Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
US Presidential Election 2020
Options
Comments
-
Joe_ Public wrote: »So obama and biden insiders say he was, sanders camp denies it and there's absolutely nothing there that proves one way or another that it's something that was being seriously considered. You're perfectly entitled to your belief, but i dont see it's quite the fact you make it out to be.
We'd laugh at a Trump supporter if they came out with that line when two people went on the record that something involving Trump happened, and then there was a clip found of Trump saying that this thing was a good idea, and then no independent person involved would go on record denying it happened.
Fire ahead with whatever mental gymnastics makes you feel comfortable though.0 -
The full/original video where Sanders called for Obama to be primaries, for those interested
0 -
We'd laugh at a Trump supporter if they came out with that line when two people went on the record that something involving Trump happened, and then there was a clip found of Trump saying that this thing was a good idea, and then no independent person involved would go on record denying it happened.
Fire ahead with whatever mental gymnastics makes you feel comfortable though.
Trump? What's he got to do with it? I'm looking at a story spun by obama and biden people in a publication not endeared towards sanders, at a time their chosen candidate is sinking fast, and you imagine my antennae aren't going to be raised? They did at least include the bit where sanders expressly insisted he was not intending to run, though its so well buried, it's easy to miss.0 -
Joe_ Public wrote: »I'm looking at a story spun by obama and biden people in a publication not endeared towards sanders, at a time their chosen candidate is sinking fast,
Now that's not the case either, SC was a huge win for Biden that has him very close to Sanders, and Buttigieg dropping out would seem to help him (though some polls put have his votes splitting equally among the other candidates, actually with sanders out ahead by 2%). Without that resounding a win on Saturday, he would have been one foot in the grave alright.
Tomorrow is going to make some really interesting viewing, there are some SC-like states up for play, but also some looking set for Sanders, especially Texas and California (the two biggest states for delegates) which he looks to win each of handily. A big day for Sanders tomorrow may put him out of reach if super delegates were not a thing, but we won't know for a good 36 hours or so and in the meantime, Biden certainly isn't sinking fast.0 -
Now that's not the case either, SC was a huge win for Biden that has him very close to Sanders, and Buttigieg dropping out would seem to help him (though some polls put have his votes splitting equally among the other candidates, actually with sanders out ahead by 2%). Without that resounding a win on Saturday, he would have been one foot in the grave alright.
Tomorrow is going to make some really interesting viewing, there are some SC-like states up for play, but also some looking set for Sanders, especially Texas and California (the two biggest states for delegates) which he looks to win each of handily. A big day for Sanders tomorrow may put him out of reach if super delegates were not a thing, but we won't know for a good 36 hours or so and in the meantime, Biden certainly isn't sinking fast.
That story was before sc result at a time it was being speculated sanders was running close and might even win and polls were showing that. I'm not saying there was no talk of a primary against obama, just that sanders never seriously considered it or there isnt a whole pile of concrete evidence he did. Yeah, sc ends up being a boost for biden and buttigieg obviously helping too. A lot can happen in a week any campaign.0 -
Advertisement
-
Buttigieg's speech to end his campaign has been scheduled for the exact same time as a $1.5mn buy from Mike "I paid hecklers in the last debate" Bloomberg to talk about coronavirus on another network.
Fair play to Pete, seems like quite a middle finger to the guy just outright trying to buy the election with zero shame, and something I hadn't taken stock of is how much Bloomberg entry hurt Buttigieg's momentum following Iowa.0 -
I have to say, that's quite reductivist to be mild.
First is the fact that chasing people who still are leaning towards Trump at this point is a fools game. These people will nearly all vote trump, if after the last three years they have not been turned against him then they simply won't, full stop, between now and November. Trying to convince yourself otherwise is an fools errand.
Trying to claim some kind of moral high ground by appealing to these voters while continuing to leave the younger voters alienated and made to feel like they are not part of this game. That is how the last many years have felt for them, and Biden does not represent much difference to Trump to the in that respect, especially as he has gone out of his way to assure the large corporations that nothing at all will change, which leaves him about as open to negotiate as Sanders.
