Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee


used2b

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Have you ever watched a Republican debate or stump speech?

Do you think they say, "We don't want everyone to have health care! We want low wages! We want college to be too expensive! WE DRINK BABY BLOOD AND ARE EVIL!"?

Are they lying? Absolutely. We know they have no intention of actually trying to make those things happen and we know they will buckle to the pressure of their benefactors and donors. I'm not saying they'll fight for those things, but if you asked them if they want those things, they'd say yes.

Show me the plans.

Show me the willingness to piss off your donors to make sure those plans happen.

You are a liar. Why would a bernie bro lie about the differences between the GOP and democrats?

You are a liar pushing both sides are the same, the same narrative pushed by right-wing media outlets and trump himself.

It is possible that instead of being a liar, your brain is rotted by twitter.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GW Hayduke said:

You are a liar. Why would a bernie bro lie about the differences between the GOP and democrats?

You are a liar pushing both sides are the same, the same narrative pushed by right-wing media outlets and trump himself.

It is possible that instead of being a liar, your brain is rotted by twitter.

When did I say that?

But as far as being a liar, which of those things, except the one I bolded, would a mainstream Republican politician say he was against?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bad_teammate said:

When did I say that?

But as far as being a liar, which of those things, except the one I bolded, would a mainstream Republican politician say he was against?

Who cares what they say? Are you an idiot that actually listens and believes anything the GOP says? Are you a liar or an idiot? Or both?

If you are going to comment in the Dem Nominee thread, read the democratic platform from 2016. 

https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GW Hayduke said:

Who cares what they say? Are you an idiot that actually listens and believes anything the GOP says? Are you a liar or an idiot? Or both?

If you are going to comment in the Dem Nominee thread, read the democratic platform from 2016. 

The fact that we shouldn't just listen to what they say they want is exactly my point. I don't care what Joe Biden or mainstream corporate Dems claim they want.

Show me the plans.

Shoe me the willingness to fight their own donors to put those plans in effect.

It's not 2016. Biden isn't Hillary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The fact that we shouldn't just listen to what they say they want is exactly my point. I don't care what Joe Biden or mainstream corporate Dems claim they want.

Show me the plans.

Shoe me the willingness to fight their own donors to put those plans in effect.

It's not 2016. Biden isn't Hillary.

You are a liar and idiot. Ok.

Below is quick easy list of commonalities between Bernie and the democratic platform.  The opinion of a liar/idiot isn't relevant.

Both groups see health care as a right and want to expand health care services for all Americans. They differ on exactly how to do that.

Both groups want to end gerrymandering, decrease corporate influence in politics, and make it easier for people to vote.

Both groups want to make higher education more accessible. They differ on exactly how to do that.

Both groups see climate change as a threat and want to build a green economy that decrease GHG emissions.

Both groups want to increase the earnings of the working class, strengthen worker's rights, and increase the tax burden on the wealthy.

The 2016 democratic platform is available online.

https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously a disappointing finish, but man I like a lot of these numbers coming out of Texas.

I know some of you are incapable of reading my posts at this point and realizing that there is zero excuse-making happening, and that's OK, but if you want a progressive future you have to feel encouraged by this.

The black vote killed Bernie, but is it because progressive politics turned them off? I don't see any evidence of that. Obama made the calls he needed to make and Clyburn broke his pledge to make sure SC was a landslide and, in terms of the black vote, that was a knife in Bernie's heart. That's how the game goes.

But outside of this election, do not let Republicans or moderates say that progressivism isn't popular. M4A is popular. Legalized marijuana is popular. Free college is popular.

If not for the intervention of a once-in-a-lifetime political powerhouse (the first black president, universally beloved by the Democrats), Bernie Sanders, an Independent Democratic Socialist from Vermont, wins Texas running away.

Again, that's not me throwing sour grapes, that's me just pointing out how the fundamentals of left-progressive politics can be successful.

Bernie is the most visible champion of the platform right now, but the platform itself is what matters and it is so much stronger in 2020 than it was in 2016.

