Serious 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

[Adamant Zoroark]

Warren's path to the nomination is a contested convention and being the compromise candidate between the Bernie camp and the Establishment camp. Whether or not this path is even possible is debatable, but I believe this is what she is playing for.

I think she has shot herself in the foot with recent moves (painting Sanders as sexist, using a superPAC). Her campaign seems full of unforced errors, which I find really disappointing. That said, I'm not sure how Warren staying in hurts Sanders. Warren was a huge asset at the debate stage, supporting Sanders' policies and taking down Bloomberg as much as possible. From my look at the math, I think Warren staying in would only have a minor affect on the number of delegates Sanders walks away with (and Sanders + Warren delegates would be much more than Sanders alone, if she drops out).

Since so many delegates are up for grabs this month, debates will play a negligible role from here on out, so I think she's pretty much played her role, but I don't know how Tuesday will play out.

Buttigieg simply did not have a path forward. He had no minority support. He had no chance of appealing to progressive voters. He was flanked on all sides by Bloomberg, Biden, and Klobuchar. He was by far the most likely to drop out. (Though I expect to Klobuchar to drop out soon unless she massively overperforms Tuesday. She may be the Biden backup.)

I'll use California's primary as an example of how Warren staying in the race hurts Sanders. FiveThirtyEight currently has her forecasted to win, on average, 17% of the popular vote in California, with an 80% confidence interval between 12% and 22%. If she's in the lower end of that confidence interval, then she gets none of California's statewide delegates and the only thing her presence in the race does is reduce Bernie's share of the popular vote, thus netting him fewer delegates. (This works on the assumption that the majority of Warren voters would go to Bernie if she weren't in the race, which is likely the case given that they're very similar in terms of policy). Likewise, her being in the race could cost Bernie wins in several of the closer Super Tuesday primaries, including Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Virginia.

I agree that Warren appears to be playing to get the nomination in the event of a brokered convention (similar to how Ted Cruz and John Kasich stayed in the 2016 Republican race solely to attempt to prevent Trump from getting a delegate majority) but I think she needs to realize soon that getting the nomination that way would only score Trump more points to use in political attack ads; thinking about this scenario, I can already imagine the Trump campaign running ads claiming she didn't get the nomination legitimately, she robbed Sanders of the nomination, etc., not to mention alienating both Bernie voters and Biden voters. Hopefully the Democratic Party leadership also realizes that such a scenario is not conducive to a general election victory, but my view of them is quite pessimistic.

 

[HeaLnDeaL]

Will you acknowledge that Warren has no path to the nomination and that she is only still the race at this point to prevent Sanders from getting a majority of the pledged delegates? If she is lucky she'll win Massachusetts and come in a very distant 2nd in California, she has no chance of winning in any single state afterwards. I asked you to explain earlier what rationale she has for staying in the race at this point, but you never answered. Do you think she will use her delegates to help Bernie out later in the convention? If not, do you seriously think the super delegates would pick her to be the nominee over Biden or Bloomberg? Have you stopped and asked yourself why she now has the largest corporate SuperPAC out of any candidate after pledging not to take money from one,?

I had a conversation with my Warren supporting relative about this topic last night and managed to convince him that continuing to support her is a dead end and only helps the establishment... and Trump. It's nothing personal, and I have realized in retrospect that calling her a snake (even though I think it's understandable to be upset with her actions) isn't productive. But the facts speak for themselves. I really want to do everything I can to prevent this scenario from playing out, and the fact that the party establishment is trying to steal the nomination away from Sanders using superdelegates in a contested convention is something that is now being widely reported in multiple media outlets. Their strategy is now fully out in the open, and Buttigieg dropping out while Warren and Klobuchar are still staying in the race in spite of having worse performances so far should be enough evidence of that.

I think all my answers to your questions should be fairly obvious if you've read my other posts. Warren and Sanders are a team, their missions align. Warren will undoubtedly support Sanders in the convention if she does not have the most (or a close second) number of delegates. This seems likely to happen at this point, yes. There's still a lot left to play out, but yes it seems very likely. I completely do not think she would try to force her way as a middle ground candidate UNLESS she gets second place, of which case then we have a clear progressive win anyway, and realistically I think her ceiling is third unless some big changes happen. But in all realistic worlds, I see her supporting Bernie fully.

