|
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 | ||
|
Oh Snapple! posted:Consequences of bringing a bunch of republicans who have done innumerable harm to the rights of women and others seem like perfectly fine topic of discussion to me. Bringing them in certainly doesn't scream that they actually give a poo poo about the issue of abortion, or many others. yeah you're not going to see me defending bringing kasich on to talk
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 19:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 15:16 |
|
|
William Bear posted:Not sure, but the current draft of the 2020 Democrat platform calls for returning to the Obama-era status of relations with Iran and Cuba. The person heading Biden's national security and foreign policy team was the former deputy of the CIA personally responsible for covering up the agency illegally monitoring Congress people and who later worked for palantir https://www.google.com/amp/s/static.theintercept.com/amp/biden-adviser-avril-haines-palantir.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:The person heading Biden's national security and foreign policy team was the former deputy of the CIA personally responsible for covering up the agency illegally monitoring Congress people and who later worked for palantir https://www.google.com/amp/s/static.theintercept.com/amp/biden-adviser-avril-haines-palantir.html Thank god Trump isnt a competent fascist. Imagine how bad it would be of one of those got into the white house.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:01
|
|
|
punishedkissinger posted:if the party is deciding that we need anti-abortion republicans to win then its kind of reasonable to be concerned about the direction of the party The party has been cool with anti-abortion democrats for the longest time, though they've been losing their primaries. Maybe that's why they're bringing in these republicans, can't vote them out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
An anti-abortion party would probably have a better plan for protecting Roe v. Wade than “hope Ruth Bader Ginsberg dies when we want her to and then pray for the death of Justice Thomas.” Because it’s not very clear to me that Democrats have any other policies at all aimed at protecting women’s reproductive rights in a realistic fashion, given that the court has shown a real eagerness to chip away at Roe while keeping it intact.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:04
|
|
|
Currently reading a fun article about Biden and his foreign policy team:quote:Biden was the most modest vice president in recent history, coming into office with a net worth of less than $150,000. But afterward, he made big money, profiting from a multimillion-dollar book deal and earning $540,000 annually from a University of Pennsylvania center named for him that doesn’t involve any teaching. He nevertheless promoted himself as Middle-Class Joe. “I work for you—not any industry,” he tweeted last year. quote:Tasked by Obama to end the Iraq War, Biden supported Nouri El-Maliki, the leader he knew, and rescued the Iraqi prime minister’s career even though it ended up fracturing the country. When Maliki narrowly lost in 2010, Biden didn’t give Iraqi political parties time to broker a new coalition. With Biden’s endorsement, Maliki gained a second term; he grew more authoritarian, which is now widely believed to have led to the rise of ISIS. Biden ignored experts who were skeptical of Maliki and preferred to glad-hand. “He came to deal with Iraqi politicians like local political kingpins in Delaware or Pennsylvania,” said Robert Ford, who was deputy ambassador in Baghdad from 2008 to 2010. https://www.google.com/amp/s/prospect.org/api/amp/world/how-biden-foreign-policy-team-got-rich/
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
rko posted:An anti-abortion party would probably have a better plan for protecting Roe v. Wade than “hope Ruth Bader Ginsberg dies when we want her to and then pray for the death of Justice Thomas.” Because it’s not very clear to me that Democrats have any other policies at all aimed at protecting women’s reproductive rights in a realistic fashion, given that the court has shown a real eagerness to chip away at Roe while keeping it intact. Here's the Democratic Party's abortion plan: ship your blonde, blue-eyed daughter across state lines to deal with an 'oopsie' that'll derail her bright future at daddy's financial firm. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
Grayly Squirrel posted:If Biden loses, the message received by the DNC will not be "we need to be more leftist." They will blame the loss on concessions made to the liberal wing, outspokenness on the part of progressive Dems in the House, and go all-in on securing the increasingly alienated suburban moderate/conservative vote. Another thing I'm learning about is how many high status democrats abandoned Mcgovern in 1972.  Apparently this included sitting mayors and Congress people? Amazing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:09
|
|
|
Has there been anything from the Biden team on abortion that isn’t a supremes court justice that still has a minority and play defense against slowly eroding rights?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:09
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:I'm confident that there are a lot of more useful things this thread can go after than 'are the dems secretly anti-abortion' https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/legislature/article_d970cbd0-8486-11e9-bb8a-cf565198aa1f.html quote:Progressive Democrats in Louisiana, particularly women, are furious at Gov. John Bel Edwards for signing an extreme anti-abortion bill, a development that could cause problems for the governor as he runs for re-election this fall. https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...22aa_story.html quote:The Democratic Party should not impose support for abortion rights as a litmus test on its candidates, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Tuesday Can we talk about how Dems are openly anti-abortion (or ambivalent at best)?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:10
|
|
|
Eminai posted:https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/legislature/article_d970cbd0-8486-11e9-bb8a-cf565198aa1f.html If I wanted to watch a long bad faith discussion where it’s claimed that John Bel Edwards represents the entire Democratic Party on abortion I would just read the Protest Vote thread from before Prester Jane was banned.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:21
