Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sinn Fein

2020: The Race For the White House - The Good Place

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

Not even 2 weeks ago I made this prediction and here is Bloomberg’s campaign manage threatening Bernie.

@ksheekey

The opposition research on @BernieSanders could fill @realDonaldTrump’s empty Foxconn facility in Wisconsin.

It is very damaging, perhaps even disqualifying.

https://twitter.com/ksheekey/status/1229778713010679808?s=21

If they had something that damaging on Bernie and the Clintons/DNC didn't use it to burn (Bern?) him to the ground I'd be stunned. 

Edited by KiddLattimer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

Not even 2 weeks ago I made this prediction and here is Bloomberg’s campaign manage threatening Bernie.

@ksheekey

The opposition research on @BernieSanders could fill @realDonaldTrump’s empty Foxconn facility in Wisconsin.

It is very damaging, perhaps even disqualifying.

https://twitter.com/ksheekey/status/1229778713010679808?s=21

I’m very interested in how the Bloomberg campaign thinks about disqualifying behavior.

Edited by caustic
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, KiddLattimer said:

If they had something that damaging on Bernie and the Clintons/DNC didn't use it to burn (Bern?) him to the ground I'd be stunned. 

The Clinton campaign did hardly any heavyweight oppo on Bernie. Their focus was always on the general. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KiddLattimer said:

If they had something that damaging on Bernie and the Clintons/DNC didn't use it to burn (Bern?) him to the ground I'd be stunned. 

Eh Team Hillary may have made the strategic decision not to use it because it might widen the schism. Bloomberg in his Trumpian fashion might decide otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Sanders won’t release his medical records.

- I don’t think his actual records are necessary but medical summaries would be good. Guy’s 78 with a legit :heart: condition.

He did already release these -- he put out a summary letter from his physician (Congressional doctor of like 20 something years) and two more from cardiologists post heart attack. That's on par with Biden and Bloomberg (who each have released just a single summary letter), and maybe slightly behind Warren (who released a letter + like the result of a blood test or something?).

Edited by mcintyre1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/17/2020 at 11:51 AM, lod001 said:

WASHINGTON — House Democrats, recovering from their failed push to remove President Donald Trump from office, are making a sharp pivot to talking about health care and economic issues, turning away from their investigations of the president as they focus on preserving their majority.

Only took them 3.5 years of failure after failure to figure it out. :lol:

 

:confused:

It's almost like the 2018 midterms didn't happen in the minds of many of you.  These are exactly the things that won them their seats a year and a half ago.  They certainly seemed to forget about it shortly after that major success for whatever reason, but seem to be getting back to it now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, The Commish said:

:confused:

It's almost like the 2018 midterms didn't happen in the minds of many of you.  These are exactly the things that won them their seats a year and a half ago.  They certainly seemed to forget about it shortly after that major success for whatever reason, but seem to be getting back to it now.

I know this is anathema to our cynicism about the parties, but maybe, just maybe, they impeached Donald Trump because he should have been and they saw that the civic duty of bringing forth the Articles of Impeachment was more important to the safety and security of the country than politicking about previous conditions w/r/t healthcare.

It could really be that, couldn't it be? 

Edited by rockaction
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, rockaction said:
16 minutes ago, The Commish said:

:confused:

It's almost like the 2018 midterms didn't happen in the minds of many of you.  These are exactly the things that won them their seats a year and a half ago.  They certainly seemed to forget about it shortly after that major success for whatever reason, but seem to be getting back to it now.

I know this is anathema to our cynicism about the parties, but maybe, just maybe, they impeached Donald Trump because he should have been and they saw the civic duty of bringing forth the Articles of Impeachment was more important to the safety and security of the country than politicking about previous conditions w/r/t healthcare.

It could really be that, couldn't it be? 