Warren has consistently fundraised more than any candidate other than Sanders, more than Buttigieg or Biden, and her raw vote count has been comparable to theirs (before Biden hit South Carolina).

I think there is tremendous value in her staying in the race, as she will undoubtedly siphon some of the Steyer/Buttigieg votes and prevent them all from going to Biden/Bloomberg, and I think the number of such voters that she gets that would otherwise go to Sanders is very low. There are still debates left as well, and her presence on the debate stage prevents a gang up on Sanders by the moderates. Sanders isn't the best debater and I think he benefits (and has benefited) greatly from her ability to target the moderates to lessen the screentime that they have to attack Sanders (since they have to waste their talking time defending from Warren's attacks). On the debate stage I think Sanders can adequately handle Biden on his own, but if Bloomberg/Klobuchar somehow survive to March 15th (possible for Klobuchar if she picks up a majority of her home state, and possible for Bloomberg if any of his spending works out) then I think it's to the progressive side's benefit for Warren to stay in. If the moderates drop further and if Warren doesn't see a notable slice of the delegates, then it might make sense for her to drop as well. But the more screentime Warren gets on any debate stage or on any news program, I think the more solid of a case that the progressives can make in the general.

If the narrative can be spun (by republicans) that Sanders only won the nomination because he was a lone progressive madman who split the reasonable moderates' votes away from them, then Sanders will have a tougher time in the general. If Warren stays in longer and does well (say, launches herself into a solid 3rd place), even if she doesn't do as well as Sanders, then that argument disappears. And Warren is still the best attackdog Sanders could ever dream of having on his side, both against the moderates and against the republicans. idr who said they thought Warren would decline to be Sander's VP, but I don't think she would decline and I think she benefits him greatly in that role, and she looks stronger for that role the longer she stays in this race. Certainly don't want to say she would be the only good pick for Sanders, but I think having someone who is feistier than he is a big plus.

#teamprogessives

I'm not interested in the rhetoric that Warren is weakening or hurting or annoying Sanders when I think the opposite is true. Warren staying in helps Sanders up until the point where there is only one moderate candidate left standing, and asking her to drop out before that is sorta weird when she's fundraising more than Biden.

 

[termi]

Left wing politicians lose because they continue to believe facts and policies are persuasive enough to dictate voter behavior. Judging this arrogant response, it’s clear why history keeps repeating itself.

ur right that facts and policies arent enough, the reason i believe sanders has a good shot is because he has got a whole movement going of people who are willing to get out there and campaign for him. it seems to be doing him a lot of favors so far. he also has more than "just policy" in that his rhetoric is anti-establishment, which seems to be soing well in a country where political trust is abysmally low. the last two presidents were elected on platforms of "change" for better or worse, with one of them relying on a grassroots movement that is not dissimilar to what bernie has behind him rn. your critique would make a hell of a lot more sense for pretty much any candidate other than bernie, like what exactly does joe biden have besides policy other than his legacy as obama's vp? and dont get me started on the others lol. most of the failures of so-called "center-left" politics of the last few decades are the result of exactly the kind of politics you are describing, meanwhile anti-establishment rhetoric is doing well all throughout the west

dont get me wrong tho, im still cynical where it comes to bernie's chances, just not because he doesn't have the tools to win or anything. it's more likely that he'd get smeared by the corporate media (cnn & co could never openly back trump but they can attempt to depress turnout), obstructed by the dnc, or simply RFK'd if all else fails. if that is enough reason for you to say that it's better to elect someone who has the establishment behind him then i think maybe instead you should conclude that american democratic politics arent worth the trouble, since i dont really see the point in playing perfectly the rules of a deeply corrupt system (and if sanders gets stopped by the aforementioned factors, maybe more people will come to that conclusion ;3)

 

[Celticpride]

Internet democrat? Speak for yourself!

I wasn’t referring to anyone on here! It was in reference to places like twitter where the groupthink on the platform ends up severely detached from reality (see: xyz will finally get trump impeached, the entire yang campaign, almost anything related to brexit, etc). Pete’s a corporatist Democrat but he’s not the spawn of satan or anything. He’d have been Obama will less progressive undertones if elected POTUS.