A Biden in in 2020just guarantees for them that their concerns will be swept away under the carpet by the baby boomers that inherited perhaps the best setup in human history (on the back of the US' post WWII socialism) and have spent all the time since hoarding it as much as possible while these younger generations are living paycheck to paycheck, across multiple jobs, with no realistic chance of ever owning a home.
And there is a lot of resentment from these younger voters towards that older generation for that very reason. Let's not forget that Jimmy Carter was closer to Bernie than maybe any president since, but he and all he stood for were roundly rejected by 1980s Democrats and Republicans in favour of trickle down economics, neo liberalism, putting corporations ahead of people, and offloading those same jobs they bemoan the lack of today, to other countries, all in the name of profits that never really made it down much below boardroom level.
There is a very strong argument that they have been one of the most negative, destructive generations in world history, and probably are the worst in US history in this regard. There is a very real reason why global perception of the US has nosedived so badly during their time as the dominant voting bloc, and had it not been for their generation Bernie Sanders would not be seen nearly as negatively as socialism was alive and well in the US before they became the dominant bloc.
This resentment is fuelled further by hearing that same generation take great pleasure in sh*tting on those whose prospects they have ruined so thoroughly. Every time they lecture on how they were able to pay through college as a waitress, had their own house by 25, were able to raise 4 children while working a low paying job, and on and on acts as a serious slap in the face to these younger generations, because not only is that mow impossible - it is impossible because of the people lecturing them. One last slap in the face is the fact that these baby boomers grew up in such a prosperous USA because of socialist policies and programs following WWII.
If we are giving the claim that people who think they might just prefer the guy who throws children in cages, acts against the US' better interests at every possible opportunity, and is clearly not interested in the well being of the country whatsoever, over what Sanders is offering... we really can't pretend that these people were potential voters in any meaningful way.
But beyond that, it shows Sanders supporters just how little Biden supporters are willing to negotiate with them - very little, if at all. Instead, should Biden win we will see them be expected to shut up, vote for him and accept it, because Biden is closer to then on the political spectrum than the other. The great con in this though, is that is exactly how the Overton window has shifted so rapidly to the right in the US over the last 40 years, and how the Democrats are now economically much, closer to the 1980s Republicans than anything else - the same 1980s Republicans that began this whole mess.
Some pundits on the 'moderate' end of the democrats have already made noise that they might prefer more of Trump to a Sanders win. In other words their ideology is more important to them than holding power, and they would rather control their parties identity than control the WH, if it came to it. Well guess what? It cuts both ways, and yes some Sanders supporters are similar, and would rather have a Democrat party out of power in the short term but fighting for their interests, than one in power whose purpose is to serve corporations, the wealthy, and so on, while continuing to ignore the everyday worker and younger generations.
I don't agree with Sanders supporters staying home if Biden is the nominee, but it is no less understandable than Biden supporters staying home if Sanders were to be the nominee. To try and place different sets of rules or expectations where one set of voters is ok to throw their toys out of the pram if they don't get their way, but to label the other as cult-like, unreasonable, and selfish for doing the same... that's not something I can get behind.
Most of that is a rant about Boomers, which I have no intention of getting into.
A lot of the rest of your argument seems to boil down to - if they would consider Trump then we shouldn't care about them. That wasn't the question you asked and at this point it is starting to look like a moan than an honest question.
You seem to have the same mindset that concerns me about Bernie, you're either with him or you're a bad guy and you should be discounted. Getting nothing is valued the same as getting a partial victory. It appears that you believe it is understandable to prefer the democratic party appear to be fighting for the working and young people than taking action like expanding obamacare, getting a public option, putting through gun reform etc etc. That mindset is why Bernie has led practically nothing during his political career.0 -
The majority black South Carolina that overwhelmingly voted for Biden fit exactly into your 'social class' theory :rolleyes:
South Carolina is a highly conservative state. I heard James Carville say that Biden won because South Carolina looks like the Democratic party. That's completely wrong. South Carolina doesn't look like the Democratic party. Neither does it look like the US.
Nevada is considerably more reflective of the US as a whole than South Carolina and Sanders romped it. At least one poll released within the last week shows Sanders ahead with black voters nationwide and ahead with Latinos by a large margin.
