|
Who will you vote for in 2020? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Biden |
|
425 | 18.06% |
| Trump |
|
105 | 4.46% |
| whoever the Green Party runs |
|
307 | 13.05% |
| GOOGLE RON PAUL |
|
151 | 6.42% |
| Bernie Sanders |
|
346 | 14.70% |
| Stalin |
|
246 | 10.45% |
| Satan |
|
300 | 12.75% |
| Nobody |
|
202 | 8.58% |
| Jess Scarane |
|
110 | 4.67% |
| mystery man Brian Carroll of the American Solidarity Party |
|
61 | 2.59% |
| Dick Nixon |
|
100 | 4.25% |
| Total: | 2089 votes | ||
|
StratGoatCom posted:https://twitter.com/BethLynch2020/status/1276677374659174401 Just say the attacks are ageist against seniors. Simple.
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2020 14:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 23:08 |
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I think it's perfectly fair to frame Biden as anti-M4A. I mean, anybody who watched even a fraction of any of the debates could tell you that. If the House and Senate were entertaining the idea, he would tell them not to do it. Like I said, "would he sign a bill" is an academic question because there won't be a bill, and he doesn't want there to be a bill. You and I agree on that. He wants to sign bills republicans pass. The Democrats won't gut social security. The Democrats won't support escalation in the drug war. The Democrats are unlikely to be quite as hawkish on supporting genocide. Biden wants to gut SS, has made escalation in the drug war the single most consistent message in his legislative career, and wants to see new genocides in places like Venezuela while continuing those in Palestine and Yemen. I think it's really important to elect a ton of Democrats at lower levels of elections because that makes room for more leftward shifts in legislation and more opportunities for the left to win primaries and more chances for Democrats to end Republican gerrymandering. It's not as important who wins the presidency. Biden with a Republican congress will do just as many terrible things as Trump. Different things, but still terrible. Asking "is loving up the coronavirus response better or worse than funding right wing death squads in South America" is a stupid question. I know some in this thread might disagree and just want to see the Democrats ruined, and think reform is impossible. I think reform is possible, but that electing Biden makes it harder.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2020 14:54
|
|
|
Ague Proof posted:Just say the attacks are ageist against seniors. Simple. Said the dem leadership. It was far less sure in november.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2020 15:27
|
|
|
joe biden is firmly on the right of the democratic party, an already quite right-wing endeavour of course he's not going to socialise medical care
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2020 15:45
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/theintercept/status/1276641602375688198 Biden's campaign hired someone from Palantir as advisor. Palantir is the Peter Thiel join that provides face detection software to ICE and AI software to drones (and for one of those, the contract was signed under Obama). The contract for drones was signed when providing AI to drones was considered too evil even by google.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2020 17:10
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:i agree that people should get involved on the ground floor and start shaking things up on that level, where such efforts can be fruitful if eternally frustrating and tedious, but that's no reason to vote for joe biden who is by no mechanism accountable to that level of politics That's part of why the state party and DNC stuff, which is interlocked with local party involvement, is crucial - the president is still only kinda accountable to those, but historically if the party moves so does Joe Biden specifically. I also have a largrly unfounded suspicion that individual elected DNC members (forget the 15% or whatever appointees, that's donor country) may in fact be nudgeable by public pressure, particularly the district level ones. Calling your House rep demonstrably has some effect, and the Dem public never bothers to treat individual DNC members as important, so maybe appealing to their ego that way might get them to listen? also the number of votes received by a district member is not... large, so they're incentivized to assume that anyone who's interested enough to email them is interested enough to personally and directly be a nontrivial influence on their next election
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2020 17:49
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:https://twitter.com/BethLynch2020/status/1276677374659174401 Yeah, especially since Trump figured it was all right allowing Russia to pay militants to American troops
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2020 23:19
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:Yeah, especially since Trump figured it was all right allowing Russia to pay militants to American troops no, clearly trump looking the other way on reports that russia was paying bounties to the afghans for killing american troops will benefit the trump campaign. gently caress if i can see how though
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2020 23:28
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:That's part of why the state party and DNC stuff, which is interlocked with local party involvement, is crucial - the president is still only kinda accountable to those, but historically if the party moves so does Joe Biden specifically. right, this is the big advantage of single-representative constituencies - weirdos who care about politics can exert an outsize influence on the political proceedings of their region. the crucial part of this that allows american politics to function is that the reward is less than the necessary investment - hardly anyone can afford to spend enough effort to make themselves essential in this way. it's no reason to vote joe.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 01:42