It could be.  I'd hope that our elected officials we appoint to office would be capable of doing more than one thing at a time though.  If not, we're in trouble.  This isn't an either/or set of events the best I can tell.  It's been very frustrating and annoying to watch the Democrats continually blow all the opportunities provided them by talking about Trump 24x7 instead of talking about their plans to help the country.  It's an easy trap to fall into, but it's an obvious trap.  It should be pretty clear to anyone paying attention that the last thing Trump or his handlers want is him talking about policy and the Dems can't seem to keep their message straight and focused on the issues.

ETA:  I should also point out that my comment was a pushback on the "3.5 years" shtick...they did exactly what he's saying they haven't done just a year and a half ago during midterms.

Edited by The Commish
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Commish said:

It could be.  I'd hope that our elected officials we appoint to office would be capable of doing more than one thing at a time though.  If not, we're in trouble.  This isn't an either/or set of events the best I can tell.  It's been very frustrating and annoying to watch the Democrats continually blow all the opportunities provided them by talking about Trump 24x7 instead of talking about their plans to help the country.  It's an easy trap to fall into, but it's an obvious trap.  It should be pretty clear to anyone paying attention that the last thing Trump or his handlers want is him talking about policy and the Dems can't seem to keep their message straight and focused on the issues.

That's likely true. I am less sanguine about your premise that they should be devoting their full attention to both. I'm not sure it is possible.

But that's from the outside looking in. I don't know enough to give an expert analysis of the roles and work impeachment took. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, rockaction said:

That's likely true. I am less sanguine about your premise that they should be devoting their full attention to both. I'm not sure it is possible.

But that's from the outside looking in. I don't know enough to give an expert analysis of the roles and work impeachment took. 

To be clear, I am talking about the messaging.  That takes little work.  That's just some :hophead: in front of the cameras during the news cycles.  It's pretty clear, the work they've been doing based on the stacks of bills sitting on McConnell's desk.  Obviously, "full attention to both" is not attainable.  That literally can't happen, but it's clear to me that the Dems are terrible at messaging...it's tough to watch at times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Commish said:

To be clear, I am talking about the messaging.  That takes little work.  That's just some :hophead: in front of the cameras during the news cycles.  It's pretty clear, the work they've been doing based on the stacks of bills sitting on McConnell's desk.  Obviously, "full attention to both" is not attainable.  That literally can't happen, but it's clear to me that the Dems are terrible at messaging...it's tough to watch at times.

Ah, I see. I wasn't really being contentious. I'm not sure myself if they could do both. But yes, the work does seem to be building on McConnell's desk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as a centrist Democrat, I’m pretty damn frustrated. 

Biden would beat Trump, but he’s flawed; can’t get there. 

Bloomberg would beat Trump, but it’s looking more and more like he’s flawed as well. 

Buttigieg would beat Trump but it he appears to be flawed as well. 

The one candidate who appears to have almost no flaws on the centrist side is Klobuchar, and I was hoping her performance in New Hampshire would gain her traction but the emergence of Bloomberg has prevented it. Bloomberg has captured all of the media’s attention, but the voters still aren’t sure, and the result is that he, Buttigieg, Biden and Klobuchar are still dividing the vote. The result is Bernie has a double digit lead in California. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, KiddLattimer said:

If they had something that damaging on Bernie and the Clintons/DNC didn't use it to burn (Bern?) him to the ground I'd be stunned. 

Go back in the way back machine to that race for a minute though. Bernie never protested at the time really about the rigging and folded like a cheap suit in the end.

Not saying the Bloomberg camp has something on him, but Bernie really went out with a whimper in 2016 and always left some of us scratching our heads why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, timschochet said:

the result is that he, Buttigieg, Biden and Klobuchar are still dividing the vote. The result is Bernie has a double digit lead in California. 

This was always the  likely outcome, which is why I didn't think Bloomberg would enter and why I was so unhappy when he did. Hopefully the next two debates bring hi down to earth and balance the ad campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Widbil83 said:

Go back in the way back machine to that race for a minute though. Bernie never protested at the time really about the rigging and folded like a cheap suit in the end.

Not saying the Bloomberg camp has something on him, but Bernie really went out with a whimper in 2016 and always left some of us scratching our heads why.