Played right, we will be able to exert TREMENDOUS pressure on Biden if he wins to push his policy platform left and secure economic, racial, and social justice for all.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Played right, we will be able to exert TREMENDOUS pressure on Biden if he wins to push his policy platform left and secure economic, racial, and social justice for all.

This is the most accurate and important part of your post (the rest contains a good amount of wishful thinking and yes, sour grapes).

And I hope that happens.  I would love to see Biden forced to take a big gulp of progressive policy and govern accordingly.  He won't get you all you want -- not even close.  But he can do better than he would with no pressure from the left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good ole Joe - 

"I’m a liberal on health care because I believe it is a birth right of every human being—not just some damn privilege to be meted out to a few people.

. . .  I don’t like the Supreme Court decision on abortion. I think it went too far. I don’t think that a woman has the sole right to say what should happen to her body."

 

Edited by washparkhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That darned Joe says the darnedest things  - 

"He defines politics as power. “And, whether you like it or not, young lady,” he says, leaning over his desk to shake a finger at me, “us cruddy politicians can take away that First Amendrnent of yours if we want to.”' 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, G650 said:

I don't think this is a remotely progressive position anymore

Nope

3 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Well the centrist presumptive Democratic nominee is against it, so there's that.

Yep

Just now, G650 said:

I'd bet good money that tune changes. It's even becoming popular with Republicans.

Nope

It all depends on the question asked.  The Kaiser Family Foundation has done some excellent polling on the issue, drilling down on some nuances.

Quote

As Medicare-for-all becomes a staple in national conversations around health care and people become aware of the details of any plan or hear arguments on either side, it is unclear how attitudes towards such a proposal may shift. KFF polling finds public support for Medicare-for-all shifts significantly when people hear arguments about potential tax increases or delays in medical tests and treatment (Figure 9). KFF polling found that when such a plan is described in terms of the trade-offs (higher taxes but lower out-of-pocket costs), the public is almost equally split in their support (Figure 10).  KFF polling also shows many people falsely assume they would be able to keep their current health insurance under a single-payer plan, suggesting another potential area for decreased support especially since most supporters (67 percent) of such a proposal think they would be able to keep their current health insurance coverage (Figure 11).

KFF polling finds more Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents would prefer voting for a candidate who wants to build on the ACA in order to expand coverage and reduce costs rather than replace the ACA with a national Medicare-for-all plan

The majority favors some sort of conceptual public option, single payer system.  But when you drill down into details, such as the pros and cons of a M4A plan, that doesn't draw nearly as much support.  Maybe that will change.  But today, M4A and all that it entails (when voters are asked questions that reveal that level of detail) hasn't captured majority support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, washparkhorn said:

That darned Joe says the darnedest things  - 

"He defines politics as power. “And, whether you like it or not, young lady,” he says, leaning over his desk to shake a finger at me, “us cruddy politicians can take away that First Amendrnent of yours if we want to.”' 

Well, he's right.  Politics IS power.  I mean, that's literally what it is.  It's about governance, which necessarily includes power.

And he's also right about the First Amendment, and any other part of the Constitution -- they CAN repeal any portion of it via amendment, which is then submitted to the states for vote (and guess who votes in the states?  It ain't the people via direct ballot.  It's...politicians (the state legislature)).  It's a chickenshit threat....but it's one every one of us should have our eyes wide open about.  

And it's our job to keep our leaders fucking straight on that shit -- if Biden ends up being our nominee, it would be good if we the people told him "fuck that shit, that's not acceptable," as opposed to the base of support of the current occupant of the WH, who would say "woohoo! go get get 'em, and suck it libtards!"  But of course, you know that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Nope

Yep

Nope

It all depends on the question asked.  The Kaiser Family Foundation has done some excellent polling on the issue, drilling down on some nuances.

The majority favors some sort of conceptual public option, single payer system.  But when you drill down into details, such as the pros and cons of a M4A plan, that doesn't draw nearly as much support.  Maybe that will change.  But today, M4A and all that it entails (when voters are asked questions that reveal that level of detail) hasn't captured majority support.