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:I also have a largrly unfounded suspicion that individual elected DNC members (forget the 15% or whatever appointees, that's donor country) may in fact be nudgeable by public pressure, particularly the district level ones. Calling your House rep demonstrably has some effect, and the Dem public never bothers to treat individual DNC members as important, so maybe appealing to their ego that way might get them to listen? also the number of votes received by a district member is not... large, so they're incentivized to assume that anyone who's interested enough to email them is interested enough to personally and directly be a nontrivial influence on their next election This is only true within a very limited ideological range. Politicians can be convinced to support things that don't significantly cost their major moneyed stakeholders, but it's impossible to persuade them to support anything that would actually be a direct material detriment to them. This means that you can accomplish some wins in some areas that just involve rewriting laws to protect some people, or areas that don't have a significant negative material impact (like some very small tax increase funding a minor improvement to social security), but those things are not in any way indicative of a possible future willingness to go further. They all make perfect sense as areas where Democratic politicians could be flexible. edit: To be clear, there can be individual exceptions where some new member of the House might be genuinely persuadable, but that won't ever lead to a situation where left-wing legislation is actually being passed (because the party's general strategy and priorities will still be dictated by its majority and leadership). Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 01:53 on Jun 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 01:50
|
|
|
nevermind
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 02:41
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:That's part of why the state party and DNC stuff, which is interlocked with local party involvement, is crucial - the president is still only kinda accountable to those, but historically if the party moves so does Joe Biden specifically. Can you point to any of these examples of "moving" on a matter? More precisely, can you point to an example of the democratic party moving on an issue that is widely popular among the base but not the donor class?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 02:46
|
|
|
Craig K posted:no, clearly trump looking the other way on reports that russia was paying bounties to the afghans for killing american troops will benefit the trump campaign. do you actually think it matters? Like unless you have more proof beyond 'uh the spies say it happened' you can't genuinely believe any amount of voters will be swayed by this rumor mill nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 03:04
|
|
|
Trump attacking Biden's 'alleged dementia'/'health' problems is not going to lower Biden's favorability. It makes Biden look like a victim, which generates sympathy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 03:32
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:do you actually think it matters? Like unless you have more proof beyond 'uh the spies say it happened' you can't genuinely believe any amount of voters will be swayed by this rumor mill nonsense. Unlike you and Trump, the voters generally do believe our intelligence community.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 04:03
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Unlike you and Trump, the voters generally do believe our intelligence community. I mean yea but if 'the alphabet soup guys said he's bad' meant anything Hillary would have won after the DNC's disgusting jacking off of those guys last time
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 04:04
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Unlike you and Trump, the voters generally do believe our intelligence community. It's particularly hilarious to watch Liberals throw a shitfit over foreign governments buying political ads. Like, they are completely fine when corporations doing it. They are completely fine when foreign corporations do it. They are completely fine when corporations owned by foreign governments do it. But foreign governments? Well, that's illegal!
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 04:05
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Unlike you and Trump, the voters generally do believe our intelligence community. which is incredible when you consider how much our intelligence agencies lie
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 04:30
|
|
|
What are you guys talking about, I think it’s extremely cool that liberals love the intelligence agencies who murdered all the black leaders they’re learning about for the first time in all their new “I’m a caring white person learning about racism for the first time” reading lists. Seriously, all those agencies should be abolished. They exist primarily to destroy democracies abroad to make sure America has plenty of pliant puppet states to control and crush internal dissent, and anything valuable they do could be performed better by agencies without their tainted legacies. Instead, Maddow et al. have liberals fully in love with the IC and the Biden administration will be sure to keep them extra funded so we can have Cold War II with China and Russia. Awesome!