That really is not my impression at all. I think he hung on way too long in 2016, acted like an petulant, immature child, and did serious damage to Hillary Clinton’s attempt to unify the Democrats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Ah, I see. I wasn't really being contentious. I'm not sure myself if they could do both. But yes, the work does seem to be building on McConnell's desk.

no worries :hifive: 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyhow, I’ve already written my belief that if Bernie wins the nomination he will likely lose the election- see Jeremy Corbyn- though of course I hope I’m wrong about that. 

But even beyond that, his nomination makes me feel like there is no place for me, or people like me, in our political system at this time. It seems like on both sides the extremists have taken over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

Anyhow, I’ve already written my belief that if Bernie wins the nomination he will likely lose the election- see Jeremy Corbyn- though of course I hope I’m wrong about that. 

But even beyond that, his nomination makes me feel like there is no place for me, or people like me, in our political system at this time. It seems like on both sides the extremists have taken over. 

Crazy to think that a centrist couldn't win in today's climate when a centrist seems to be exactly what we need for political stability's sake. At least that's how I feel. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rockaction said:

Crazy to think that a centrist couldn't win in today's climate when a centrist seems to be exactly what we need for political stability's sake. At least that's how I feel. 

And don’t get me wrong- from a purely entertainment perspective, if you are a political junkie like I am, there would almost be nothing better than a Bernie vs Trump showdown. It will be an absolute circus, totally unpredictable and wild. Populist vs populist. It’s just that the stakes are a little higher than a sporting event. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

And don’t get me wrong- from a purely entertainment perspective, if you are a political junkie like I am, there would almost be nothing better than a Bernie vs Trump showdown. It will be an absolute circus, totally unpredictable and wild. Populist vs populist. It’s just that the stakes are a little higher than a sporting event. 

I'm not sure I could be entertained given how I feel about populism unchecked and given, as you point out, what's at stake.

It's too important and my country means too much to me to be entertained by it instead of edified by it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Crazy to think that a centrist couldn't win in today's climate when a centrist seems to be exactly what we need for political stability's sake. At least that's how I feel. 

I think a centrist could win, but the process and ego is getting in the way

In 2016,  four relatively moderate candidates (Bush, Cruz, Kasich. Rubio) split the vote,potentially paving the way for Trump's nomination.
In 2020, four relatively moderate candidates (Biden, Bloomberg, Buttigieg, Klobuchar) are splitting the vote.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mystery Achiever said:

I think a centrist could win, but the process and ego is getting in the way

In 2016,  four relatively moderate candidates (Bush, Cruz, Kasich. Rubio) split the vote,potentially paving the way for Trump's nomination.
In 2020, four relatively moderate candidates (Biden, Bloomberg, Buttigieg, Klobuchar) are splitting the vote.....

Perhaps we're seeing a splintering of coalitions that lasted for so long and that's the answer. I wonder if someone more up on it than us has delved into exactly where we're fracturing within these coalitions. Or is it that we've all become so accustomed to purity tests that we now reflexively hold minor flaws or disagreements against people to our detriment? Or, lastly, is it just that the political class we've been dealt has been that bad? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mystery Achiever said:

Or there were just too many candidates in the races competing for attention.

But this is always the way extremists win elections. If you study history, extremist candidates NEVER have a majority of voters. In the rare instances when they win its because the opposition is too divided. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

But this is always the way extremists win elections. If you study history, extremist candidates NEVER have a majority of voters. In the rare instances when they win its because the opposition is too divided. 

Support something radical for a change, something that does real good and probably cuts down on the extremists' influence -- election reform. Primary reform. There are far better ways to do things than the ways we do them now. Our current methods probably discourage centrist voters and give the extremists' far too much influence. But the centrist Democrats (we won't even talk about Republicans and election reform, they're still a century or so out on that) won't get behind reforms because they fear their own power being diluted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Anyhow, I’ve already written my belief that if Bernie wins the nomination he will likely lose the election- see Jeremy Corbyn- though of course I hope I’m wrong about that. 