For me this matters because I feel like progressives tend to get into this weird sense of complacency where they feel like the frontrunner because there are a lot of good vibes around the campaigns and often unexpected success, but the reality is it’s still an uphill battle. This leads to these movements just falling short in the endgame, and I sincerely hope that doesn’t happen to the Sanders campaign this go around.

 

[Machoke]

Amy dropped out too. Her Joe Biden endorsement will prob be an attempt to carry him further in super Tuesday vs Bernie

 

[Bass]

I think all my answers to your questions should be fairly obvious if you've read my other posts. Warren and Sanders are a team, their missions align. Warren will undoubtedly support Sanders in the convention if she does not have the most (or a close second) number of delegates. This seems likely to happen at this point, yes. There's still a lot left to play out, but yes it seems very likely. I completely do not think she would try to force her way as a middle ground candidate UNLESS she gets second place, of which case then we have a clear progressive win anyway, and realistically I think her ceiling is third unless some big changes happen. But in all realistic worlds, I see her supporting Bernie fully.

Warren has consistently fundraised more than any candidate other than Sanders, more than Buttigieg or Biden, and her raw vote count has been comparable to theirs (before Biden hit South Carolina).

I think there is tremendous value in her staying in the race, as she will undoubtedly siphon some of the Steyer/Buttigieg votes and prevent them all from going to Biden/Bloomberg, and I think the number of such voters that she gets that would otherwise go to Sanders is very low. There are still debates left as well, and her presence on the debate stage prevents a gang up on Sanders by the moderates. Sanders isn't the best debater and I think he benefits (and has benefited) greatly from her ability to target the moderates to lessen the screentime that they have to attack Sanders (since they have to waste their talking time defending from Warren's attacks). On the debate stage I think Sanders can adequately handle Biden on his own, but if Bloomberg/Klobuchar somehow survive to March 15th (possible for Klobuchar if she picks up a majority of her home state, and possible for Bloomberg if any of his spending works out) then I think it's to the progressive side's benefit for Warren to stay in. If the moderates drop further and if Warren doesn't see a notable slice of the delegates, then it might make sense for her to drop as well. But the more screentime Warren gets on any debate stage or on any news program, I think the more solid of a case that the progressives can make in the general.

If the narrative can be spun (by republicans) that Sanders only won the nomination because he was a lone progressive madman who split the reasonable moderates' votes away from them, then Sanders will have a tougher time in the general. If Warren stays in longer and does well (say, launches herself into a solid 3rd place), even if she doesn't do as well as Sanders, then that argument disappears. And Warren is still the best attackdog Sanders could ever dream of having on his side, both against the moderates and against the republicans. idr who said they thought Warren would decline to be Sander's VP, but I don't think she would decline and I think she benefits him greatly in that role, and she looks stronger for that role the longer she stays in this race. Certainly don't want to say she would be the only good pick for Sanders, but I think having someone who is feistier than he is a big plus.

#teamprogessives

I'm not interested in the rhetoric that Warren is weakening or hurting or annoying Sanders when I think the opposite is true. Warren staying in helps Sanders up until the point where there is only one moderate candidate left standing, and asking her to drop out before that is sorta weird when she's fundraising more than Biden.

I am sorry but where is your evidence of this? How about listening to what she is actually saying about Bernie right now instead of putting your blinders on:

If what you say is true, then why does she continue to throw dishonest attacks like this one at Bernie? Imagine blaming him for failing to stop the Iraq War when almost everyone else who voted was taking money from the military industrial complex, or failing to get single payer medicare for all because all of congress is bought by the health insurance industry. Why do you think he is running for president?

The idea that Warren will help him on the debate stage is ludicrous. Again, although she mainly focused on Bloomberg, she also attacked Bernie in the last debate too. And now, Klobuchar and Buttigieg have dropped out, and the remaining two "moderates" are known to have been among the worst debaters this campaign. Can you still justify her needing to be on the debate stage? Imagine if Biden and Bloomberg used that same faulty logic and wanted the field to remain crowded. They understand that winning this race isn't about rhetoric but delegates..