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 06:43
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:https://twitter.com/theintercept/status/1276641602375688198 Did they miss the part in the Lord of the Rings where it was pretty much impossible to use the Palntir without it corrupting your mind and putting you on a path to evil or what?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 08:15
|
|
|
Rick posted:Did they miss the part in the Lord of the Rings where it was pretty much impossible to use the Palntir without it corrupting your mind and putting you on a path to evil or what? No, no, they caught that. Part of the appeal, really.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 10:00
|
|
|
Polyseme posted:No, no, they caught that. Part of the appeal, really. I think it's a similar principle to having a law firm called "Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe." They figure if people are dumb enough to let them get away with anything when they spell it out right there in the name, then their evil poo poo is fair game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 10:06
|
|
|
Pobrecito posted:So... what are Biden's priorities going to be if he assumes office? DC statehood assuming the Dems have Congress.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 13:37
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:do you actually think it matters? Like unless you have more proof beyond 'uh the spies say it happened' you can't genuinely believe any amount of voters will be swayed by this rumor mill nonsense. every troop and every troop bootlicker just got a really compelling reason not to vote for Trump and lol if you think that basic survival doesn't motivate people to vote
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 13:43
|
|
|
rko posted:Seriously, all those agencies should be abolished. They exist primarily to destroy democracies abroad to make sure America has plenty of pliant puppet states to control and crush internal dissent, and anything valuable they do could be performed better by agencies without their tainted legacies. Nobody itt disagrees with this and didn't already know it. What does that have to do with the general election?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 13:45
|
|
|
Any troop who voted Republican after the lies about WMDs were revealed in 2004 has no sense of self preservation, and this killed fewer troops than that so
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 13:56
|
|
|
Relevant Tangent posted:Nobody itt disagrees with this and didn't already know it. What does that have to do with the general election? I think it just speaks to the general disillusionment of Americans over the state of their government. At this point, the strongest thing you could say about Biden is that Trump wouldnt actively turning the country into a ashpile if he got into office, but that is about it. Btw, I think most of the criticisms of Biden I heard in this thread are spot on, but people are already desperate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 18:08
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:I think it just speaks to the general disillusionment of Americans over the state of their government. At this point, the strongest thing you could say about Biden is that Trump wouldnt actively turning the country into a ashpile if he got into office, but that is about it. The other aspect is that we’re about to hit major budgetary crunch. The reality is, trump may decide to cut Medicare and social security. If he does, the Democrats will put up at least a token resistance, if not outright refusal. If Biden is at the helm and pulls the same stunt for the same reason (and he has a history of trying to cut these programs), the Democrats will line up behind him and republicans will absolutely let it happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 18:19
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:The other aspect is that we’re about to hit major budgetary crunch. The reality is, trump may decide to cut Medicare and social security. If he does, the Democrats will put up at least a token resistance, if not outright refusal. If Biden is at the helm and pulls the same stunt for the same reason (and he has a history of trying to cut these programs), the Democrats will line up behind him and republicans will absolutely let it happen. Lets be fair, the Tea Party's spinal reflex refusal to vote for anything a Democrat proposes might inadvertantly save those programs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:The other aspect is that we’re about to hit major budgetary crunch. The reality is, trump may decide to cut Medicare and social security. If he does, the Democrats will put up at least a token resistance, if not outright refusal. If Biden is at the helm and pulls the same stunt for the same reason (and he has a history of trying to cut these programs), the Democrats will line up behind him and republicans will absolutely let it happen. If Trump tried to cut Medicare and social security, the Democratic opposition would not a “token resistance”, it would be scorched earth. I wish I could say the same in the event that Biden tried to do it. Some of the party would definitely come out against it hard, but we’d probably ultimately be stuck hoping Republican intransigence saves us like it did in 2011.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 18:28
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:If Trump tried to cut Medicare and social security, the Democratic opposition would not a “token resistance”, it would be scorched earth. Scorched earth from the populace sure, but I doubt half of the dem party would care that much
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 18:29