But even beyond that, his nomination makes me feel like there is no place for me, or people like me, in our political system at this time. It seems like on both sides the extremists have taken over. 

So, you've brought up this Corbyn reference a few times now, and I still don't get it.  Corbyn is generally loathed by his own supporters.  Why do you think that's similar enough to any of our candidate options to continually bring him up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, The Commish said:

So, you've brought up this Corbyn reference a few times now, and I still don't get it.  Corbyn is generally loathed by his own supporters.  Why do you think that's similar enough to any of our candidate options to continually bring him up?

Because I think that, in both Britain and the United States, deep down in our psyches we reject the whole idea of socialism. It goes way beyond any specific political issue, and I’m also not talking about certain conservatives who always like to bring up dictatorships. It has more to do with that, in our core, we believe in individualism and self-reliance. Whether these ideas actually exist, whether they’ve always been fantasy, doesn’t matter; we believe in them as an ideal. And I just think that in the end somebody who calls himself a socialist is never going to get elected President, not even against a corrupt authoritarian jerk like Donald Trump. In the end he’s going to get blown out of the water because he is not how we see ourselves. 

And that, IMO, is what happened to Jeremy Corbyn and that’s why I have compared Bernie to him, and to George McGovern as well. Take it with a grain of salt, but that’s what I think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Because I think that, in both Britain and the United States, deep down in our psyches we reject the whole idea of socialism. It goes way beyond any specific political issue, and I’m also not talking about certain conservatives who always like to bring up dictatorships. It has more to do with that, in our core, we believe in individualism and self-reliance. Whether these ideas actually exist, whether they’ve always been fantasy, doesn’t matter; we believe in them as an ideal. And I just think that in the end somebody who calls himself a socialist is never going to get elected President, not even against a corrupt authoritarian jerk like Donald Trump. In the end he’s going to get blown out of the water because he is not how we see ourselves. 

And that, IMO, is what happened to Jeremy Corbyn and that’s why I have compared Bernie to him, and to George McGovern as well. Take it with a grain of salt, but that’s what I think. 

Interesting.  I can't explain why Bernie embraces the term Democratic Socialist or even Socialist.  He's neither if we go by the actual definitions.  If we can acknowledge that they don't exist, then that's a step forward.  What's illogical is the leaps one has to take to essentially say "Hey, I know he's not a socialist as that ideal isn't represented in his positions, but that's what he calls himself so I am going to reject him".  That's the position it takes to reject Bernie.

However, I don't believe any of that applies to Corbyn.  His primary support comes from voting against the other guy.  Thats his source of support.  It's not because they believe in his message and/or approach.  Bernie's source is rooted in groups of people who believe in what he's saying.  It's rooted in people who see him as morally superior to Trump.  None of that applies to Corbyn.

If I am speaking bluntly, it seems to me that you are looking way too hard for a correlation between the two in an effort to be the "I told you so" guy.  It may very well end up being that Bernie loses to Trump, though I don't see how he loses the likes of Michigan and Wisconsin or even Ohio at this point.  Anything can happen.  But there is little to nothing (that I can see) that is similar enough between Bernie and Corbyn to warrant the comparison.  The support profiles are completely different.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, CentralPA said:

I noticed the anecdotal voter in that case was an elderly woman who was sick of Trump and his low class deriding of John McCain. I wonder for how many people stuff like that is the real exposure they have of him, and whether or not people will vote against that. I personally view it, with no links to back it up, as something that is large enough to cause me not to vote for him. I was immediately turned off by the mocking of the disabled reporter, and it continued.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

That really is not my impression at all. I think he hung on way too long in 2016, acted like an petulant, immature child, and did serious damage to Hillary Clinton’s attempt to unify the Democrats. 

Whatever, Bernie endorsed her and campaigned with her more than Obama did in 2016. It was only after the dust settled well after the election that Bernie admitted Hillary and the DNC rigged the primary.