|
|
|
Eminai posted:Can we talk about how Dems are openly anti-abortion (or ambivalent at best)? Use your judgement.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:23
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:I'm confident that there are a lot of more useful things this thread can go after than 'are the dems secretly anti-abortion' quote:Last week, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Ben Ray Luján refused to rule out helping pro-life Democrats win election to the House, saying instead that there will be no “litmus test” on abortion in 2018. The comments provoked swift backlash: Ilyse Hogue, the president of NARAL, denounced the approach as “an ethically and politically bankrupt strategy.” Feminist writers accused the party of selling out women and making “a disastrous mistake.” https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/democrats-abortion-litmus-test-controversy/536352/
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:26
|
|
|
a biden ticket is not going to end in an abortion ban seriously, though, if biden tacking as hard right as he can - to the point of having a guy who brazenly and knowingly lied to directly enable the single greatest policy failure of the 21st century thus far as a spokesman - at the same time as clearly losing his mind and setting up another massively crappy character for the 2028 run isn't enough to make you withhold your vote, you must accept that this is what you're supporting. do not actively support this gaggle of people who seemingly have no major issue with actual crimes against humanity
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:27
|
|
|
biden is going to drive america further to the right, in some ways, than trump will, and he'll take up the two next presidential elections to do it. at least trump's out after four years and is increasingly mentally unfit, and prone to doing poo poo to blow up the american empire
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:29
|
|
|
I think dems don't do enough to protect abortion rights and access to reproductive health care (even though it is one of the core dem positions)(or all health care, for that matter). That's still a long ways from dems are anti-abortion
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:a biden ticket is not going to end in an abortion ban This run, certainly, but you can bet that making both major parties anti-abortion is one of the strategic objectives of the the nevertrump entryists.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:This run, certainly, but you can bet that making both major parties anti-abortion is one of the strategic objectives of the the nevertrump entryists. centrist Rs, who i assume are the ones who would largely be going over to the dems, are not especially anti-abortion. only ~20% of americans oppose abortion and they're almost entirely far right evangelicals afaik
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
punishedkissinger posted:Thank god Trump isnt a competent fascist. Imagine how bad it would be of one of those got into the white house. It's amazing how everyone just forgot how insane it is that the director of the CIA became president.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:but yeah wrt platform, i think people wildly underestimate just how statistically centrist the us is and the popularity of some leftist positions is not additive. 80% of people might love something, but 15% of people will consider it a deal breaker and if you add several highly charged issues like that up you end up with a platform that is a non-starter for a large percentage of people. This makes superficial sense but would benefit a lot from any evidence at all that it actually applies to the issues at hand. I think a lot of that 15% is the same 15% of people that hate everything else and they were never gonna vote D. V. Illych L. posted:biden is going to drive america further to the right, in some ways, than trump will, and he'll take up the two next presidential elections to do it. at least trump's out after four years and is increasingly mentally unfit, and prone to doing poo poo to blow up the american empire I believe him when he said he wasn't running in 2024, if only because I am still not convinced he'll make it to January with anyone still genuinely believing he's 'there'. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Aug 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
spunkshui posted:What are they gonna kill her? So that would be a necessary condition for you leaving, but is it a sufficient one?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:37
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:I think dems don't do enough to protect abortion rights and access to reproductive health care (even though it is one of the core dem positions)(or all health care, for that matter). That's still a long ways from dems are anti-abortion Poster A: Democrats are absolutely not against abortion Poster B: can you show me why you think the Democratic Party of 2020 is "absolutely not against abortion?" quote:ab·so·lute Considering that there's a couple of Democratic governors who have passed anti-abortion laws and that as recently as 3 whole years ago the DCCC chair made statements saying that being pro-choice wasn't going to be a litmus test within the Democratic Party, I think that passes the bar for the word "absolute" not being applicable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:38
|
|
|
Why should we enact purity tests? No seriously tell me how that is constructive to the health of the party when we see how that has worked with the gop
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:42
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:Why should we enact purity tests? No seriously tell me how that is constructive to the health of the party when we see how that has worked with the gop Which positions are purity tests? Obviously it's going to be the one's you don't care about. But which ones?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:43
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:Why should we enact purity tests? No seriously tell me how that is constructive to the health of the party when we see how that has worked with the gop The GOP has won how many elections versus the dems in the last 30 years? This is not the own you think it is. Having standards is loving important.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:44
