Serious 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

[MikeDawg]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1242539017662386177

remains interesting as a european to see american MSM reporting like this. they have completely normalized the amount of power wall street and big business have over politics, absolutely no critical note whatsoever. does anyone really believe the democratic leadership will try to get money out of politics when they are so openly serving the interests of capitalists?

What does being a stock investor have to do with corruption in politics? Or "wall street"? Or "big business"? Or Democrats?

Investors exist, you know? Do you think they should be barred from participating in the political process? Do you think media outlets should just omit potentially relevant information about their sources (e.g. occupation)? Which other careers should be banned from giving interviews?

"Wall street bad!" is such a juvenile worldview. This isn't a CEO or corporate leader. They spoke to presumably a private stock investor or business analyst for a financial company. What's the issue? Does taking a job in finance require a blood sacrifice? Does it change the makeup of your DNA? Because I'm not seeing the connection you're trying to manufacture here.

 

[GatoDelFuego]

Investors exist, you know? Do you think they should be barred from participating in the political process?

 

[Machoke]

So does anyone think something will come out of Tara Reade coming out with the story about Biden's sexual abuse on her? Or will he get away with it just like Trump did?

 

[MikeDawg]

Not unless she comes up with a shred of evidence to balance out the red flags. Until then, the media isn't going to touch it (nor should they).

lol @ the immediate jump to "will he get away with it?"

 

[tcr]

Believe all women (unless its politically inconvenient)

 

[MZ]

Yes the media is famous for not touching stories that might possibly lack sufficient evidence, especially when they fit excellently into a well-documented pattern of behavior that can be spun into a controversy-generating conclusion.

 

[MikeDawg]

Yes the media is famous for not touching stories that might possibly lack sufficient evidence, especially when they fit excellently into a well-documented pattern of behavior that can be spun into a controversy-generating conclusion.

There's a difference between "sufficient evidence" and "no evidence".

Granted, I won't be surprised if there's a CNN article tomorrow, but there's nothing to substantiate her accusation more than any random ex-staffer. If anything, her credibility is lower than the average ex-staffer because of those aforementioned red flags.

P.S. There's also a difference between "believe all accusers" and "crucify all accused". But tcr already knows that.

 

[Dece1t]

There's a difference between "sufficient evidence" and "no evidence".

Granted, I won't be surprised if there's a CNN article tomorrow, but there's nothing to substantiate her accusation more than any random ex-staffer. If anything, her credibility is lower than the average ex-staffer because of those aforementioned red flags.

I think he was being sarcastic. I'd be damned if he wasn't. substantiate the claim first, then go ruin someone's life.

 

[Luck O' the Irish]

Probably not the thread for this, but anyway I haven’t read into this but I’m curious about above responses how the issue of her credibility are coming up. I think it isn’t helpful to assume joe Biden is guilty right off the bat assuming our principles is innocent until proven guilty, but on the other hand I find that questioning her “believability” before anything is well laid out is damaging towards survivors

 

[Kingler]

So does anyone think something will come out of Tara Reade coming out with the story about Biden's sexual abuse on her? Or will he get away with it just like Trump did?

media blackout into gaslighting and "russian agent" smears probably. all of the left outlets seem to be taking it seriously, haven't seen a single MSM article about it

 

[TheValkyries]

God I'm exhausted. The fucking pony race is so tiring. "Biden has crushed Bernie because he's a bad candidate" Who the fuck cares about the campaign or strategy what fucking matters is the fucking policy, the fundamental moral ideals. And the difference between these two is night and fucking day on that front! The people who are attached to this individualist elected monarch bullshit continue to screw over themselves to make sure that those worse off than them stay that way, to preserve the idea of a parental figure who watches over us — some cartoon hero, who will fly in and solve all the problems with aplomb and a kind demeanor. If it's not this infantile approach to our governance, then I honestly have no idea what people see in Biden. I have no fucking clue. It's just beyond ludicrous at this point.

 

[MikeDawg]

Brilliant copypasta material. Just needs a reference to chicken tendies to be canon.

Hilarious to see a Bernie fan complaining that people have an "infantile approach to governance". Populism is a powerful drug. Case in point: the fact that you think everyone else is utterly insane and that you and your small cohort of Bernie bros are the only enlightened ones.