I'm not talking about Bernie's specific "M4A", but universal coverage. Use whatever terminology you wish, the public is overwhelmingly for it.

 

All the pseudo analysis claiming people want it till they see how they have to pay is a red herring as well. No one will ever agree on how to pay for anything, from the bar tab to healthcare. This doesn't obviate the fact everyone wants it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, G650 said:

I'm not talking about Bernie's specific "M4A", but universal coverage. Use whatever terminology you wish, the public is overwhelmingly for it.

Well, the distinction actually matters.  Because there are a lot of details and nuances, not just "how do you pay for it?"  For example, one nuance would be a requirement that no supplemental insurance or other benefit could cover a service or procedure that M4A covers -- people don't like that.

Here's the Kaiser analysis: https://www.kff.org/slideshow/public-opinion-on-single-payer-national-health-plans-and-expanding-access-to-medicare-coverage/

Yes, people DO now support the idea of universal coverage.  But universal coverage and M4A are NOT the same thing.  M4A is just one form that universal coverage might take -- there are many other forms that differ significantly from M4A.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Little late to the game here because I've been on vacation, but as a Bernie voter but not a Bernie cultist (I think he has the best chance to pick up the three rust belt states we need, and my deeply ingrained anti authority streak ultimately got me), I do think the timing of the Pete/Amy exits is pretty shady and is probably going to create some issues with Bernie voters. I will obviously vote for Biden and expect any reasonable person to do so, but if he loses, a lot of it will be self inflicted by the old hat Democrats, once again. And once again they'll be standing dick in hand wondering what happened as Trump appoints Alex Jones to the Supreme Court.

I have to agree with an old b_t trope here. I hate the Democrats. Speaking of, hey b_t, I'll take you off ignore now. Let's kill some billionaires.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

Little late to the game here because I've been on vacation, but as a Bernie voter but not a Bernie cultist (I think he has the best chance to pick up the three rust belt states we need, and my deeply ingrained anti authority streak ultimately got me), I do think the timing of the Pete/Amy exits is pretty shady and is probably going to create some issues with Bernie voters. I will obviously vote for Biden and expect any reasonable person to do so, but if he loses, a lot of it will be self inflicted by the old hat Democrats, once again.
I have to agree with an old b_t trope here. I hate the Democrats. Speaking of, hey b_t, I'll take you off ignore now. Let's kill some billionaires.

And millionaires. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, G650 said:

The name isn't trademarked Brisket. Feel free to miss the forest for the trees though.

 

If the Dems take both houses, they will pass some universal coverage and Biden would sign it.

He would also sign decriminalization of marijuana if a dem majority in both houses passed it. And other things too. If a dem legislature is willing to push some policies that are more liberal than his general persona, he's not going to veto it. I think Warren is currently obtaining some promises from him to support liberal legislation that he is not currently publicly supporting. I got an email from her campaign that heavily implies she's dropping out but that there is still some work to do, which again I assume is pressing the Biden campaign for some stuff.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bad_teammate said:

If Warren can be a left-progressive mole inside the Biden campaign while Bernie pushes and pushes from the outside then that could be good.

I think it's happening as we speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/04/business/wall-street-joe-biden-bernie-sanders.html

Wall St., breaking out their checkbooks for Joe.

Quote

Now, with Mr. Biden’s victories presenting him as an effective political foil for Mr. Sanders, executives who had shrugged off the race are racing to support a candidate whom they believe can defend the social policies they are committed to without upending the economy.

Tracy V. Maitland, the president of Advent Capital Management and a supporter of Mr. Biden’s, said he was fielding numerous calls and texts from elated friends on Wall Street and in the entertainment industry. “People think we’ve turned a corner,” he said.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Biden was not my first choice. But starting now I’m not going to say a bad word about him until the first Wednesday in November.

The primary is the time to push him and make him change for the better. That's the entire purpose of the primary, to mold a candidate that the people want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The primary is the time to push him and make him change for the better. That's the entire purpose of the primary, to mold a candidate that the people want.