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:The other aspect is that we’re about to hit major budgetary crunch. The reality is, trump may decide to cut Medicare and social security. If he does, the Democrats will put up at least a token resistance, if not outright refusal. If Biden is at the helm and pulls the same stunt for the same reason (and he has a history of trying to cut these programs), the Democrats will line up behind him and republicans will absolutely let it happen. Yeah, I would the real danger of Biden is that he would try to government as a right-wing Obama...which means spending cuts and entitlement "reform"...the last thing this country needs. Personally, I think we are heading in one direction and Biden may temporarily stabilize the situation for 1-2 years but there is no way for the Democrats not to get crush in the midterms and then the stage will be set for 2024. For the Democrats to win the midterms, they would need to implement a recovery plan that would be more aggressive than the New Deal, and we know that isn't going to happen. That said, I don't know if I would blame someone in Michigan/Wisconsin for throwing a vote at Biden just to get a couple of years of stability even if the mid/long-term future looks very bleak.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 18:34
|
|
|
Terror Sweat posted:Scorched earth from the populace sure, but I doubt half of the dem party would care that much Obviously it’s questionable whether they would “care”, as evidenced by their opposition being contingent on what party the president trying to do it belonged to. But the official Democratic stance, if Trump tried, would be 100% against, they would be very vocal about it, and nobody would vote for it. Unless Republicans had a really, really, really strong trifecta and the winds at their back, the bigger danger to Social Security will always be centrist Democrats, in an “only Nixon could go to China” kind of way, providing they could get at least middling Republican support. I strongly disbelieve that Trump could cut Social Security, but Biden possibly could. I’m not sure either will try. Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Jun 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 18:47
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Obviously it’s questionable whether they would “care”, as evidenced by their opposition being contingent on what party the president trying to do it belonged to. But the official Democratic stance, if Trump tried, would be 100% against, they would be very vocal about it, and nobody would vote for it. Granted, it is also a situation where Trump is pushing the situation to such an extreme fiscally that it means "entitlement" reform will gain long term appeal to the Beltway crowd. Trump is bringing the ball down the court, but it is Biden that needs to take the shot. Of course, all of this is completely disastrous to the short/long-term fate of the country.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 18:57
|
|
|
Rick posted:Did they miss the part in the Lord of the Rings where it was pretty much impossible to use the Palntir without it corrupting your mind and putting you on a path to evil or what? That's why they named it that, kind of like how the company that developed the Iowa caucus app that tried to throw it to Buttegeig named itself "Shadow." These people want the people that hire them to know that they're evil, that's the whole point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2020 22:34
|
|
|
It frustrates the hell out of me that Trump is screwing the pooch so badly he may actually sink the GOP Senate and that a golden opportunity to pass decent legislation for the first time in more than a decade, should it arise, will be utterly squandered.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 13:40
|
|
|
Skippy McPants posted:It frustrates the hell out of me that Trump is screwing the pooch so badly he may actually sink the GOP Senate and that a golden opportunity to pass decent legislation for the first time in more than a decade, should it arise, will be utterly squandered. Perhaps not totally squandered. The public is feeling its power right now at the same time it’s getting frustrated with the slow pace of change, while Biden represents an increasingly moribund circle of political operatives who are in no way capable of managing the public’s expectations like Clinton and Obama managed. I don’t think many people really internalized how loving little Nancy Pelosi got done with the giant majority she was handed in 2018, but I don’t expect that to be true if the Democrats get unified control of government in 2020. All we can do is hope that in the decade since OWS, the organizing power of BLM and various other groups is getting strong enough that it can’t be ignored and will be effective in pushing back. lol who am I kidding nothing will get done and HB1 will get strangled in the cradle by the same party that was too afraid to pass card check or enforce the motor voter bill when it had a once-in-a-generation supermajority.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
a biden-pelosi-schumer party is never passing anything worthwhile except possibly puerto rico statehood and DC representation. maybe they'll throw in something on gun, i guess
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
Puerto Rico will be sacrificed for DC and then that won't even happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 23:08 |
|
|
Isn't PR statehood tricky because of local opposition to changing their status? Or did the loving over they got with the recent disasters make some of those people realize how vulnerable territory status actually makes you?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2020 17:24
|
|
