Jump to content

Dropout

Full Members
  • Posts

    812
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Dropout

  1. Bernie in East LA today /cheech. What an opportune time for this untapped voting bloc to show up.

    https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2019-11-16/bernie-sanders-heads-to-east-l-a-for-a-rally-as-part-of-his-outreach-to-young-latinos

    Nationwide, Latino voters are expected to be the largest minority voting bloc in 2020, surpassing black voters for the first time. But campaigns have failed to mobilize their full potential: Voter turnout for Latinos falls behind black voter turnout. And Latino voters in the U.S. skew young: Of the estimated 32 million eligible to cast ballots, 43% are 18 to 34, according to the research firm Latino Decisions. The average age of Latinos in the U.S. is 30.

    Sanders polls well with Latino voters. Nationally, 34% of likely Democratic Latino voters under 30 supported him, compared with 11% for former Vice President Joe Biden, a November youth poll by the Institute of Politics at Harvard found, according to its polling director, John Della Volpe. And in a California poll released Wednesday by the Latino Community Foundation, 31% of Latino registered voters surveyed said they planned to vote for Sanders, compared with 22% for Biden and 11% for Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts.

     

  2. Bernie still the only candidate to speak honestly and bluntly about a wide range of foreign affairs. This tweet is similar to statements from Jamal Khashoggi before he was murdered. Bernie is the only one who gives a fuck.

    Why haven’t other candidates spoken up about these atrocities? Do you trust your candidate on foreign policy? What do you point to in order to voice support of said candidates foreign policy? You trust their imagination? Is the rest of the world not important? Are we back to thinking our little bubble won’t burst? Or is it you simply won’t notice?

    I was told we were the leaders of the free world. 

    • Like 4
  3. 18 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

    Yess hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm if only there WERE such a candidate hmmmm oh well I guess we're screwed!

     

    Bill Maher has lost all of his fucking marbles.  Pretty sure I watched him tell Bernie after one of their interviews he would be with him in 2020. All to watch him squirm at the idea come crunch time. He can’t even broadcast a truthful show without a progressive there to slap him around and laugh to his face.

  4. 50 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

    Yeah, I was with him word for word and about to call him an even more prophetic luminary than Orwell or Huxley, but then I saw he trashed both Dumb & Dumber and Beavis and Butthead in the next sentence (neither of which are actually even dumb; they’re cleverly crude).  So, now I say Carl Sagan’s shit is all retarded.

    At least he left Kingpin out of it

    • Haha 1
  5. 2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    According to the link above, Warren has the 4th highest support among blacks and 3rd highest support among Hispanics, and the biggest group in both demographics is undecided.  That isn't remotely comparable to the bottom-feeding candidates, and is better than most of the candidates who qualified for the 3rd debate.    Calling her support the "least diverse" is completely disingenuous. 

    And there’s like 3 or 4 people legitimately running for the democratic nomination. Assuming undecideds will not follow their respective trends is disingenuous. I’ll get back to you in a few months.

  6. 42 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    You're imagining things, just like you completely imagined that my argument was about sexual assault.   

    Sexism against women. I misspoke and corrected this when pointed out no problem. Really has no bearing on the argument on either side anyway. No crutch for you.

    42 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    My engagement with you was, from the beginning, purely to point out that the "Bernie Bro" thing was a political narrative pushed by diehard Hillary supporters to diminish the legitimacy of Bernie's support.   Yes, it's code for white males, but a specific kind of white male:  bros, frat-boy types, guys who, as a caricature, are teeming with toxic masculinity.   The sexism and aggressiveness was the point. 

    I agree w your first sentence. Your imagination and cover starts with the rest of that paragraph. Again it starts with white male. It doesn’t start w sexist. I mean the article it started with even said so. Every Bernie Bro is a white guy. Not every Bernie Bro is a sexist.