I don't know what to say, you are bending over backwards to justify her taking money from a a very large corporate SuperPAC. Considering that the point of Bernie's campaign is to make the people behind this SuperPAC pay their fair share of taxes, do you honestly think these people are helping Warren keep her campaign alive to help Bernie? Fucking really? I can only see her actions as her signaling to either steal the nomination at the convention (despite having barely any delegates) or more likely use her delegates to help Biden steal it in exchange for a VP or cabinet position. I saw lots of conspiracy theories going around stating that this was the reason she dropped the whole "Bernie is a misogynist" bomb earlier but I am honestly starting to believe in it more with every increasing day she stays in the race.

 

[HeaLnDeaL]

I am sorry but where is your evidence of this? How about listening to what she is actually saying about Bernie right now instead of putting your blinders on:

If what you say is true, then why does she continue to throw dishonest attacks like this one at Bernie? Imagine blaming him for failing to stop the Iraq War when almost everyone else who voted was taking money from the military industrial complex, or failing to get single payer medicare for all because all of congress is bought by the health insurance industry. Why do you think he is running for president?

The idea that Warren will help him on the debate stage is ludicrous. Again, although she mainly focused on Bloomberg, she also attacked Bernie in the last debate too. And now, Klobuchar and Buttigieg have dropped out, and the remaining two "moderates" are known to have been among the worst debaters this campaign. Can you still justify her needing to be on the debate stage? Imagine if Biden and Bloomberg used that same faulty logic and wanted the field to remain crowded. They understand that winning this race isn't about rhetoric but delegates..

I don't know what to say, you are bending over backwards to justify her taking money from a a very large corporate SuperPAC. Considering that the point of Bernie's campaign is to make the people behind this SuperPAC pay their fair share of taxes, do you honestly think these people are helping Warren keep her campaign alive to help Bernie? Fucking really? I can only see her actions as her signaling to either steal the nomination at the convention (despite having barely any delegates) or more likely use her delegates to help Biden steal it in exchange for a VP or cabinet position. I saw lots of conspiracy theories going around stating that this was the reason she dropped the whole "Bernie is a misogynist" bomb earlier but I am honestly starting to believe in it more with every increasing day she stays in the race.

I request that you stop talking to me in this thread, because you consistently twist every time Warren says "Hey, I think my plans are more clear than Bernie's" as her saying her "I hate you Bernie." (P.S. Her plans are more clear, too). Krysten Ball has literally been bashing Warren for a whole year now, she has consistently spun Warren is a negative direction and she's still doing it now, showing a video from her now is really not relevant. Ball is literally just theorizing out of thin air and just because she says Warren won't advocate for Sanders in the convention doesn't mean it's true. Warren has never said she wouldn't, don't use Ball to say that she won't smh. Your evidence (and Ball's evidence) to say that Warren will try to screw Sanders and the progressive wing in the convention is literally nothing, and I think Warren's defense of Sanders clearly outweighs the incredibly small amount of attacks she's made, most of which just boil down to Sanders not willing to fully disclose his funding for medicare for all. She does a much better job of explaining simply where her money comes from, Sanders clearly is not adept at doing the same, and she has every right to point that out.

 

[Adamant Zoroark]

I request that you stop talking to me in this thread, because you consistently twist every time Warren says "Hey, I think my plans are more clear than Bernie's" as her saying her "I hate you Bernie." (P.S. Her plans are more clear, too). Krysten Ball has literally been bashing Warren for a whole year now, she has consistently spun Warren is a negative direction and she's still doing it now, showing a video from her now is really not relevant. Ball is literally just theorizing out of thin air and just because she says Warren won't advocate for Sanders in the convention doesn't mean it's true. Warren has never said she wouldn't, don't use Ball to say that she won't smh.

With Klobuchar dropping out - despite being more likely to win a Super Tuesday state than Warren was - the moderates are already consolidating. Warren came in 3rd in Iowa, 4th in New Hampshire, 4th in Nevada, and 5th in South Carolina. It’s clear as day at this point that her presence in the race is only serving to act as a Bernie spoiler. Until we get ranked choice primaries, we cannot take a chance at having two progressives in the race.

 

[JTD783]

Is anyone in this thread even a supporter of the moderate wing, or is everyone completely for the progressive/leftist block?

 

[billymills]

With Klobuchar out of the race, Warren staying in only hurts Sanders for sure. It'll be interesting to see how long she stays in now that the math is clear.

