidence or faith in that guy doing any cleanup work and his best bet for winning is in fact convincing people that everything will be better like magic instead of well, asking anyone to trust his skills at fixing this.

there's not much to say about this post aside from that it makes no sense whatsoever, but i'm going to try to tease it out

we began with an extreme claim put into people's mouths by Endorph, that "libs" believe that simply removing donald trump magically fixes the damage that he's done. nobody believes this. it is an obviously stupid position that is put forth to attack instead of the position that anyone holds.

it's just obviously not true. nobody believes it. all you need to do is point that out, which i did

what you are then arguing is "we should consider who would do the best job cleaning up after trump" we should! in the primary. that exact issue is why i supported neither bernie nor biden. but the primary is over. so when you talk about biden now, you're talking about the GE - and the person he's running against is the guy pledging to break it more. so it just comes back to the usual "there's no difference between biden and trump!!!!" argument that is transparently not true, and transparently just searching for a justification to support trump.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:04

Ague Proof: Jun 5, 2014; they told me
I was everything

The right choice for the DNC would probably be to ditch Biden citing genuine concern about Reade and then nominate Gavin Newsom and a woman VP at the e-convention.

Obviously I'd prefer Bernie or another leftist but that's never going to happen.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:05

yronic heroism: Oct 31, 2008

Ague Proof posted:

The right choice for the DNC would probably be to ditch Biden citing genuine concern about Reade and then nominate Gavin Newsom and a woman VP at the e-convention.

Obviously I'd prefer Bernie or another leftist but that's never going to happen.

Warren is the compromise candidate :getin:

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:07

StratGoatCom: Aug 6, 2019; Our security is guaranteed by being able to melt the eyeballs of any other forum's denizens at 15 minutes notice

yronic heroism posted:

Warren is the compromise candidate

Yeah, no, she'll get snubbed again. No one trusts a snake, even if it's their snake.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:08

SKULL.GIF: Jan 20, 2017

evilweasel posted:

you know i have actually been convinced after looking at it that pulling bernie off the ballot stinks in NY and hopefully that does get reversed

i'm quite sure it's a cuomo special, considering he's a corrupt rear end in a top hat, and is primarily geared towards manipulating the state/local primaries though (previously, those were specifically held on a different day in order to avoid presidential primary voter turnout from affecting them)

he is probably still a little peeved about his IDC friends getting the boot

Seems more like DNC pulling strings, but I mean that's pretty much the Biden campaign already.

quote:

https://twitter.com/emilyngo/status/1254803712033390594

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1254829322352893955

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:10

ColonelMuttonchops: Feb 18, 2011; Young Orc

SgtSteel91 posted:

I hate this reality that I'm having to weigh between voting Biden or not, and that I leaning towards voting for the rapist because I hate Trump more than Biden

And that's it really, no policy, not anything other than I can't stand seeing that orange poo poo on TV and twitter

Worst thing is, MSM will probably still be following him and reacting to whatever bullshit he tweets out because of ratings

Just... gently caress

I'll say that you don't have to vote for a rapist, but this is absolutely the vote-your-conscience election if there ever was one. Granted, your reason is pretty flimsy, but still.

Also, you should probably stop looking at the MSM at all if you're able; they rarely have anything useful to say. And if they do say something useful, it'll probably be posted on the forums somewhere.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:13

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

SKULL.GIF posted:

Seems more like DNC pulling strings, but I mean that's pretty much the Biden campaign already.

that's a quote from a new york state appointed election official who is likely directly under the thumb of cuomo

the DNC does not really give a gently caress about new york local primaries but andrew cuomo absolutely does, because many of his allies have been getting turfed out as part of the backlash to the IDC nonsense

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:17

Active Quasar: Feb 22, 2011

This unity candidate sure is working out well.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:17

joepinetree: Apr 5, 2012

It would be a lot easier to argue that Biden would be less worse if we didn't have the last 2 democratic presidents enabling incredibly regressing legislation that Republicans would have never achieved because of the whole "Nixon in China" thing.