Funny you talk about Sanders and his supporters being like Trump because that was a pure Trump-style response. Extrapolate one unrepresentative example and make a massive generalisation based on that.0 -
Fair enough on the timing.Joe_ Public wrote: »That story was before sc result at a time it was being speculated sanders was running close and might even win and polls were showing that. I'm not saying there was no talk of a primary against obama, just that sanders never seriously considered it or there isnt a whole pile of concrete evidence he did. Yeah, sc ends up being a boost for biden and buttigieg obviously helping too. A lot can happen in a week any campaign.
I have put the video above, I do think sanders was quite serious about it but I an also understand his reasoning about Obama not being the president he ran on being (something that can't really be denied) and on how weak he was when dealing with the republicans, as McConnell basically slapped him all over Washington for much of his second term, while Obama continued to try to act in good faith with someone who clearly had no interest in that.
I think Obama was a pretty good president, especially I nthe economy, and would not have agreed with sanders on primarying him. But I can appreciate that is was not based on sanders wanting Obama to be someone other than who he was, and was instead based on Sanders wanting Obama to be who he claimed to be, back in 2008.0 -
Most of that is a rant about Boomers, which I have no intention of getting into.
A lot of the rest of your argument seems to boil down to - if they would consider Trump then we shouldn't care about them. That wasn't the question you asked and at this point it is starting to look like a moan than an honest question.
You seem to have the same mindset that concerns me about Bernie, you're either with him or you're a bad guy and you should be discounted. Getting nothing is valued the same as getting a partial victory. It appears that you believe it is understandable to prefer the democratic party appear to be fighting for the working and young people than taking action like expanding obamacare, getting a public option, putting through gun reform etc etc. That mindset is why Bernie has led practically nothing during his political career.
Ah here. Have you got anything except rants against an imagined straw man version of what you think Sanders and his supporters are? Because apart from that I've seen precious little from you since you started posting here.
Sanders has a very broad coalition which you seem to completely overlook. They come from everywhere and are just as "respectable" as the supporters of any other Democratic candidate.
You also may have noticed also that it was reported last week that Russia is interfering, supposedly on behalf of Sanders. Now work out what kind of interference that might be. The obvious answer is that they have a load of bots, trolls and agent provocateurs out there who are pretending to be Sanders supporters and spreading vitriol against opponents. That's what the Russians do, they do in every election they interfere with, and they interfere in a lot. At the same time, there is widespread real vitriol against Sanders and his supporters online which is in no way connected to reality. It would be good if people acknowledged that.
I find posters' obsession with insisting on only debating through their "perception" or the perception they want to create of Sanders pretty tiresome. It's a real cop out but I suppose it stops them having to debate real issues in good faith.0 -
Advertisement
-
I have to say, that's quite reductivist to be mild.
First is the fact that chasing people who still are leaning towards Trump at this point is a fools game. These people will nearly all vote trump, if after the last three years they have not been turned against him then they simply won't, full stop, between now and November. Trying to convince yourself otherwise is an fools errand.
Trying to claim some kind of moral high ground by appealing to these voters while continuing to leave the younger voters alienated and made to feel like they are not part of this game. That is how the last many years have felt for them, and Biden does not represent much difference to Trump to the in that respect, especially as he has gone out of his way to assure the large corporations that nothing at all will change, which leaves him about as open to negotiate as Sanders.
A Biden in in 2020just guarantees for them that their concerns will be swept away under the carpet by the baby boomers that inherited perhaps the best setup in human history (on the back of the US' post WWII socialism) and have spent all the time since hoarding it as much as possible while these younger generations are living paycheck to paycheck, across multiple jobs, with no realistic chance of ever owning a home.
And there is a lot of resentment from these younger voters towards that older generation for that very reason. Let's not forget that Jimmy Carter was closer to Bernie than maybe any president since, but he and all he stood for were roundly rejected by 1980s Democrats and Republicans in favour of trickle down economics, neo liberalism, putting corporations ahead of people, and offloading those same jobs they bemoan the lack of today, to other countries, all in the name of profits that never really made it down much below boardroom level.