Agreed on this. Obviously the primaries aren't over, but at the current trajectory, Biden answering for things like his Iraq War vote during the primary is a good thing. Democrats don't need to get personal or tell outright lies like Trump will, but issues related to his record (and Bernie's too, for that matter) should absolutely be pressed. It gives him a chance to explain himself to voters, both preparing him to answer for it in the general and also addressing the concern for a portion of the electorate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

That's an excellent point.

It’s why she’s not likely to get much more than head of the CFPB from Biden.  The juice isn’t worth the squeeze if the Dems win 4 seats. I mean, you have to assume RGB will want to retire immediately or after the spring session. 

Edited by Bateshorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look on the bright side fellas. We are going to have a plethora of coding coal miners soon. I don't particularly like Biden (senile) or Sanders but luckily they're running against the biggest turd living on the planet so it's an easy choice. Took an exit poll for the first time in my life and my only priority is getting the R's and Trump out of office as quickly as possible.

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

47 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Little late to the game here because I've been on vacation, but as a Bernie voter but not a Bernie cultist (I think he has the best chance to pick up the three rust belt states we need, and my deeply ingrained anti authority streak ultimately got me), I do think the timing of the Pete/Amy exits is pretty shady and is probably going to create some issues with Bernie voters. I will obviously vote for Biden and expect any reasonable person to do so, but if he loses, a lot of it will be self inflicted by the old hat Democrats, once again. And once again they'll be standing dick in hand wondering what happened as Trump appoints Alex Jones to the Supreme Court.

I have to agree with an old b_t trope here. I hate the Democrats. Speaking of, hey b_t, I'll take you off ignore now. Let's kill some billionaires.

 

 

Ok--I gotta ask: what is "shady" about Buttigieg's and Klobuchar's exits?

I mean, for one thing, it was time.  Buttigieg was out of money.  He really had no way to continue past Super Tuesday (or even to it--they were completely broke).  Klobuchar had no path.  Their decisions shouldn't really surprise.

And to the extent things were offered, isn't that how this works?  You compromise.  You make deals.  Isn't that what we want?  Isn't that what we're going to need from a president if we hope to get legislation passed?

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BradInATX said:

I do think the timing of the Pete/Amy exits is pretty shady and is probably going to create some issues with Bernie voters

I was in a discussion with someone on reddit about this. He was framing it as “unfair” and Bernie being a victim. 

How can the endorsements by candidates be considered anything but just ordinary politics? Why the “unfair” framing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Blotto said:

My most realistic hope at this point is that Trump and Biden will get into an alpha-male noogie contest at the first debate and both stroke out. 

The simulation specifications call for them both to have debilitating cardiovascular events in the weeks prior to the election. Biden first, and then Trump to follow closely behind, both prior to election day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was in a discussion with someone on reddit about this. He was framing it as “unfair” and Bernie being a victim. 

How can the endorsements by candidates be considered anything but just ordinary politics? Why the “unfair” framing?

I don't recall candidates of that strength dropping out before super Tuesday. At risk of stoking the flames of the True Believers, I do think it was pretty obviously ordered from above with promises made.

Keep in mind that purely policy wise I am much more in line with Joe/Amy/Pete than I am with Bernie, with the exception of our guillotining billionaires platform. So I'm not really coming from an agenda driven place. It just seems a bit dicey, especially given 2016.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The simulation specifications call for them both to have debilitating cardiovascular events in the weeks prior to the election. Biden first, and then Trump to follow closely behind, both prior to election day. 

Bernie will come running in from offstage to save the day.

Then also have a heart attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't recall candidates of that strength dropping out before super Tuesday. At risk of stoking the flames of the True Believers, I do think it was pretty obviously ordered from above with promises made.Keep in mind that purely policy wise I am much more in line with Joe/Amy/Pete than I am with Bernie, with the exception of our guillotining billionaires platform. So I'm not really coming from an agenda driven place. It just seems a bit dicey, especially given 2016. 