Clinton cut welfare and enacted by far the most aggressive anti-immigrant legislation in the history of this country. Obama essentially made every police officer an ICE deputy.

It is possible to imagine a number of scenarios or areas where Biden is better than Trump. It is also possible to imagine a number of incredibly regressive and harmful policies that only have a shot at passing under Biden. Trump isn't cutting social security or medicare, Biden might.

Does that mean I want Trump to win? No. There are many ways in which Biden could signal that he wouldn't repeat the same strategy of passing regressive legislation because of the cover that the democratic label provides. But not only do we get the opposite of that, we have a concerted effort to make sure that Bernie doesn't get even a minority of delegates in the convention.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:20

Ytlaya: Nov 13, 2005; Can't post for 4 hours!

evilweasel posted:

It's been a long time since i followed Virginia politics closely and I don't want to act like I'm an authority on the specifics of what the new Democratic administration is doing. To the extent that labor laws aren't changed, that's absolutely something people should be pissed about - it's just that even if they were about to change them, whatever that 50 out of 50 ranking was relying on would be referencing laws passed by Republicans that Democrats hadn't had a chance to overturn.

There has been a very sizeable shift left in the state's politics, and you can assume that will get bigger in 2021 because Northram can't run for re-election and Democrats will be running on fair maps, not gerrymandered maps, so you would expect their majority to increase. There's certainly going to be things people believe should have been done but were not (I believe some gun control measures were just killed). But there has been a very large, positive change that can be built on - and one key aspect of it was an uninspiring moderate winning the governor's office in 2017 (instead of denying him votes so that the neo-confederate won instead and democrats learned their lesson!!! for 2021).

Like joepinetree pointed out, you have a very poor understanding of politics that is leading you to believe that moving left on something like gun control somehow brings you closer to moving left in areas like labor rights.

Iron Twinkie posted:

Virginia is ranked 50 out 50 on workers rights. A party of Democrats for the affluent suburbs that is actively hostile to workers is one that I am not a part, have no future in, and why I can't stomach voting for them anymore.

Those aren't the people who matter, though. Gun control is important because it could conceivably impact the children of affluent suburbanites, but most of that other stuff is an issue for the lesser people that can be placed on the back-burner indefinitely.

joepinetree posted:

You are quoting an article from after super tuesday this year. I just posted an article about how the interpretation was different in 08. You can't be this stupid. The point is that the interpretation of the rule is different between 08 and 2020, and as such pointing out that it is indeed the interpretation in 2020 is moronic.

I assure you that he actually can. Most of these folks do this thing where they take a handful of facts and then use dumb reasoning to believe those facts support their conclusion, but yronic can't even get the first part of that right.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:20

StratGoatCom: Aug 6, 2019; Our security is guaranteed by being able to melt the eyeballs of any other forum's denizens at 15 minutes notice

evilweasel posted:

that's a quote from a new york state appointed election official who is likely directly under the thumb of cuomo

the DNC does not really give a gently caress about new york local primaries but andrew cuomo absolutely does, because many of his allies have been getting turfed out as part of the backlash to the IDC nonsense

He may be angling for a chance at replacing Biden, as a long shot at least.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:20

is pepsi ok: Oct 23, 2002

Disnesquick posted:

This unity candidate sure is working out well.

Amazing how the narrative flipped from "most electable candidate!" to "look I know nobody actually wants to vote for Biden but you have to anyway because he's our only option" the moment Bernie dropped out.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:20

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

joepinetree posted:

Does that mean I want Trump to win? No. There are many ways in which Biden could signal that he wouldn't repeat the same strategy of passing regressive legislation because of the cover that the democratic label provides. But not only do we get the opposite of that, we have a concerted effort to make sure that Bernie doesn't get even a minority of delegates in the convention.

such as?

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:21

yronic heroism: Oct 31, 2008

ColonelMuttonchops posted:

I'll say that you don't have to vote for a rapist, but this is absolutely the vote-your-conscience election if there ever was one. Granted, your reason is pretty flimsy, but still.