There is a very strong argument that they have been one of the most negative, destructive generations in world history, and probably are the worst in US history in this regard. There is a very real reason why global perception of the US has nosedived so badly during their time as the dominant voting bloc, and had it not been for their generation Bernie Sanders would not be seen nearly as negatively as socialism was alive and well in the US before they became the dominant bloc.
This resentment is fuelled further by hearing that same generation take great pleasure in sh*tting on those whose prospects they have ruined so thoroughly. Every time they lecture on how they were able to pay through college as a waitress, had their own house by 25, were able to raise 4 children while working a low paying job, and on and on acts as a serious slap in the face to these younger generations, because not only is that mow impossible - it is impossible because of the people lecturing them. One last slap in the face is the fact that these baby boomers grew up in such a prosperous USA because of socialist policies and programs following WWII.
If we are giving the claim that people who think they might just prefer the guy who throws children in cages, acts against the US' better interests at every possible opportunity, and is clearly not interested in the well being of the country whatsoever, over what Sanders is offering... we really can't pretend that these people were potential voters in any meaningful way.
But beyond that, it shows Sanders supporters just how little Biden supporters are willing to negotiate with them - very little, if at all. Instead, should Biden win we will see them be expected to shut up, vote for him and accept it, because Biden is closer to then on the political spectrum than the other. The great con in this though, is that is exactly how the Overton window has shifted so rapidly to the right in the US over the last 40 years, and how the Democrats are now economically much, closer to the 1980s Republicans than anything else - the same 1980s Republicans that began this whole mess.
Some pundits on the 'moderate' end of the democrats have already made noise that they might prefer more of Trump to a Sanders win. In other words their ideology is more important to them than holding power, and they would rather control their parties identity than control the WH, if it came to it. Well guess what? It cuts both ways, and yes some Sanders supporters are similar, and would rather have a Democrat party out of power in the short term but fighting for their interests, than one in power whose purpose is to serve corporations, the wealthy, and so on, while continuing to ignore the everyday worker and younger generations.
I don't agree with Sanders supporters staying home if Biden is the nominee, but it is no less understandable than Biden supporters staying home if Sanders were to be the nominee. To try and place different sets of rules or expectations where one set of voters is ok to throw their toys out of the pram if they don't get their way, but to label the other as cult-like, unreasonable, and selfish for doing the same... that's not something I can get behind.
Outstanding post and I very much agree with you. Since the early 1980's and the Corporate Democrats complete control of that party and the complete acceptance of Milton Friedman's disaster capitalism the Democrats have been very much part of the problem in destroying the economic lives and opportunities of so many Americans. Granted the Republicans have now lurched so far to the right it is scary but it does not change the fact that the corporate Democrats like Biben in their hubris and contempt for the economic well being of most Americans have very much alienated many of them yet then try and paint them as problems if they do not obediently vote for the continuation of a system designed to reward the wealthy and shaft the majority of Americans.0 -
Joe_ Public wrote: »Trump? What's he got to do with it? I'm looking at a story spun by obama and biden people in a publication not endeared towards sanders, at a time their chosen candidate is sinking fast, and you imagine my antennae aren't going to be raised? They did at least include the bit where sanders expressly insisted he was not intending to run, though its so well buried, it's easy to miss.
If they were making it up why doesn't anyone else involved come out and say it was a lie? Why did Bernie make those comments about it being a good idea?
You seem to be just focusing on one element of the story that could have potential issues than everything as a whole, again a very Trumpian tactic - whistleblower, FBI, etc etc0 -
And that right there is the crux of the problem.Most of that is a rant about Boomers, which I have no intention of getting into.
I have very clearly outlined the frustrations, fears and anxieties of many sanders supporters, have very clearly shown how these have been the realities through their adults lives, have very clearly shown how those enforcing these realities did not have to put up with this in their time and indeed benefitted so much because of exactly what they now oppose so strongly, and have outlined how decades of trying to compromise while the other side doesn't (which is exactly what you are suggesting) has caused the 2020 democrats to be more like the 1980s republicans that started this shift, than anything else.
