|
Ron Darling posted:this and also bernie ran a fairly white-centric campaign and still lost So his appeals for a more equal America were racially charged? Or are you just blaming him for Hillary's defeat?
|
#
¿
May 23, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 08:22 |
|
|
Ron Darling posted:The factors of Hillary's defeat were numerous, and starting with her, but Sanders seems to think that as long as you have economic equality everything else will magically fall into place and we'll turn into this rainbow land of unicorns and dreams and lol that will never happen without first dealing with the very real structural and systemic racist issues that are ingrained within the American fabric Hillary is after his heart*. They both used broad rhetoric that appealed to emotions, with constant reminders that the way out would not be an easy one. They both promised a land of unicorns. The only difference I see is that Bernie wanted to take gambles that would appeal broadly and Hillary was just a Judas goat for her special interests. Clinton showed no love of poor people, middle class people or minorities. She only cared about her narrowest constituency - big donors. Are you suggesting that anything short of divine intervention would just whoosh racism away? *in tactics.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Ron Darling posted:No but I do see in the current undertow of progressivism a sort of benevolent racism, wherein the white people are going to give these policies to the minorities that would supposedly lift them up without dealing with the exposed raw nerves underneath. I'm not saying that this is all current progressivism, but I'm seeing it crop up here and there. I'm also peeved that every time Bernie candidates lose they always fall back on the old VOTER FRAUD canard instead of looking at their own candidates and nominating someone who's acceptable to everyone Ron Darling posted:I'm not a bernie person, and while yes I did vote for Clinton I'm infuriated she won't take any personal responsibility for her loss in this because it always comes down to the candidate, win or lose. My problem is this: if Bernie had won and failed to implement like, anything, then what? every time I asked someone about this they'd be all "well we'd just vote in progressives next time" without honestly understanding like any dynamics of midterms. He was some sort of magical panacea that people stuck their hopes to because Obama didn't pan out to their every wish As for Obama, he cut his teeth making compromises. He was the perfect company man. A great smile, a strong demagogue and a great grasp of politics. I thought he might be more of a Jimmy Carter. Making that comparison later on in life gives it fresh meaning. Bernie's candidacy might have changed broader elections. He may have met better terms in Congress, since we also know Clinton left the Rust Belt high and dry. Yes, I do think Sanders would have made some good changes. If you stand up and say "I am for free healthcare" "I am for free school" "I am for better wages" and you MEAN IT instead of dropping it like dead-weight on day one, your enemies are going to look pretty bad for stymieing you. But that's just digression. All we can do now is mitigate Trumps damage and try to get the Democrats moving left. Although: Gammatron 64 posted:Spoiler alert: it's not going to reform. RIP a bone to pick posted:That is how effective media propaganda is, the "berniebros" and "white candidate" narratives carry on to this day, people still think Jill Stein is anti-vaxx too.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
Yes. vvv I think you're saying the same thing. phasmid fucked around with this message at 20:31 on May 23, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 23, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
Tallgeese posted:I'm not so sure that's the right word, given what a certain Hillary R. Clinton spent to lose. Celebrity endorsements aren't cheap.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2017 20:42
|
|