Also, you should probably stop looking at the MSM at all if you're able; they rarely have anything useful to say. And if they do say something useful, it'll probably be posted on the forums somewhere.

Please rely on a forum of neckbeard man babies for all your journalism needs.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:22

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

yronic heroism posted:

Why should voting be a morality play about which candidate gets rewarded by winning? That makes for a nice Ron Howard movie but you have to buy into a cult of personality. Let’s say they are all bastards. Lincoln was a bastard, FDR was a bastard, LBJ was a huge bastard.

None of that answers what the best way to vote is based on how people’s lives will improve or worsen, what is really achievable (hint: not third party candidates), or really anything that a rational adult should care about. Your whole framing assumes we can’t make utilitarian judgments and relies on personal feelings.

Except a utilitarian calculus blows away the idea that most voters have a moral obligation to vote for Biden, since my vote has a minuscule to zero impact on the outcome of the election or the outcome of policies from this election.

And while you refuse to even argue the point, but it is entirely possible for the long term impacts from Biden to have worse outcomes than 4 more years of Trump. So there's a probability that from a utilitarian perspective that Biden has worse long term utilitarian outcomes than Trump.

So then I have to weigh the absolutely tiny potential for improvements from my vote versus the opportunity cost, so at some point it becomes more useful for me to spend the time improving the lives of those in my community rather than trying to cast a vote.

Even in a "swing state" there is a point where its better to spend that time doing other pro-utils activities instead of voting, but how many hours is it? 6? 8? Remember you have to include the time spent fighting over voter registrations, ballots, voting sites, etc.

Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Apr 27, 2020

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:22

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

StratGoatCom posted:

He may be angling for a chance at replacing Biden, as a long shot at least.

i am super not up on the DNC rules but my instinct is that as a practical matter the only way you actually get biden replaced on the ticket is after he picks his VP, and his VP is replacing him

maybe cuomo gets the VP slot in that situation (something i would fervently support, on the same grounds all of the indiana republicans supported mike pence as VP) but i see no way anyone other than a biden VP nominee gets his slot if he is forced to withdraw

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:22

Goatse James Bond: Mar 28, 2010; If you see me posting please remind me that I have Charlie Work in the reports forum to do instead

Ague Proof posted:

The right choice for the DNC would probably be to ditch Biden citing genuine concern about Reade and then nominate Gavin Newsom and a woman VP at the e-convention.

Obviously I'd prefer Bernie or another leftist but that's never going to happen.

convention attendees get to set the convention rules, so if Biden drops or there's a consensus to boot him the DNC (itself an elected body, but i don't remember when they get replaced; i'd assume before the national convention since like 70% of them get elected at state conventions etc but :shrug:

) doesn't have sole authority to appoint a nominee

evilweasel posted:

i am super not up on the DNC rules but my instinct is that the only way you actually get biden replaced on the ticket is after he picks his VP, and his VP is replacing him

maybe cuomo gets the VP slot in that situation (something i would fervently support, on the same grounds all of the indiana republicans supported mike pence as VP)

Nope! Well, sort of nope!

There are no provisions I was able to find for the person with an absolute majority of pledged delegates dropping out before the convention. There's lots of precedent for changing the rules for either smooth sailing (a bunch of times nominees have been confirmed by voice vote even though there were multiple candidates with delegates, to create a facsimile of unanimous consent for party unity and/or avoid a disruptive incident) or in unusual circumstances.