I think Warren's critiques of Bernie are pretty fair. He definitely plays up his opposition on bills that are approved by near consensus. I don't think this was talking about the Iraq war vote, but likely USMCA and other less publicized votes. It's great to say you were against something, but just being against something isn't enough as a senator. Oddly enough, it is enough as president, which kinda validates Bernie bring it up.

 

[Myzozoa]

Sanders is a very flawed candidate who benefits from male privilege in getting forgiven for almost all his offenses like endorsing Cuban literacy programs, etc. Warren's record is equally contemptible, but her supporters can't get away with saying she's the perfect candidate cause she's a woman and Americans don't give the benefit of the doubt to women too often. There is entitlement from every angle for every candidate's white supporters be they bernie bros or white feminists, their minds have been numbed by electoral politics and they're like angry animals lashing out on their iphones. They're like religious fanatics arguing, "'My God will save you'-'no my god will save us!'". what i think is a lot of these white ladies dying on the hill for Warren are affluent and have an unconscious interest in not having a more progressive economic system, and for some reason theyre always dreaming of the election where they'll finally get a woman into the presidency, pay no attention to the fact that it's NEVER a woman of a color they're trying to get to win. Sanders is contemptible too, he is too casual in endorsing old and new weirdo socialists and such regimes despite their extremely oppressive social policies, but he gets away w it everytime.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/29/elizabeth-warren-super-pac-week-in-patriarchy

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/me...cal-discussion-n988541/ncrd1051551#blogHeader

old, but this just came to my attention, v important strategic document

"The 16-page document warns that "any less than full investment in Georgia would amount to strategic malpractice" and urges Democrats to replicate nationally what she did in Georgia by focusing on "expanding the electorate" with people who don't often vote, rather than trying to persuade the "relatively small" number of swing voters."

 

[HeaLnDeaL]

Klobuchar being out now is... not what I was expecting. Not sure where my head is at.

There's still two moderates left via Bloomberg and Biden. Warren still absorbs *some* of the Buttigieg/Steyer/Klobuchar voters who would prefer Biden over Sanders but would prefer her over Biden (Buttigieg and Klobuchar endorsing Biden does not mean he automatically inherits all of their voters). These three dropping out is really quite a big deal, and now the field has been shaken up so much that it's hard to predict what happens.

Warren positively should stay in until the end of Super Tuesday at the very least, maybe even a bit longer. If Bloomberg drops out she can drop out safely to preserve the left side.

But for now, this is chance for Warren to bring disenfranchised Buttigieg/Klobuchar/Steyer votes a bit more left, which makes the transition for them to voting for Sanders in the general a little bit less jarring.

We'll have a much more clear picture after Super Tuesday and all of its dust settles, right now I don't think Warren should be dropping out yet. She still fundraised more than Biden who is in, she had a ton of second place support in a lot of polls and she could get a bump with the recent drop outs. Bloomberg and Biden are still splitting each other, and I think Warren splits more moderates off of the real moderates than she scrapes anything off of Sanders. It's too early to say she's hurting Sanders by staying in, she could be the bridge that the moderates need to be okay with now before they will be okay voting for Sanders in the general.

A lot of lightning quick decisions and changes have happened since South Carolina, but I'm much more interested in the long game (by which I mean more so the general and less so the convention).

If Warren barely nets delegates tomorrow and if Bloomberg drops out, then yes she should drop out too. If only one of those things happens then I'm a bit torn and not sure what the best thing is. If neither happens (Bloomberg stays in and she gets a sizable delegate haul), then she shouldn't drop out until more states decide / until after the next debate.

EDIT:
While my "long game" for this cycle is to get a strong progressive wing for this election that moderates are comfortable enough supporting (i.e. make Sanders look more appealing to moderates and to let him fend off attacks in the general of being too radical and too alone), I also have a long game in mind where Deb Haaland gets an important role in the administration and for Native Americans to actually start building sizable political resumes.