    42 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    It stuck to some degree with Bernie versus Hillary not because it was fair, but because there is an inherent vulnerability on sexism in a modern Dem primary for a male running against the first strong female candidate for president.  Before Bernie, it was the Obama Boys, though that didn't stick as well because Obama's candidacy had its own historic nature.    It's not happening to Warren because she doesn't have a vulnerability to an attack on sexism grounds, for obvious reasons.   And, sure, her supporters are mostly white, but a white person who loves Liz Warren doesn't fit the frat-boy stereotype behind the Bernie Bros narrative either. 

     

    It stuck with Bernie bc it’s constantly regurgitated. It stuck w Bernie bc he has enemies in high places and for good reason. There is no stereotype that fits a Bernie supporter. There is one that fits a Warren supporter. Definitely more so than a Bernie supporter. Even then it’s definitely possible to just fucking make something up. You know?

    42 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    That you don't understand why Warren Bros isn't a thing should cause you to question your own reasoning, but you seem to be more comfortable with your false assumptions and the seeming unfairness of something you can't explain.

    I understand why Warren Bros is not a thing very clearly. It’s one set of rules for one candidate and entirely different set for everyone else. One of us is comfortable with false assumptions that’s for sure.

    20 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    Sure, when you're throwing around terms like "least." 

    Nah

  7. 20 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    What uncomfortable questions?  I haven't denied that it's code for white males.  That's the very basis for it being an accusation of sexism:   aggressively misogynistic frat dudes who wouldn't support Hillary simply because she's a woman.   It was a caricature pushed by Hillary PUMAs for political benefit.  That's what I've been saying. 

    Do you even know what you're arguing against?   Because it doesn't resemble anything I've said. 

    I know what I’m arguing. You’re the one changing positions mid argument.

    I mean this is the first time you’ve said Bernie Bro is code for white males. Before it was about sexism against women. Don’t equate the two. Don’t hide behind sexism against women. The major player with the term Bernie Bro is white males who can be sexist. Not sexists who can be white males.

    Uncomfortable questions that this rabbit hole began with. Bernie has the most diverse supporters. Warren has the least diverse. Why does Warren not get a similar label? Something that labels her supporters predominately white when that is indeed the case. In Bernie’s case it’s fucking fairy tales. Why do Warren supporters not merit the same attacks? Is it because Warren is preferable to the establishment than Bernie? Why is that when their platforms seem to be incredibly similar? Why should I trust Warren over Bernie? All this given that we both agree Bernie Bro is code for white males.

  8. 8 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    The article coined the term, but then it took on a life of its own, leading the original author to apologize and try to rein it back in.  If you don't think it was used as part of a push by Hillary PUMAs to paint support for Bernie as sexist, I don't know what to tell you.   I'm surprised to see a Bernie supporter giving the Hillary side a pass on that, but you're entitled to your opinion.   We'll just have to disagree. 

    I’m giving no pass. In fact the way I view it it’s worse bc women are included in minority when it comes to power. We will have to disagree bc the moment you admit Bernie Bro is code for white male you have to start asking uncomfortable questions.

  9. 4 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    What does "odd that it doesn't mention sexual assault" mean?   I didn't say it had anything to do with sexual assault.  

    My mistake. Sexist against women. The article doesn’t mention sexist against women but white middle class perhaps upper middle class male.

  10. 4 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    No need to get so defensive.  It's just my opinion, the world doesn't end because we disagree.   I just looked back through the last 10 pages or so and only two people used the term:  b_t using it defensively and Hugo, who repeatedly refers to "Kamala bros" too.  You're just so sensitive to this issue that you view it though a weird martyr prism.

    Defensive? Maybe I should of went with you look stupid bc you view it through a weird sexual assault prism instead of idk explaining my viewpoint. A quick google search of Bernie Bro leads to this article as the creation.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/here-comes-the-berniebro-bernie-sanders/411070/

    Odd it doesn’t mention sexual assault. There is this tho

    The Berniebro is not every Bernie Sanders supporter. Sanders’s support skews young, but not particularly male. The Berniebro is male, though. Very male.