For that matter, there are no binding provisions where the candidate's own choice of running mate matters in the slightest! As with the voice vote thing, the tradition is for the convention to rubberstamp the candidate's choice, because prior to 1984 there were several disasters when they didn't. :v:

Upshot: if Biden drops out / is thrown out, and there's not enough time for Bernie to lunge to a majority of pledged delegates, it will be anywhere from a little bit of a shitshow to a gigantic shitshow. Plausible candidates are Bernie (second-placer with a strong organized campaign), Biden's VP (the person who'd get it the day after the election if Biden died and presumably a person the Biden delegates largely approve of), or God Knows Who The Compromise Candidate (if we're blessed with the gigantic-shitshow scenario).

if we get the gigantic shitshow, i'll be extremely disappointed if i'm not a national delegate to participate

Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 19:31 on Apr 27, 2020

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:23

yronic heroism: Oct 31, 2008

Ytlaya posted:

I assure you that he actually can. Most of these folks do this thing where they take a handful of facts and then use dumb reasoning to believe those facts support their conclusion, but yronic can't even get the first part of that right.

Cool post about posters bro

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:24

ColonelMuttonchops: Feb 18, 2011; Young Orc

Disnesquick posted:

This unity candidate sure is working out well.

No, that was warren. That's why we're in this mess now, we should've gotten behind her when we got the chance *sprays liberty green paint all over my blood and teeth*

I'm gonna have a hearty lol when warren, again, gets nothing in return for supporting the dems, though.

yronic heroism posted:

Please rely on a forum of neckbeard man babies for all your journalism needs.

lol You're so loving mad you can't shame people into doing what you want. Log off, moron.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:24

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

is pepsi ok posted:

Amazing how the narrative flipped from "most electable candidate!" to "look I know nobody actually wants to vote for Biden but you have to anyway because he's our only option" the moment Bernie dropped out.

it is not at all amazing how people changed from "here is why you should vote for a specific candidate in the primary" to "here is why you should vote for the nominee in the general" the moment the moment the primary ended and the general began

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:25

joepinetree: Apr 5, 2012

evilweasel posted:

such as?

Not getting advice from Larry Summers, not running ads that Trump is too soft on Chinese immigrants, not trying with all their power to restrict the number of delegates Bernie gets (and whether reducing Bernie delegates is the main objective or just a nice side benefit of the NY cancellation is a stupid, meaningless conversation), proposing something for COVID that is actually progressive instead of "open the ACA exchanges, ban Chinese greencard holders and force the Chinese to let in our experts under the threat of intervention." Those are things for a start...

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:26

yronic heroism: Oct 31, 2008

Trabisnikof posted:

Except a utilitarian calculus blows away the idea that most voters have a moral obligation to vote for Biden, since my vote has a minuscule to zero impact on the outcome of the election or the outcome of policies from this election.

And while you refuse to even argue the point, but it is entirely possible for the long term impacts from Biden to have worse outcomes than 4 more years of Trump. So there's a probability that from a utilitarian perspective that Biden has worse long term utilitarian outcomes than Trump.

So then I have to weigh the absolutely tiny potential for improvements from my vote versus the opportunity cost, so at some point it becomes more useful for me to spend the time improving the lives of those in my community rather than trying to cast a vote.

Even in a "swing state" there is a point where its better to spend that time doing other pro-utils activities instead of voting, but how many hours is it? 6? 8? Remember you have to include the time spent fighting over voter registrations, ballots, voting sites, etc.

Except the president isn�t the only thing on the ballot so you�re not expending the time and effort �just� to vote for president. And even under utilitarianism you can still say it�s immoral not to select whatever the greatest utility action is. And there�s absolutely no way to accurately forecast that the worse candidate will be better in the long run. Like ew says, that�s just an article of faith people use to rationalize supporting Trump.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:29

punishedkissinger: Sep 20, 2017

So is Tara Reade's neighbor and the other witness also paid of by Putin or what

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:30

i got owned: Apr 10, 2020; by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

yronic heroism posted:

Except the president isn’t the only thing on the ballot so you’re not expending the time and effort “just” to vote for president. And even under utilitarianism you can still say it’s immoral not to select whatever the greatest utility action is. And there’s absolutely no way to accurately forecast that the worse candidate will be better in the long run. Like ew says, that’s just an article of faith people use to rationalize supporting Trump.

Hell yeah I support Trump dude. If both candidates are going to be rapists why not support the guy who's at least better at it?