If you have "no fucking clue" what people see in Biden despite him being the distinct frontrunner for nearly 1.5 years straight, then you're totally to blame. Have you tried Google?

 

[RaikouLover]

Y'all are talking to someone who only sees the world in red and blue. If you don't support the blue man you support the red man by default, and that makes you the enemy

Life is easy when everything is like supporting a sports team

....and Bernie supremacists are still patronizing black voters that are Democratic Party loyalists about where voting priorities should be.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...undering-coronavirus-crisis#comment-139189003

i hope to be very wrong abt covid-19 not sinking trump, but looks like we;re gonna get 4 more years. ppl like the dynamics of trump, they like his tone and his optics. They look for any rationalization to continue supporting him and a crises just means more fear to make ppl dumb and get them to start drinking the kool-aid out of denial that things could be as bad as they are (they want to keep their optimism). the democratic leadership is completely clueless and unprepared for how to deal with substance-less con-artists such as this. also the justice department has asked for emergency powers to detain ppl without due process: i.e this administration has now reached the phase where the weight of the mismanagement and crimes grow to a Brazilian-esque level, and so the administration prepares for the next move, which is to lock up political opponents in order to maintain the optics.

Here we you again. All the data points to the exact opposite, but you continue with the pro-Trump narrative.

What we are seeing with Trump's short term poll numbers is the "rally around the flag" effect. He got a small bump post-impeachment that faded within a month, and now is enjoying a crisis bump. Americans will always give the President the benefit of the doubt in a national crisis. Those polls can (and likely will) turn sour as the U.S. death toll rises and our unprepared health care system begins to flounder.

The political environment is far more stable, and is still trending further and further away from Republicans as this election cycle rolls on.

 

[politics understander]

....and Bernie supremacists are still patronizing black voters that are Democratic Party loyalists about where voting priorities should be.

White people talking on behalf of black people online is literally the reason America was invented, you are not a true patriot if you don't do it.

 

[MikeDawg]

I'm really fascinated by all of the "Believe Tara!" people who spent weeks saying "Don't believe Warren!", especially when Warren had a far more compelling case.

Does anyone want to chime in with an explanation? Machoke? It sounds pretty hypocritical to me. You guys should just stick with "I believe Bernie!" at this point, because we all know that's what you really mean.

 

[tcr]

I believe her because, first of all, anybody who comes forward at this point to be prepared to testify in the United States Senate against someone who's being nominated to one of the most powerful positions in the United States government, that takes an extraordinary amount of courage. - Kamala Harris

And then, ultimately, not whether he is innocent or guilty, this is not a trial, but ultimately, have enough questions be raised that we should not move on to another candidate in that long list put together by the Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society. Move on to another candidate because ultimately the Supreme Court Presidency is not an entitlement. - Cory Booker

 

[BIG ASHLEY]

I'm really fascinated by all of the "Believe Tara!" people who spent weeks saying "Don't believe Warren!", especially when Warren had a far more compelling case.

Does anyone want to chime in with an explanation? Machoke? It sounds pretty hypocritical to me. You guys should just stick with "I believe Bernie!" at this point, because we all know that's what you really mean.

i'm fascinated by the implication here that there's no difference between a sexual assault claim against a man with a noted history of extremely questionable behaviour around women and warren's claim that a man who's spent his entire career supporting women made a negative comment about her chances (which has, iirc, been discussed fairly extensively itt). maybe you should just stick to "i hate bernie!" - pretty clear that's what you really mean.

have a nice day!

 

[MikeDawg]

1. Reade hasn't expressed interest in testifying for the Senate (afaik).

2. The presidency is an elected position. I truly can't tell if you're serious about this point or just trolling... at this point I have to assume the former.

3. The fact that you're even trying to conflate this political circus act with the Kavanaugh case is gross. She has no evidence in her favor, and plenty of evidence to suggest she's totally non-credible. The fact that you think this will catch on is comical. That fact you think it should catch on is deplorable.

The lack of integrity behind this narrative is as transparent as it is unsurprising. I wonder what the Bernie camp will come up with next week.