Whats your take on this Tim? Do you think Bloomberg has all the damaging information on Bernie that his campaign manager is hinting at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Interesting.  I can't explain why Bernie embraces the term Democratic Socialist or even Socialist.  He's neither if we go by the actual definitions.  If we can acknowledge that they don't exist, then that's a step forward.  What's illogical is the leaps one has to take to essentially say "Hey, I know he's not a socialist as that ideal isn't represented in his positions, but that's what he calls himself so I am going to reject him".  That's the position it takes to reject Bernie.

However, I don't believe any of that applies to Corbyn.  His primary support comes from voting against the other guy.  Thats his source of support.  It's not because they believe in his message and/or approach.  Bernie's source is rooted in groups of people who believe in what he's saying.  It's rooted in people who see him as morally superior to Trump.  None of that applies to Corbyn.

If I am speaking bluntly, it seems to me that you are looking way too hard for a correlation between the two in an effort to be the "I told you so" guy.  It may very well end up being that Bernie loses to Trump, though I don't see how he loses the likes of Michigan and Wisconsin or even Ohio at this point.  Anything can happen.  But there is little to nothing (that I can see) that is similar enough between Bernie and Corbyn to warrant the comparison.  The support profiles are completely different.

If you believe nothing else, believe me when I say that I do NOT want to be the “I told you so guy”. I’ve never wanted that, I get nothing out of it, and I especially don’t want it in this instance. If Bernie is the nominee I hope to Hell he wins big. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

 

Whats your take on this Tim? Do you think Bloomberg has all the damaging information on Bernie that his campaign manager is hinting at?

I have no idea. I was joking about it earlier. I certainly think Republicans have stuff they’re holding back but I don’t know if any of this will influence people in the election anyhow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, timschochet said:

 If Bernie is the nominee I hope to Hell he wins big. 

tim, what in the heck is Bernie going to do with foreign policy? Will he further isolate or rebuild alliances with the UK and with NATO? Or, like, what? I haven't heard a peep from him on foreign policy besides being against the second Iraq war from the beginning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I have no idea. I was joking about it earlier. I certainly think Republicans have stuff they’re holding back but I don’t know if any of this will influence people in the election anyhow. 

The Republicans are obviously going to go all out on it in a way that his primary opponents can't because they need his voters if they win the primary.  From the polling, I think the primary is largely a forgone conclusion so I think if the other primary candidates have anything along the lines of oppo research they deem useful and aren't using it, they are making a mistake.  It's like exhausting your pitchers in Game 6 down 3-2.  You have to get to Game 7 before you worry about it and if they truly are holding something back they IMO are making a fatal error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, rockaction said:

tim, what in the heck is Bernie going to do with foreign policy? Will he further isolate or rebuild alliances with the UK and with NATO? Or, like, what? I haven't heard a peep from him on foreign policy besides being against the second Iraq war from the beginning.

I can’t imagine it will be anything I love. I’m guessing more isolationism with a little bit of Wilsonian self-righteousness sprinkled in. However I do think it will be an improvement on the current transactional state of affairs, but almost anything would be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

 However I do think it will be an improvement on the current transactional state of affairs, but almost anything would be. 

Can you unpack this a bit for me? I mean, in all seriousness it's a genuinely asked question by me. I can't figure out what in the world our foreign policy involves right now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rockaction said:

Can you unpack this a bit for me? I mean, in all seriousness it's a genuinely asked question by me. I can't figure out what in the world our foreign policy involves right now. 

Simply put I believe that we mostly favor nations who do nice things for Trump and and his business associates. We are tough on nations that, by being tough on them, will energize Trump’s base. We ignore prior commitments no matter how long lasting, “what have you done for me lately?”has become the motto of the hour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rockaction said:

I noticed the anecdotal voter in that case was an elderly woman who was sick of Trump and his low class deriding of John McCain. I wonder for how many people stuff like that is the real exposure they have of him, and whether or not people will vote against that. I personally view it, with no links to back it up, as something that is large enough to cause me not to vote for him. I was immediately turned off by the mocking of the disabled reporter, and it continued.