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:31

StratGoatCom: Aug 6, 2019; Our security is guaranteed by being able to melt the eyeballs of any other forum's denizens at 15 minutes notice

yronic heroism posted:

Except the president isn�t the only thing on the ballot so you�re not expending the time and effort �just� to vote for president. And even under utilitarianism you can still say it�s immoral not to select whatever the greatest utility action is. And there�s absolutely no way to accurately forecast that the worse candidate will be better in the long run. Like ew says, that�s just an article of faith people use to rationalize supporting Trump.

If the party gave a poo poo about such things, they'd be pushing Biden to drop.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:31

SgtSteel91: Oct 21, 2010

ColonelMuttonchops posted:

I'll say that you don't have to vote for a rapist, but this is absolutely the vote-your-conscience election if there ever was one. Granted, your reason is pretty flimsy, but still.

Also, you should probably stop looking at the MSM at all if you're able; they rarely have anything useful to say. And if they do say something useful, it'll probably be posted on the forums somewhere.

Yeah, I admit it is flimsy, but given that Trump and Biden are basically interchangeable in policy, the only thing left that I'm basing off of my decision is who's face do I see on the news.

I can't stand Trump after 4 years, yes it's the "let me eat brunch without thinking about politics" answer but gently caress it

gently caress Trump, gently caress him

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:32

Ague Proof: Jun 5, 2014; they told me
I was everything

Biden banned from the convention for sexual assault, following in the footsteps of Vic Mignogna.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:32

Goatse James Bond: Mar 28, 2010; If you see me posting please remind me that I have Charlie Work in the reports forum to do instead

SgtSteel91 posted:

Yeah, I admit it is flimsy, but given that Trump and Biden are basically interchangeable in policy, the only thing left that I'm basing off of my decision is who's face do I see on the news.

I can't stand Trump after 4 years, yes it's the "let me eat brunch without thinking about politics" answer but gently caress it

gently caress Trump, gently caress him

well there we go, someone who I'm angry at even though I agree with their November voting conclusion

Feldegast42 posted:

With canceling the primaries (and therefore a chance for Bernie to get delegates to go to the national convention for rules changes and platform stuff) they are beyond unwilling to cede anything to the left, they are in the process of a full blown purge

1) sign up as a Biden delegate, people :mad:

it was my recommendation BEFORE this garbage, for other good strategic reasons
2) fun fact, it turns out that if the presidential primary is canceled the state party and/or the DNC and/or the convention as a whole (in a timey wimey confusing circle, because the convention is made up of pledged delegates) get to allocate delegates, they don't vanish into the aether or all automatically go to Biden

i don't, uh, expect this to go better for bernie than a mail election would, but it's at least funnier than "well looks like Biden gets all of New York"

Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Apr 27, 2020

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:33

Feldegast42: Oct 29, 2011; COMMENCE THE RITE OF SHITPOSTING

joepinetree posted:

It is clear that democrats are unwilling to cede even a minority position to the left even if the left plays nice and even if it might hurt their chances in November.

With canceling the primaries (and therefore a chance for Bernie to get delegates to go to the national convention for rules changes and platform stuff) they are beyond unwilling to cede anything to the left, they are in the process of a full blown purge

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 29, 2024 10:43

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

evilweasel posted:

but the idea that biden might be worse than trump on a policy axis is just nuts. that's all there is to it. people have made clear that is a preposition they will not reconsider. it's not a preposition people reasoned themselves into, because there's just no way to get there from here. it's a position people settled on as a justification for what they'd already decided to do.

This assertion is pretty revealing - you're clinging to the unfounded idea that Trump simply has to be worse than Biden, will not reconsider this, and instantly dismiss the possibility because you've been cheerleading a rapist segregationist for the last XX pages.

Biden's record is bad, man. He's a bad man.

# ? Apr 27, 2020 19:34

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Dem Presidential Primary 2020: Bernie dropped out, all hail nominee Biden

«‹›1728 »