Your response? "Shut up ranting I don't want to hear any of it". Thats it. That's your total input. For all your comain ing about Sanders supporters not wanting to discuss issues or look at the concerns of others, you are doing exactly that yourself.
And you wonder why sanders supporters feel like they are not being listened to or having their concerns put into consideration?
That is some astounding tone deafness.
My point is that trying to fight or "the middle ground voter" in a time with the least 'middle ground' since the civil war, is a losing battle.A lot of the rest of your argument seems to boil down to - if they would consider Trump then we shouldn't care about them. That wasn't the question you asked and at this point it is starting to look like a moan than an honest question.
When the alternative is to push for the energizing the largest voter bloc in the nation, and the one that voted in the biggest numbers in 2018, a bloc that is overwhelmingly in your parties favour... it's a very obvious choice which is your best road to success.
I would like for these two sides to listen to each other and try to reach genuine common ground. But if these two sides will refuse to even listen to each other, and instead will just write off the concerns of the other as "a rant", then I'll take the latter every time. Numbers win elections.
:rolleyes:You seem to have the same mindset that concerns me about Bernie, you're either with him or you're a bad guy and you should be discounted.
Then you clearly are not paying attention to my posts, including the one where I provided the video to back up your claim and also criticised him on talking about primarying Obama.
Frankly, you seem quite guilty of the reverse of what you are so eager to accuse anyone whose preferred candidate is sanders of.
Please clarify.Getting nothing is valued the same as getting a partial victory. It appears that you believe it is understandable to prefer the democratic party appear to be fighting for the working and young people than taking action like expanding obamacare, getting a public option, putting through gun reform etc etc. That mindset is why Bernie has led practically nothing during his political career.0 -
Fair enough on the timing.
I have put the video above, I do think sanders was quite serious about it but I an also understand his reasoning about Obama not being the president he ran on being (something that can't really be denied) and on how weak he was when dealing with the republicans, as McConnell basically slapped him all over Washington for much of his second term, while Obama continued to try to act in good faith with someone who clearly had no interest in that.
I think Obama was a pretty good president, especially I nthe economy, and would not have agreed with sanders on primarying him. But I can appreciate that is was not based on sanders wanting Obama to be someone other than who he was, and was instead based on Sanders wanting Obama to be who he claimed to be, back in 2008.
It is an example of Sanders not understanding compromise and governing.0 -
And that right there is the crux of the problem.
I have very clearly outlined the frustrations, fears and anxieties of many sanders supporters, have very clearly shown how these have been the realities through their adults lives, have very clearly shown how those enforcing these realities did not have to put up with this in their time and indeed benefitted so much because of exactly what they now oppose so strongly, and have outlined how decades of trying to compromise while the other side doesn't (which is exactly what you are suggesting) has caused the 2020 democrats to be more like the 1980s republicans that started this shift, than anything else.
Your response? "Shut up ranting I don't want to hear any of it". Thats it. That's your total input. For all your comain ing about Sanders supporters not wanting to discuss issues or look at the concerns of others, you are doing exactly that yourself.
And you wonder why sanders supporters feel like they are not being listened to or having their concerns put into consideration?
That is some astounding tone deafness.
My point is that trying to fight or "the middle ground voter" in a time with the least 'middle ground' since the civil war, is a losing battle.
When the alternative is to push for the energizing the largest voter bloc in the nation, and the one that voted in the biggest numbers in 2018, a bloc that is overwhelmingly in your parties favour... it's a very obvious choice which is your best road to success.
I would like for these two sides to listen to each other and try to reach genuine common ground. But if these two sides will refuse to even listen to each other, and instead will just write off the concerns of the other as "a rant", then I'll take the latter every time. Numbers win elections.
:rolleyes:
Then you clearly are not paying attention to my posts, including the one where I provided the video to back up your claim and also criticised him on talking about primarying Obama.
Please clarify.
