Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee


used2b

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I really want to party with Carville.  I don't agree with him on some issues or maybe some strategies.  But damned if that wouldn't be fun.

Whenever Carville pops up on television, it always reminds me of this guy:

giphy.gif

(Red was on last night, so timing is pretty funny. Love Helen Mirren in that, too)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

 

Yeah, we should keep taking advice from recidivist losers who think policy is not the result of acquired power but some ideal future fucking state that will organically emerge , uncompromised and pure, just as soon as reality takes a breather. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love how the far left on this board act like Bernie actually represents the Democratic Party considering his platform does not remotely resemble the democratic party historically.  Most of my immediate family are democrats and have voted democrat their entire lives.  They all think Bernie is batshit crazy.   

Anecdotal evidence from a few family members does not change the fact tgat the majority of democratic voters support positions like M4A, tuition free public college, etc.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ongoing saga of Culinary 226 in Nevada is an interesting microcosm of how this primary is going for unions and smaller regional parties.

The overall pattern is this:
- The union/party bosses want to endorse someone who isn't Bernie but the workers themselves overwhelmingly want Bernie.
- The union/party bosses either endorse the non-Bernie or start attacking the non-Bernie.
- The workers themselves revolt, hitting the bosses on social media, sending letters, or even doing rogue group endorsements of Bernie.
- The bosses go to the media claiming that the Bernie Bros are harassing them and ruining their lives.
- The workers continue to organize and make it even more obvious that the bosses are going against the will of the workers.

This is not uncommon. In 2008 this happened with Clinton and Obama. The Culinary 226 bosses endorsed Obama, but Hillary worked the workers and they went strong to her in the caucus. The bosses caught hell from Hillary-loving workers; I remember one rumor that the head of the union had her office trashed.

The head of Culinary 266 now is part of Neera Tanden's centrist think tank, Center for American Progress. They put out mailers attacking M4A and the rank-and-file are in revolt, sending angry messages to the bosses.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, gmr548 said:


Anecdotal evidence from a few family members does not change the fact tgat the majority of democratic voters support positions like M4A, tuition free public college, etc.

Yeah, uh... no

Quote

Only one in four Democratic voters says they would favor eliminating private health insurance and replacing it with a government-run plan — the centerpiece of the “Medicare for all” proposals put forward by Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. And only one in three favors making public college tuition free for all Americans regardless of income, another idea shared by the two leading progressives in the race.

It turns out that they respond positively to those things only when asked as yes or no questions, like - "do you support medicare for all", or  "do you support free college", but when you give them choices, they don't actually prefer those things vs giving people a public option or making college more affordable. 

Here's the data

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Kaiser Family Foundation (yes, that Kaiser): 56% approve of national single-payer
Hill/HarrisX: 70% support

 

Yes, I already posted this. It shows that public option is more popular than M4A. Great work.

 

oh, and the 2 year old HarrisX poll? Uh, dude. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Bernie's top surrogate just conceded that (Warren's) incremental approach to fixing healthcare might be the only path forward and she's ok with that. Is AOC now a "snake? A "corporate whore"? A "DNC centrist shill"?

Are you talking AOC talking about how basic compromise work or did she something else about it being impossible or not worth fighting for?

Because if you're talking about the tweet above, she's just acknowledging how negotiation works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Are you talking AOC talking about how basic compromise work or did she something else about it being impossible or not worth fighting for?

Because if you're talking about the tweet above, she's just acknowledging how negotiation works.

Bernie Bros have called Warren everything short of the devil for suggesting what AOC just acknowledged. So my guess is no - a significant portion of Bernie's base truly expect an uncompromising M4A bill, and when it doesn't come to fruition, they'll check out of the political process and go back to their hot cheetos and Minecraft. I have no faith in Bernie's young idealistic low-information voter block  staying engaged in the political process if Bernie doesn't deliver what he's been preaching forever. So I'm actually happy AOC is tempering some of the expectations; it's better to do it now than later. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Ask your girl AOC.

Would if I could. She won't return my DMs.

Nice dodge, though, always fun to see the "I'm a smart realist!" guys not know how to explain their supposed realism.