 

To add, it feels like a "we prefer four more years of Trump to Bernie" move. They had to know the optics would suck and that it was the opposite of what needed to happen to unite everything left of center. They just didn't care. The whole thing just seems mega greasy and I'm uncomfortable with it.

 

That said, please vote for Joe if we get there. For the sake of my children and yours. As many have stated, he's pretty shitty but he's not the literal worst case scenario, which our hillbilly president currently is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

To add, it feels like a "we prefer four more years of Trump to Bernie" move. They had to know the optics would suck and that it was the opposite of what needed to happen to unite everything left of center. They just didn't care. The whole thing just seems mega greasy and I'm uncomfortable with it.

Ok. Those all seem like very strange feelings imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

I don't recall candidates of that strength dropping out before super Tuesday. At risk of stoking the flames of the True Believers, I do think it was pretty obviously ordered from above with promises made.

Keep in mind that purely policy wise I am much more in line with Joe/Amy/Pete than I am with Bernie, with the exception of our guillotining billionaires platform. So I'm not really coming from an agenda driven place. It just seems a bit dicey, especially given 2016.

 

Man--I really just don't get where you're coming from on this.  I don't understand what is "dicey."

Are we in agreement that Buttigieg and Klobuchar weren't winning shit?  I mean, we can agree on that, right?  We can go back to the polls and the fivethirtyeight.com model and show that neither one had a real path to the nomination.

And we can agree that neither one had any money in the bank, right?  That information is far from transparent, but that's what I've been hearing consistently.  And it's consistent with the fact that Pete's (in particular) fundraising completely dried up.

So we agree that they were going to need to drop out, right?  We're only quibbling about the timing, right?

I mean, if that's the quibble, then I don't get it.  They knew they were going to have to drop out.  So rather than stay in a race that they both knew they weren't going to win, they got out at a time at which they still had leverage to get something out of it.

Compare them with Bloomberg.  Do you think Biden gave anything to Bloomberg to get him to quit the race?  Fuck no--he didn't need to.  Bloomberg lost.  And that would've been Amy's and Pete's fate, too, if they had stayed in until today.

And look at Warren.  She still have some leverage.  Her withdrawal and endorsement still have value.  But if she waits another week or two, it won't.  She needs to cut a deal now.

I mean, is this news to you that this is how this works?  Are you surprised that when one person has something of value to another person, and the other person has something of value to him/her, that they will work an exchange?  I understand not wanting to know how the sausage is made, but seriously--what the fuck?

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man--I really just don't get where you're coming from on this.  I don't understand what is "dicey."

Are we in agreement that Buttigieg and Klobuchar weren't winning shit?  I mean, we can agree on that, right?  We can go back to the polls and the fivethirtyeight.com model and show that neither one had a real path to the nomination.

And we can agree that neither one had any money in the bank, right?  That information is far from transparent, but that's what I've been hearing consistently.  And it's consistent with the fact that Pete's (in particular) fundraising completely dried up.

So we agree that they were going to need to drop out, right?  We're only quibbling about the timing, right?

I mean, if that's the quibble, then I don't get it.  They knew they were going to have to drop out.  So rather than stay in a race that they both knew they weren't going to win, they got out at a time at which they still had leverage to get something out of it.

Compare them with Bloomberg.  Do you think Biden gave anything to Bloomberg to get him to quit the race?  Fuck no--he didn't need to.  Bloomberg lost.  And that would've been Amy's and Pete's fate, too, if they had stayed in until today.

And look at Warren.  She still have some leverage.  Her withdrawal and endorsement still have value.  But if she waits another week or two, it won't.  She needs to cut a deal now.

I mean, is this news to you that this is how this works?  Are you surprised that when one person has something of value to another person, and the other person has something of value to him/her, that they will work an exchange?  I understand not wanting to know how the sausage is made, but seriously--what the fuck?

 

We're in agreement that your tone is condescending, simplistic, and shitty. I'll respond to the last five paragraphs of your diatribe if you go and vacuum out all of the douche that you sprayed everywhere with it and make it palatable for people that don't have to listen to you jack yourself off because they're paying you to.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...