 

[Bass]

I request that you stop talking to me in this thread, because you consistently twist every time Warren says "Hey, I think my plans are more clear than Bernie's" as her saying her "I hate you Bernie." (P.S. Her plans are more clear, too). Krysten Ball has literally been bashing Warren for a whole year now, she has consistently spun Warren is a negative direction and she's still doing it now, showing a video from her now is really not relevant. Ball is literally just theorizing out of thin air and just because she says Warren won't advocate for Sanders in the convention doesn't mean it's true. Warren has never said she wouldn't, don't use Ball to say that she won't smh. Your evidence (and Ball's evidence) to say that Warren will try to screw Sanders and the progressive wing in the convention is literally nothing, and I think Warren's defense of Sanders clearly outweighs the incredibly small amount of attacks she's made, most of which just boil down to Sanders not willing to fully disclose his funding for medicare for all. She does a much better job of explaining simply where her money comes from, Sanders clearly is not adept at doing the same, and she has every right to point that out.

I simply posted Krystal Ball's video because it was the most recent thing I saw that had a clip of Warren's speech post SC where she attacked Sanders. I deliberately set the time of that video to 2:10 so that would be the first thing you see, but instead of acknowledging that my point is correct (that Warren has made multiple attacks on Sanders as of late in spite of supposedly staying in this race to help him), instead you are trying to divert the topic over to the fact that the video was posted by someone with a known anti-Warren bias. But the number of attacks Warren has made on Bernie are not "incredibly small", the biggest attack made by any candidate during this entire campaign was her claiming Sanders said "a woman can't win". Why are you adamantly denying this? I thought you came into this thread asking those of us who support Sanders why we are now attacking Warren. I responded directly to you but you basically ignored almost all of the facts and points I have made. The establishment is now throwing the entire kitchen sink to stop the only viable progressive candidate from winning the nomination, so I have found your stubbornness (and Warren's) in this whole situation really frustrating. I sincerely hope you are right and I am wrong, but if Warren backstabs us at the convention and gives the nomination to Biden I think you should apologize to everyone who has been trying to warn you in this thread.

And please stop parroting this false idea that Warren is better at explaining the details for her plans. The only thing that's true is that some of her plans are more detailed on her website, but that does not inherently make them superior. Take both of their medicare for all plans for instance. Sanders models his after how other countries do it which means there is a modest middle class tax increase. Of course, we both know the point is it saves money for the middle class overall because you don't pay premiums, copays, or deductibles. Instead, Warren tried to create a totally unrealistic plan and claimed it wouldn't increase taxes on the middle class, and literally everyone rightfully pointed out how bad her plan was. And lo and behold, she decided to backpedal and stop supporting medicare for all. Meanwhile everyone (now including Warren) disingenuously asks Bernie how he is going to pay for his plan, even though he has already said so hundreds if not thousands of times. The peer reviewed literature states that the details of his plan make fiscal sense. The myth that he can't explain how he pays for his plans is MSNBC and health insurance industry talking points. And the more important point is no matter what the details are, everyone should acknowledge that Bernie's plans can be paid for because less wealthy countries are already doing it just fine. What it takes is to make the wealthy start paying their fair share of taxes, that's an undeniable truth.

Anyways, if you still aren't convinced then I apologize for trying. Again, it's nothing personal but please try to understand that a lot of us are feeling desperate. This is the best shot a progressive has ever had at becoming president of our lifetimes, and I seriously worry that we are blowing it. I really hope I am wrong.

With Klobuchar out of the race, Warren staying in only hurts Sanders for sure. It'll be interesting to see how long she stays in now that the math is clear.

I think Warren's critiques of Bernie are pretty fair. He definitely plays up his opposition on bills that are approved by near consensus. I don't think this was talking about the Iraq war vote, but likely USMCA and other less publicized votes. It's great to say you were against something, but just being against something isn't enough as a senator. Oddly enough, it is enough as president, which kinda validates Bernie bring it up.

Fair? Did you actually watch the clip? What she said was essentially that Bernie's ideas were good but he has failed to get any of it done, and her argument is that she would be more effective at getting them done. But this point conveniently ignores the reason for that which is because he is a lone progressive Senator from a small state surrounded by everyone else who takes corporate money. And Sanders wants to run for president to get money out of politics, hence why I (and many others) think he's the only viable choice for actually getting any progressive policies done. Your criticism also applies to whenever Warren makes strong statements against billionaires and Wall St but is then willing to backtrack on progressive policies like single payer medicare for all AND start taking their money.