If the 48% who didn't show in 2016 is lowered significantly and in big cities (which I would think would be the case) then Trump would probably be gonzo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

Simply put I believe that we mostly favor nations who do nice things for Trump and and his business associates. We are tough on nations that, by being tough on them, will energize Trump’s base. We ignore prior commitments no matter how long lasting, “what have you done for me lately?”has become the motto of the hour. 

Okay. Sure, I've noticed that. I think the prior commitments and keeping with our allies prior to Obama's presidency is almost inordinately huge for me. I liked Klobuchar's (?) idea of immediately visiting our former allies and having formal interests in NATO come to the fore.

I still think NATO is the most important thing in these elections, actually. Felt it in 2016, too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Commish said:

To be clear, I am talking about the messaging.  That takes little work.  That's just some :hophead: in front of the cameras during the news cycles.  It's pretty clear, the work they've been doing based on the stacks of bills sitting on McConnell's desk.  Obviously, "full attention to both" is not attainable.  That literally can't happen, but it's clear to me that the Dems are terrible at messaging...it's tough to watch at times.

There ya go.

Part of the reason the house flipped was because their messaging centered around issues like healthcare and the economy - the other part was the need of checks & balances on this administration. I don't know enough about whatever has been put on McConnell's desk to say whether they're good ideas or not - it isn't anything to concern myself with as long as McConnell is in charge, so why I apply any effort. But they've been checking this crooked administration because...it's crooked. They just also needed to show that the senate is in bed with it, so if we want that all to go away then we need to act accordingly this year. Now that they have shown that to be the case, re-center efforts on what actually matters.

^^^Will all of that lead to their desired changes in November? :shrug: If everything turns blue will they successfully follow up on those promises? :unsure: Have they conducted business in the most optimal manner? :no: Have they been fighting with others wearing their own colors who have ulterior motives? :yes: There are lots of reasons democratic messaging and strategy are consistently terrible, but them trying to fit it all under such a large tent plays a major role in their struggles against the smaller but unified republicans.

I don't have much confidence in alignment being achieved this year. The splintering being talked about strikes me as the most likely outcome. Democrats going hard left then the center-left conjoining with the existing middle/never-Trump segment of the right, rendering us all homeless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

Because I think that, in both Britain and the United States, deep down in our psyches we reject the whole idea of socialism. ...  It has more to do with that, in our core, we believe in individualism and self-reliance. 

In my opinion, when you say "we" here, you're primarily talking about older voters.  I don't know that younger people feel this way, and i suspect that's a big part of why Bernie is much more popular among the young than the old.  I'm 46 and I don't feel the way you describe.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

Because I think that, in both Britain and the United States, deep down in our psyches we reject the whole idea of socialism. ...  It has more to do with that, in our core, we believe in individualism and self-reliance. 

In my opinion, when you say "we" here, you're primarily talking about older voters.  I don't know that younger people feel this way, and i suspect that's a big part of why Bernie is much more popular among the young than the old.  I'm 46 and I don't feel the way you describe.

I can't remember where I saw the piece, but it was about what "socialism" means from a generational perspective.  I will be 46 this year and I tend to agree with you while my mom is of the old school opinion.  If we step back and think for two seconds, it makes total sense.  Our parents grew up in a time where they could see legit, oppressive socialism so when they hear the word, that's what they associate it to.  We never had that, nor will we ever have that again.  Society has moved on, but those old definitions are alive and well primarily for fear mongering purposes of the retired portion of our electorate.  And that association only goes away with time and death.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Trey said:

The Clinton campaign did hardly any heavyweight oppo on Bernie. Their focus was always on the general. 

If this is true, they were/are fools.  I find it a little hard to believe though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Sure seems like the Democrats are gearing themselves up to make nearly the exact same mistake they did in 2016.

Edited by Gr00vus
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 2/29/2020 at 11:42 PM, SaintsInDome2006 said:

If only she knew that it spoke to his ideas and not his efficacy as a leader. But since she has basically the same ideas...

Edited by rockaction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.