Totally agree with you again. The so called middle ground voter in the US is a joke at this point when your talking about a far right Republican Party and a center right Democratic party. Roughly 45% of Americans do not even vote. Maybe if the Corporate Democrats focused on the needs economically that would best serve the vast majority of Americans they could attract 5-10% of them to vote. But they have no interest because they love Milton Friedman's disaster capitalism and taking care of the wealthy. The Democrats were once the party of FDR economically and not Milton Friedman the contrast is very clear and the outcomes for the lives of the vast majority of Americans economically between the 2 equally very clear.0 -
sid waddell wrote: »South Carolina is a highly conservative state. I heard James Carville say that Biden won because South Carolina looks like the Democratic party. That's completely wrong. South Carolina doesn't look like the Democratic party. Neither does it look like the US.
Nevada is considerably more reflective of the US as a whole than South Carolina and Sanders romped it. At least one poll released within the last week shows Sanders ahead with black voters nationwide and ahead with Latinos by a large margin.
Funny you talk about Sanders and his supporters being like Trump because that was a pure Trump-style response. Extrapolate one unrepresentative example and make a massive generalisation based on that.
You can be conservative and working class.
More than one poll last week had Sanders close to Biden in SC and look how it turned out.
If you want to wonder why Sanders isn't doing well with black voters, look at him being the only candidate to skip the anniversary of bloody sunday in Selma yesterday. Another example as to why there is a legitimate question to whether black voters will 'fall behind' Bernie if he wins (a claim you never bothered to back up).0 -
Fair enough on the timing.
I have put the video above, I do think sanders was quite serious about it but I an also understand his reasoning about Obama not being the president he ran on being (something that can't really be denied) and on how weak he was when dealing with the republicans, as McConnell basically slapped him all over Washington for much of his second term, while Obama continued to try to act in good faith with someone who clearly had no interest in that.
I think Obama was a pretty good president, especially I nthe economy, and would not have agreed with sanders on primarying him. But I can appreciate that is was not based on sanders wanting Obama to be someone other than who he was, and was instead based on Sanders wanting Obama to be who he claimed to be, back in 2008.
Thanks for posting the link, some but not all the quotes have appeared in various places over the past week. Whether sanders thought seriously about primarying or not, he definitely wasnt the only one disappointed with the obama presidency, maybe a product of too high hopes to begin with. I guess its an indication that sanders doesnt play the political game all that well, a weakness and a strength at the same time perhaps. FDR and RFK are his kind of democrats, JFK and obama probably not so much but it doesnt do in certain quarters to be anything less than reverential as far as those figures are concerned. Sanders is an independent and acts like one unsurprisingly enough, there may be a time to compromise but we're not there yet i dont think and might never be.0 -
It is an example of Sanders not understanding compromise and governing.
It's an example of that, yes.
Its also an example of sanders having concerns over Obama not being able to stop the republicans from running roughshod over him... Which was largely correct and really can't be denied.
And it is also an example of Sanders being concerned about politicians not living up to their campaign promises, which can suck the energy out of a party and its base... which is what the 2012, 2014 and 2016 election results show.
There is good and bad to it, yet (as seems to be the case for you and sanders) you seem intent on focusing on just the negative.0 -
Tomorrow is going to make some really interesting viewing, there are some SC-like states up for play, but also some looking set for Sanders, especially Texas and California (the two biggest states for delegates) which he looks to win each of handily. A big day for Sanders tomorrow may put him out of reach if super delegates were not a thing, but we won't know for a good 36 hours or so and in the meantime, Biden certainly isn't sinking fast.
In terms of delegates, Sanders is unlikely to pull out an unassailable lead or anything like it tomorrow, but, and ironic because I was talking about perception in a different context in another post, if Sanders was to win the majority of states tomorrow, the perception of him as the clear front runner and the most electable candidate would take a giant leap forward. When that happens, the road opens up in front of a candidate and their nomination almost becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Texas is key in this. I think Sanders really needs to win Texas. If he could win Virginia and North Carolina too, the perception of him as the winner and Biden as finished would hit home very quickly. If Sanders was to also take Minnesota and Massachussetts, he'd have defeated Klobuchar and Warren in their own states.
I think if one of Sanders or Biden sweeps all three of Texas, Virginia and North Carolina, that candidate will win the nomination. If it's a split of those states, we move nearer to contested convention territory. Win all five states I mentioned, in addition to California which should be a gimme, and I don't really see how Sanders would be stopped after that.
Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Arizona and Washington are all still to come in March and should Sanders do well tomorrow, all those should be falling comfortably into his column.
There are two things to mention about Biden. Yes he should get some sort of perception boost from Saturday. There is a possibility that his South Carolina win and Buttigieg's withdrawal could mean he runs under the radar in terms of polling.
But until yesterday, he hadn't been in a Super Tuesday state for a month, and his campaign is not exactly flush with cash in terms of advertising.
And there's still the Bloomberg factor. How many votes does hundreds of millions in advertising actually buy a candidate?0 -
And that right there is the crux of the problem.
I have very clearly outlined the frustrations, fears and anxieties of many sanders supporters, have very clearly shown how these have been the realities through their adults lives, have very clearly shown how those enforcing these realities did not have to put up with this in their time and indeed benefitted so much because of exactly what they now oppose so strongly, and have outlined how decades of trying to compromise while the other side doesn't (which is exactly what you are suggesting) has caused the 2020 democrats to be more like the 1980s republicans that started this shift, than anything else.
Your response? "Shut up ranting I don't want to hear any of it". Thats it. That's your total input. For all your comain ing about Sanders supporters not wanting to discuss issues or look at the concerns of others, you are doing exactly that yourself.
And you wonder why sanders supporters feel like they are not being listened to or having their concerns put into consideration?
That is some astounding tone deafness.
The problem is that is well and good but has nothing to do with my post or the question you posed.
Just because they are angry doesn't mean getting a lift from Dublin to Laois isn't going to help them more in their hopes of getting to Cork than staying in Dublin and sulking.My point is that trying to fight or "the middle ground voter" in a time with the least 'middle ground' since the civil war, is a losing battle.
When the alternative is to push for the energizing the largest voter bloc in the nation, and the one that voted in the biggest numbers in 2018, a bloc that is overwhelmingly in your parties favour... it's a very obvious choice which is your best road to success.
If there was any evidence so far that Bernie was actually energizing that group to get the turnout required to beat Trump plus moderates then you'd have an argument but he has failed to do it thus far.I would like for these two sides to listen to each other and try to reach genuine common ground. But if these two sides will refuse to even listen to each other, and instead will just write off the concerns of the other as "a rant", then I'll take the latter every time. Numbers win elections.
:rolleyes:
The problem is that it seems like it is only one side listening.
Bernie tried every tactic to get a contested convention in 2016, which apparently is the most toxic thing anyone could try to do in 2020.
Bernie is the only candidate that got any input into the rules for the 2020 race but the establishment are against him
Bernie negotiated a large amount of concessions for the 2016 platform, yet between him dragging it out for so long it wasn't enough and many Bernie voters stayed home or voted elsewhere.Then you clearly are not paying attention to my posts, including the one where I provided the video to back up your claim and also criticised him on talking about primarying Obama.
Frankly, you seem quite guilty of the reverse of what you are so eager to accuse anyone whose preferred candidate is sanders of.
You posted the video but I'm yet to see you say anything about what that means about his personality or how he would govern.
If you agree with what you posted elsewhere that his problem with Obama is that he didn't follow through on everything he said in 2008 the I don't see how this isn't a large concern.Please clarify.
You said this "yes some Sanders supporters are similar, and would rather have a Democrat party out of power in the short term but fighting for their interests, than one in power whose purpose is to serve corporations, the wealthy, and so on, while continuing to ignore the everyday worker and younger generations."
If you believe what Obama did was to ignore the everyday worker and younger generations then I don't know what to say. He balanced them with other interests but that is what governing is. While Obama did all he did, what legislation did Bernie lead? Appearing to be pure and 'fighting for their interests' means nothing if you have nothing to show for it.0 -
Advertisement
-
You can be conservative and working class.
More than one poll last week had Sanders close to Biden in SC and look how it turned out.
If you want to wonder why Sanders isn't doing well with black voters, look at him being the only candidate to skip the anniversary of bloody sunday in Selma yesterday. Another example as to why there is a legitimate question to whether black voters will 'fall behind' Bernie if he wins (a claim you never bothered to back up).