    The Berniebro is someone you may only have encountered if you’re somewhat similar to him: white; well-educated; middle-class (or, delicately, “upper middle-class”); and aware of NPR podcasts and jangly bearded bands.

  11. 15 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    Believe it or not but there is still a significant group of Hillary hostiles too. The common nomenclature is "Hillary die hards".  These folks argue Warren is too close to Bernie, she betrayed Hillary by not endorsing her soon enough, and saying the primary process was rigged last time. 

    It's funny because the Bernie hostiles are claiming Warren is just like Hillary, "she's a sellout to the establishment and used to be a Republican." 

    None of the accusations are based in good faith.  They're just talking points each faction wants people to believe in the hopes people will turn on Warren and support their preferred candidate.  

    Warren is nothing like Hillary. I’ve questioned why she didn’t endorse Bernie last time if their ideals are so closely aligned. I’ve questioned if she will really fight for everything she says. I’ve questioned why she’s running on Bernie’s platform. I’ve questioned why the powers that be seem a lot more comfortable with her than Bernie. What is bad faith about these questions? I don’t want you to believe anything but what’s actually happening.

  12. 1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

    You seem to believe there is a massive establishment conspiracy behind it, but it's just politics as usual.  You just look stupid trying to compare the diversity of his base versus Warren, because it was never really about demographic facts.  Defensiveness only keeps these kinds of narratives alive, and nobody is keeping the "Bernie Bro" narrative alive more than the Bernie supporters who constantly reference it. 

    Well good thing you’re here to set me straight. It was all about demographic facts and the truth trying to be kept under wraps. Bernie Bro is used without a second thought all throughout this thread and everywhere else by random people to describe pretty much any supporter of Bernie Sanders. But csb you sure won’t have to face reality if that’s what you’re going with.

  13. 2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    Should we call them Bernie hostiles instead? 

    Because that description fits much better than “bro”.

    Bernie has a more diverse base because he’s been running for President long enough to have “a base”.  Warren is in the process of building a base.  It’s kinda how this whole campaign thing works. Bernie folks are starting to sound a lot like Biden people, relying entirely on polls and the past as the best indicator of future results.  It doesn’t work that way.  You have to move the needle with people during the process to be successful.

    Call them whatever you want. Then be sure to come up w a false snarky name for everyone and get it mainstream. This is what’s done to Bernie. It won’t happen to another candidate because the powers that be aren’t fucking scared of anyone else. They have that part right as they usually do. Who to worry about and who not to worry about.

  14. 2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

    It's a coincidence that all the white suburb professional class guys here by far prefer the two candidates whose bases are (so far) lily white and mostly holding post-grad degrees. Pure coincidence.

    I don't know why you would think race and class issues dominate the subconscious of the "centrist". Unprecedented. You should be ashamed.

    I’m trying to hold up a mirror but they won’t open their eyes. Instead I whine when I live in reality and observe. Or wait I’m better than you. I guarantee I’ve done some not so great things and still do. Just not afraid to open my eyes look in the mirror and try and be better. But it’s too hard and too scary. I should stop and go along w the show but username checks out.

  15. 39 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    Not really.   Hillary owned the establishment, but the hard-core Hillary PUMAs are their own subgroup of people.   Hence the origin of "PUMA," while the establishment moved on to Obama.  And there's no  "Warren Bro" narrative because there isn't an opponent trying to portray support for Warren as sexist against women (and it wouldn't stick).   There's nothing more sinister going on here.   

    So you think sexist against women is where Bro originated from? Bro is used to mislead and falsely claim supporters of Bernie Sanders are predominately white males. Never mind that it’s 50/50 male/female. Fact is his base is the most racially diverse and Warren’s the least. Bro is intentionally used to make minorities (women included) feel as if they aren’t there. It’s a narrative that is obviously verifiably false. There is no way it is not sinister. 

×
×
  • Create New...