 

[Luck O' the Irish]

What evidence is there to suggest she is not credible... literally where is this narrative coming from

 

[termi]

i thought we did the whole "believe women" thing because it's notoriously difficult to substantiate claims of sexual assault, especially when the accused person is a very powerful person. the fact that mike dog is not even willing to entertain the possibility that she might be telling the truth is all you need to know about how committed shitlibs really are to the "believe women" principle in practice

What evidence is there to suggest she is not credible... literally where is this narrative coming from

as far as i can tell all people can point at is the fact that she wrote positively abt russia and putin once or twice on her medium account, which of course must necessarily mean that she's working for the russians. oh and in her earlier attempts to get a platform for her story she did not mention getting raped but afaik it's not uncommon for victims of sexual assault to leave things out, i cant imagine it's very easy to publicly talk about something so traumatizing and painful

 

[Surgo]

So are we believing women on this one or is it too politically inconvenient this time?

 

[TheValkyries]

Brilliant copypasta material. Just needs a reference to chicken tendies to be canon.

Hilarious to see a Bernie fan complaining that people have an "infantile approach to governance". Populism is a powerful drug. Case in point: the fact that you think everyone else is utterly insane and that you and your small cohort of Bernie bros are the only enlightened ones.

If you have "no fucking clue" what people see in Biden despite him being the distinct frontrunner for nearly 1.5 years straight, then you're totally to blame. Have you tried Google?

Im not a fan of Bernie, the person, you absolute Double Whipped Cream Mocha Frappuccino. That’s the literal point of my post!!! Bernie fails on so many fronts for me, but he’s consistently at the very least in the right position.

And I literally just told you what people see in Biden.The vast majority of it is cartoonish and facile and if there’s any more substance to it then, I’ve yet to fucking see it.

Case in point:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1243266475965775881

Look at how fucking toothless this is. How it is absolute pure unadulterated “if it were me I’d do something and it would be better.”

Fundamentally: the quality that most of the electorate values the most is quote unquote leadership. And they frankly don’t care what gets done as long as they feel like the President is a Leader. It’s why Trump’s approval rating is up 3 points in the past two weeks because he’s been appearing on TV everyday talking about it. Even if he’s constantly lying and downplaying the crisis, the PRESENCE he’s exuding is influencing the individualists.

Meanwhile Bernie secures 100% Salary coverage for unemployment benefits for four months. Biden talks about making a hypothetical task force. God the only political gesture more meaningless than making a Task Force is *talking about* making a Task Force. But what matters more to people is the posturing, not the work that needs to be done.


But what’s even the point of responding to you when I finally read the rest of your more recent posts and its you literally running the standard playbook about credibility and evidence and the fact that you can’t even see how this is exactly the same as the reaction to the Kavanaugh claims is fucking detestable. I genuinely wish I knew why you think the way that you do. I can’t even fathom what it’s like to live in the world thinking the way you do. I wish you luck, truly I do.

 

[termi]

bernie didn't secure anything lol

he didn't even show up until the vote happened

how fucking ironic that you complain about posturing

this is a lie

 

[Sam]

do you have a source? because my knowledge is bernie did not take part in crafting the bill and simply voted on it

EDIT:

from: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/25/ber...ten-to-hold-up-coronavirus-stimulus-bill.html

Is what I could find. Threatening a delay with a delay. It is tbh more than I had understood he did but to act like he's the sole person responsible for it is, in fact, still posturing given Schumer seems to be the one who got it included and the GOP's threat to delay was theater

from: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/26/inside-the-10-days-to-rescue-the-economy-149718

It passed 96-0

 

[Machoke]

I'm really fascinated by all of the "Believe Tara!" people who spent weeks saying "Don't believe Warren!", especially when Warren had a far more compelling case.

Does anyone want to chime in with an explanation? Machoke? It sounds pretty hypocritical to me. You guys should just stick with "I believe Bernie!" at this point, because we all know that's what you really mean.

Are you really trying to make it seem like Warren's claim of Bernie saying "I don't think a women could be president" or whatever she claimed he said despite not having any evidence and an allegation of SEXUAL ASSAULT are the same thing lmfao?
I'm not saying that Tara is 100% right by default, but it should at least be investigated considering numerous other women have come forward with their own stories on Biden and his sexual misconduct.
And if the claim is not investigated and taken seriously, then yes, he will have "gotten away with it" much like Trump did and numerous other men in powerful positions.