Sanders is a very flawed candidate who benefits from male privilege in getting forgiven for almost all his offenses like endorsing Cuban literacy programs, etc. Warren's record is equally contemptible, but her supporters can't get away with saying she's the perfect candidate cause she's a woman and Americans don't give the benefit of the doubt to women too often. There is entitlement from every angle for every candidate's white supporters be they bernie bros or white feminists, their minds have been numbed by electoral politics and they're like angry animals lashing out on their iphones. They're like religious fanatics arguing, "'My God will save you'-'no my god will save us!'". what i think is a lot of these white ladies dying on the hill for Warren are affluent and have an unconscious interest in not having a more progressive economic system, and for some reason theyre always dreaming of the election where they'll finally get a woman into the presidency, pay no attention to the fact that it's NEVER a woman of a color they're trying to get to win. Sanders is contemptible too, he is too casual in endorsing old and new weirdo socialists and such regimes despite their extremely oppressive social policies, but he gets away w it everytime.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/29/elizabeth-warren-super-pac-week-in-patriarchy

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/me...cal-discussion-n988541/ncrd1051551#blogHeader

old, but this just came to my attention, v important strategic document

"The 16-page document warns that "any less than full investment in Georgia would amount to strategic malpractice" and urges Democrats to replicate nationally what she did in Georgia by focusing on "expanding the electorate" with people who don't often vote, rather than trying to persuade the "relatively small" number of swing voters."

Are you seriously arguing that somehow Sanders is being left off the hook for his comments on Castro because he is male? Really? Where is your evidence of that? How about acknowledging that this is just a bullshit smear that was literally created by Republicans when Obama said the same thing and are now only bringing up as a means to attack Sanders?

"Let off the hook"? Please. The very people who are criticizing him for it now are the same that let Obama "off the hook" for it in the past.

Obama was right to make this statement back then and Sanders is right to bring it up now. Simply pointing out the things authoritarian countries do better than us is not an endorsement of authoritarian regimes. I have been to China for example and think their public transportation system and wireless infrastructure absolutely put ours to shame, but does that mean I support President Xi's government? Of course not! I think saying that doing the things every other country does right without doing the bad things is perfectly justified.

 

[Machoke]

warren drop out of the race already challenge

 

[Myzozoa]

Are you seriously arguing that somehow Sanders is being left off the hook for his comments on Castro because he is male? Really? Where is your evidence of that? How about acknowledging that this is just a bullshit smear that was literally created by Republicans when Obama said the same thing and are now only bringing up as a means to attack Sanders?

"Let off the hook"? Please. The very people who are criticizing him for it now are the same that let Obama "off the hook" for it in the past.

Obama was right to make this statement back then and Sanders is right to bring it up now. Simply pointing out the things authoritarian countries do better than us is not an endorsement of authoritarian regimes. I have been to China for example and think their public transportation system and wireless infrastructure absolutely put ours to shame, but does that mean I support President Xi's government? Of course not! I think saying that doing the things every other country does right without doing the bad things is perfectly justified.

lol so your link is to some show i dont watch, sorry the view is not like the hegemonic mainstream political discourse and ppl being inconsistent on the view is rly non-sequitor here.

what statement did obama make and why is it relevant to Sanders comments on literacy programs? and yes Sanders is literally being let off the hook by you right now in the thread, get a clue. this is not that hard, you don't have to go around disingenuously putting words in my mouth sentence after sentence like an automaton: I don't think going to china means you support Xi's gov and there is nothing in my post that could even get you to that point where you would bring that up unless you're deflecting.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/27/bernie-sanders-cuba-gay-dissidents

suggested reading and for the love of god deep breath before u @ me lol

 

[Shmoo]

How much $$$$ did Pete and Amy get for dropping out the day before super tuesday? Does anyone know? Ironic that Bloomberg who can't get bribed out will help Bernie by taking votes from Biden.