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:I believe him when he said he wasn't running in 2024, if only because I am still not convinced he'll make it to January with anyone still genuinely believing he's 'there'. While you are very likely right about this, in point of fact he never said this - the promise to not run in 2024 never once passed through Biden's lips, it was only ever suggested by people in his campaign as an idea they wanted to float to gauge the public's reaction. Nothing's been said about it in months (or decades in covid-time.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:44
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:This makes superficial sense but would benefit a lot from any evidence at all that it actually applies to the issues at hand. I think a lot of that 15% is the same 15% of people that hate everything else and they were never gonna vote D. if he can physically stand, he'll run for president in 2024 if he's the incumbent
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:44
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:Why should we enact purity tests? No seriously tell me how that is constructive to the health of the party when we see how that has worked with the gop So you're saying that if we start rigorously demanding our politicians uphold the standards we had when we elected them, our influence might wane to the point of holding the White House, one chamber of Congress, and the entire federal judiciary? Because that sounds loving awful.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:46
|
|
|
in fact i'll toxx on it if any mods are interested in keeping track and SA hasn't been destroyed by a meteor strike or rampaging barbarians by then - if elected in 2020, biden will only be prevented from running in 2024 by some physically debilitating disease such as whole or partial paralysis or death
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:Why should we enact purity tests? No seriously tell me how that is constructive to the health of the party when we see how that has worked with the gop you mean, incredibly well?? killing off the RINOs has lead to a pretty cohesive party overall. did you forget they currently hold 3/4 branches of the government?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:49
|
|
|
Danger posted:It's amazing how everyone just forgot how insane it is that the director of the CIA became president. Oooh is he available to speak at the convention?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
The gop purity testing around 'no new taxes ever, all budgets must be revenue neutral,' or whatever the precise wording of that pledge was, has been probably one of the most destructive things to happen in american politics in the last 50 years. It's also hugely poisoned debate around raising taxes and has been one of the core driving forces expanding wealth and income inequality
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
e: ^^^ so purity testing has been incredibly effective for the GOP, you're saying? UCS Hellmaker posted:Why should we enact purity tests? No seriously tell me how that is constructive to the health of the party when we see how that has worked with the gop because by voting for anyone with a D next to their name you've empowered them to happily and successfully turn themselves into 90s-era Republicans, op
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:53
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:The gop purity testing around 'no new taxes ever, all budgets must be revenue neutral' has been probably one of the most destructive things to happen in american politics in the last 50 years. It's also hugely poisoned debate around raising taxes and has been one of the core driving forces expanding wealth and income inequality oh absolutely. the GOP is incredibly vile and short-sighted, but also successful at being vile and short-sighted. on the flipside, can you imagine if a purity test for democrats was say, supporting labor rights? we might actually be sucessful!
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:54
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:The gop purity testing around 'no new taxes ever, all budgets must be revenue neutral,' or whatever the precise wording of that pledge was, has been probably one of the most destructive things to happen in american politics in the last 50 years. It's also hugely poisoned debate around raising taxes and has been one of the core driving forces expanding wealth and income inequality So you're saying it was effective in driving policy and changing the conversation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:54
|
|
|
And the purity test have pushed out the sane voices and left us with screaming idiots. Remember 2010? Remember the tea party pandering? gently caress Doug Jones won because of the purity tests that happened. Harry Reid won reelection in 2014 because of the purity tests. There are many more cases of the same thing happening and you are screaming in here that Dems should enforce the same thing, instead of focusing on local politics and movements that have been shown to excite voters and engage them, winning elections in areas they don't tend to have chances at
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/RachaelHerron/status/1296103976262221824 Is this the legacy of Kamala Harris?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
Abortion is too useful as a wedge issue, they will never abandon that fight, it is more of a cultural issue than economic in the eyes of their donors, and as such it is permissible to keep fighting for.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
Famethrowa posted:oh absolutely. the GOP is incredibly vile and short-sighted, but also successful at being vile and short-sighted. But some people under our big umbrella may not like that 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 15:16 |
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:And the purity test have pushed out the sane voices and left us with screaming idiots. Remember 2010? Remember the tea party pandering? gently caress Doug Jones won because of the purity tests that happened. Harry Reid won reelection in 2014 because of the purity tests. There are many more cases of the same thing happening and you are screaming in here that Dems should enforce the same thing, instead of focusing on local politics and movements that have been shown to excite voters and engage them, winning elections in areas they don't tend to have chances at what in the world are you talking about? and what does Doug Jones have to do with purity tests?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2020 20:58
|
|