1 minute ago, Bruh Man said:

Bernie Bros have called Warren everything short of the devil for suggesting what AOC just acknowledged.

Is AOC suggestion that we break M4A up into multiple parts like Warren is proposing? Because if she's not, you're being dishonest in comparing their positions.

(And you know "snake" doesn't come from her M4A walkback, it comes from her leaking private conversations to the press for attention and then snubbing him after the debate. Again, you're not operating in good faith here.)

Quote

So my guess is no - a significant portion of Bernie's base truly expect an uncompromising M4A bill, and when it doesn't come to fruition, they'll check out of the political process and go back to their hot cheetos and Minecraft.

Neither you nor I have any idea what "a significant portion of Bernie's base truly expect(s)". You have what you want to believe that serves to make you feel smug and superior, but that doesn't necessarily map to reality.

Are you interested in discussing these policies or their legislative pathways or is this just so you can cry about Bernie Bros?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh, so AOC says you need to compromise to get a coalition to pass your legislation  - even if its not 100% what you want. 

And here i thought M4A would pass after Bernie goes to West Virginia and calls Manchin a Republican-lite, corporate whore shit lib.  Turns out even AOC knows that's not going to win you votes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Are you talking AOC talking about how basic compromise work or did she something else about it being impossible or not worth fighting for?

 

18 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Yes, Pete's plan is an weak fallback and worse than M4A. Agreed.

take a breath.  let me spot you some punctuation.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Tell me how.

Who are the M4AWWI votes that aren't M4A votes in the Senate. Name names.

M4AWWI was specifically put together to make it more feasible. One plan raises middle class taxes, the other doesn't. So my guess is the difference in support is about a dozen Democratic senators. Manchin, Coons, Warner, Heitkamp, Tester etc. I can't see ever signing on to Bernie's bill.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bruh Man said:

M4AWWI was specifically put together to make it more feasible. One plan raises middle class taxes, the other doesn't. So my guess is the difference in support is about a dozen Democratic senators. Manchin, Coons, Warner, Heitkamp, Tester etc. I can't see ever signing on to Bernie's bill.

Well Heitkamp is gone.  But I'm sure you mean Sinema perhaps. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Huh, so AOC says you need to compromise to get a coalition to pass your legislation  - even if its not 100% what you want. 

Yes, like Bernie has done his entire career.

What's the confusion?

Quote

And here i thought M4A would pass after Bernie goes to West Virginia and calls Manchin a Republican-lite, corporate whore shit lib.

It might.

You shoot your shot and then negotiate down when you don't get it.

Bernie's plan is to work very hard and push as hard as he can to get what he thinks is right. Then, if that doesn't work, he's going to compromise down.

This isn't complicated.

1 minute ago, Bruh Man said:

M4AWWI was specifically put together to make it more feasible. One plan raises middle class taxes, the other doesn't. So my guess is the difference in support is about a dozen Democratic senators. Manchin, Coons, Warner, Heitkamp, Tester etc. I can't see ever signing on to Bernie's bill.

Heitkamp is not in the Senate
Tester has openly said we should look at single-payer
Manchin won't support anything without tremendous pressure
Coons is a punk, we can beat him into submission
Warner will be tougher than Coons but easier than Manchin

It's work. It's going to be hard, and Bernie is promising that he will fight tooth and nail to get it.

Just now, Ghost of LL said:

I swear to gawd--the Bros efforts at negative persuasion are really breathtaking.

I mean, seriously--why do you want people to hate you and your candidate?

It's sad to see grown men cry so much about mean people online.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bad_teammate said:

It's sad to see grown men cry so much about mean people online.

I'm not crying about shit.

You're the person who's trying to persuade people to vote for your guy.  And yet all you do is convince people (1) you're a lunatic, and (2) your guy has a bunch of lunatic followers.  And a guy whose supporters are all lunatics is probably a lunatic himself (or at least sufficiently close to lunacy such that I don't want to vote for him).

Here's the real question--where in the fuck did you get the idea that the point of politics was to make people cry?  When did you get the idea that politics doesn't involve persuasion?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...