 

[Bass]

lol so your link is to some show i dont watch, sorry the view is not like the hegemonic mainstream political discourse and ppl being inconsistent on the view is rly non-sequitor here.

what statement did obama make and why is it relevant to Sanders comments on literacy programs? and yes Sanders is literally being let off the hook by you right now in the thread, get a clue. this is not that hard, you don't have to go around disingenuously putting words in my mouth sentence after sentence like an automaton: I don't think going to china means you support Xi's gov and there is nothing in my post that could even get you to that point where you would bring that up unless you're deflecting.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/27/bernie-sanders-cuba-gay-dissidents

suggested reading and for the love of god deep breath before u @ me lol

And it's not just Obama, how about contrasting the Republican Party's reaction to Castro's death with almost every other country in the world?

People are just asking for some nuance. Even that article admits that these statements from Sanders, the candidate with the strongest LGBT record in the race, does not suddenly make him homophobic. My point about China is perfectly valid because by the logic of that article I can argue that by pointing out that they have a much better public transit system than we do, I am somehow failing to adequately condemn their treatment of the Uighurs and Tibetans, and so on. All we ask is for a little bit of nuance in the discussion of Cuba and other authoritarian regimes instead of just idiotically saying that everything that Castro did was bad, or that everything China does is bad, etc. Especially since, you know, every president of my lifetime has not only failed to condemn but outright supported authoritarian regimes in my lifetime, even Obama. I suggest reading the works of Noam Chomsky if you don't believe me.

You also don't provide any objective evidence how my or anyone else's defense of Bernie for making this statement has anything to do with him being a white male. I would be defending anyone for making similar statements about Cuba regardless of their gender or color of their skin.

 

[Stratos]

hi guys why do bernie supporters hate warren so much? she is just as progressive and honest as he is, and they are working together to ensure a progressive wins the election. she is staying in the race because even if the democratic primary takes longer to decide a victor in a contentious process, the ammo this gives trump is nothing compared to the unifying effect of nudging people who voted Warren in the primary to pick Sanders over Trump in the general

 

[faint]

Faint of Mesopotamia
Smogon University
faint@smogon.edu

Feelin' the Bern​

Boston, MA: Tomorrow, at approximately 7:30 AM EST, I will be casting my ballot for Bernard Sanders in hopes he becomes the Democratic Nominee for President of the United States of America. I am once again asking my fellow #teamwarren supporters to please vote strategically. A vote for Elizabeth Warren, as great as she may be, is a vote for Joe Biden. Also, fuck you Liz I hope you get primaried in 2024.

###​

 

[HeaLnDeaL]

hi guys why do bernie supporters hate warren so much? she is just as progressive and honest as he is, and they are working together to ensure a progressive wins the election. she is staying in the race because even if the democratic primary takes longer to decide a victor in a contentious process, the ammo this gives trump is nothing compared to the unifying effect of nudging people who voted Warren in the primary to pick Sanders over Trump in the general

Can you go troll somewhere else please? :rolling_eyes:

 

[Stratos]

Do you want to put money down? I'll offer anything up to $50 that Warren does not endorse Bernie until the general.

 

[HeaLnDeaL]

Do you want to put money down? I'll offer anything up to $50 that Warren does not endorse Bernie until the general.

Sorry, I have to spend that $50 on health insurance and Warren is the only candidate who has a clearly explained and feasible plan of how to pay for medicare for all to free up that money.

 

[RaikouLover]

Is anyone in this thread even a supporter of the moderate wing, or is everyone completely for the progressive/leftist block?

Everyone who isn’t a Bernie supremacist has become “moderate.”

Warren is not an ally of Bernie’s. Her base comes more from Clinton / Harris voters (educated suburban women). Warren will not risk her Democratic political career by endorsing Bernie. He’s on his own.

As a said a few posts back - tribalism wins. This is simply the Democratic base consolidating to elect a Democratic nominee.

 

[Machoke]

Sorry, I have to spend that $50 on health insurance and Warren is the only candidate who has a clearly explained and feasible plan of how to pay for medicare for all to free up that money.

U mean the flat tax she proposed that charges employers all the same whether it is Amazon or mom and pop & incentivizes downsizing and contract work to get into the obvious loopholes to avoid paying and ultimately will come out of workers paychecks?

 

[EB0LA]

Sleepy Joe projected ahead of Crazy Bernie. Pocahontas should drop out after Super Tuesday tbh, even Mini Mike is expected to do better then her.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...y-shows-bidens-surge-and-lots-of-uncertainty/

(SANDERS V BIDEN)