Again, you say Sanders is not doing well with black voters. Yet a poll in the last week showed Sanders ahead with black voters nationwide.
You do realise that Joe Biden lied about being arrested trying to get see Nelson Mandela in South Africa? He has continually lied about his connections to the civil rights campaign in the 1960s.
What does that say about his attitude to black people?
As regards your last sentence, what exactly do you have a problem with when I said should Bernie Sanders be the nominee in November, he will win the overwhelming majority of the black voters in South Carolina? Though whoever the Democratic nominee is, they are highly unlikely to win South Carolina.
As you have said yourself, the key states are the mid-west ones that Trump won last time. And Sanders is currently polling ahead of Biden in all of them.0 -
If they were making it up why doesn't anyone else involved come out and say it was a lie? Why did Bernie make those comments about it being a good idea?
You seem to be just focusing on one element of the story that could have potential issues than everything as a whole, again a very Trumpian tactic - whistleblower, FBI, etc etc
Its still a he says, she says. Sanders saying it was something they should consider is a long way from actually him making a serious run at it. In fact, he insisted on more than one occasion he had no intention of it. I didnt suggest they were lying, but how does anyone really know unless you were part of it? They could be exaggerating, not a lot of detail offered in the story beyond a few people talking. Like, bottom line, i dont know but i dont see the evidence either. Thats about it really.0 -
Seriously, who cares about whether Sanders said Obama should be primaried in 2012 or if he didn't, either way?
In terms of complete and utter irrelevancies, this has to go right in at the top.0 -
It is an example of Sanders not understanding compromise and governing.
Do you consider the way the Democrats have consistently allowed the Republicans to appoint conservative judges to lifetime positions as a good thing?
You could call that "compromise". You could also call it being ridden roughshod over.
The Republicans will not compromise over anything. They're insane. You aren't going to win a war with a wooden branch.0 -
sid waddell wrote: »Seriously, who cares about whether Sanders said Obama should be primaried in 2012 or if he didn't, either way?
In terms of complete and utter irrelevancies, this has to go right in at the top.
Well, its just my opinion that this was a centrist attack on sanders, a weak enough one, and seems an illustration that, as with the 1986 video, they're having to go to good lenghts on all sides to try to discredit him. But others, or at least one other, disagrees and sees it as something else. But thats enough said on it so you can relax and carry on!0 -
-
Amy Klobuchar has dropped out and endorsed Biden0
-
Joe_ Public wrote: »Well, its just my opinion that this was a centrist attack on sanders, a weak enough one, and seems an illustration that, as with the 1986 video, they're having to go to good lenghts on all sides to try to discredit him. But others, or at least one other, disagrees and sees it as something else. But thats enough said on it so you can relax and carry on!
It is a centrist attack on Sanders and it's laughable.
Klobuchar has pulled out of the race and endorsed Biden, one day before her home primary.
Biden must be making some serious promises to her and Buttigieg to get them to drop out one/two days before Super Tuesday.0 -
Biden win please. We need an Irish-American in the White House in case the Brits attempt to go for No Deal and effectively tear up the GFA by implementing a border.
At the end of the day, Biden wouldn't do feck all to protect the GFA merely out of a vague sense of heritage. He might do it to appeal to Irish-American voters, but it really depends on how advantageous a US-UK deal would be. If the deal is sweet enough, I think just about any POTUS would shift his or her position on the GFA.0 -
Advertisement
-
sid waddell wrote: »Seriously, who cares about whether Sanders said Obama should be primaried in 2012 or if he didn't, either way?
In terms of complete and utter irrelevancies, this has to go right in at the top.
See this is the crux of the matter.
Bernie supporters ask why people have concerns about him, people list their concerns and they are deemed as 'utter irrelevancies'.
The reason why this example matters, along with a laundry list of others, is that it shows that Bernie is an ideologue, doesn't know how to compromise, and has no idea how to govern. Sure Obama didn't follow through on everything he promised during the first term but he spent nearly all his capital on getting Obama through, even though it meant suicide for many democrats.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement