Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

***Official Joe Biden Campaign Thread


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, squistion said:

Because it was a horrible and unscientific misleading post from a small sample size purporting to show what Elizabeth Warren supporters actually think 

Go on Squis, give me a sample size to your liking. Seriously. Name a number. I'm sure I will be able to find it on Twitter. Said contingent is larger than you're giving credit for.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I live in a swing state. My top two issues in this election are Hunter Biden’s role in the Ukrainian natural gas industry and section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. I was undecided, bu

I gotta say, the amount of anti-Dems complaining about Biden getting the nomination, is probably a good sign that the Dems picked the right candidate.   Biden carries certain risks - but man

He’ll hate to lose true independents like you. 

57 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Just to recap, the Warren campaign:

- pulled the contrived sexism stunt 2 weeks before Iowa, despite the fact Sanders pleaded with her to run for prez in 2016

- lost overwhelmingly in several primaries, hardly registering a blip and ultimately finishing 3rd in her own state, but stayed in race anyway while centrists/establishment consolidated

- went on celebrity tour of SNL, sat quietly on the sidelines while establishment concentrated behind Joe Biden with uncanny synchronicity; completely abdicated any notion of responsibility to the campaign representing the ideas she claimed to believe in at a crucial point when she could have made a difference

- reportedly clutched pearls over Sanders campaigning in Massachusetts; personal vanity more important than principles

- stayed in the race with a dead campaign that voters had rejected, on the strength of a billionaire-funded "PERSIST" superpac by donor that gave money to Joe Arpaio

- found time to complain about 'bernie bros' being mean online; completely ignored sexual assault allegations against Joe Biden

Gee, why don't Sanders supporters like Warren?  Why don't they like the person whose only functional purpose was screwing Sanders and helping Joe Biden?  It's a huge mystery???

Lord. 

The opponent is Trump, not Warren.

You seem to bounce from thread to thread, trashing almost everything democratic, but it's all destructive.

The real foe is Trump.  Period. Full stop.

If Biden is the candidate, he's head and shoulders above Trump and a far better choice.

Fine.  You or someone else may have preferred Bernie.

But this whole butt-hurt whining, to me, is making LITERALL making good the enemy of perfect.

Vote third party, it's a vote for Trump.  Stay at home, it's a vote for Trump.  

ANYONE who votes for Trump over Biden really has to do a reality check as to what their values really were in the first place.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, adonis said:

Lord. 

The opponent is Trump, not Warren.

You seem to bounce from thread to thread, trashing almost everything democratic, but it's all destructive.

The real foe is Trump.  Period. Full stop.

If Biden is the candidate, he's head and shoulders above Trump and a far better choice.

Fine.  You or someone else may have preferred Bernie.

But this whole butt-hurt whining, to me, is making LITERALL making good the enemy of perfect.

Vote third party, it's a vote for Trump.  Stay at home, it's a vote for Trump.  

ANYONE who votes for Trump over Biden really has to do a reality check as to what their values really were in the first place.

What part of Joe Biden supporting the Iraq War, mass incarceration, drug war, bank bailouts, Patriot Act and pharma/insurance/weapons lobbies makes you think I want him for president.  What part of him being an alleged rapist in obvious mental decline am I supposed to like.  I don't have an attachment to the Democratic party like you do. 

It's no problem for me to watch them lose to Trump again.  Because they don't represent my value system, and Trump doesn't either.  I'm not happy about it but that's what it is.  

If they think this little of left/populist ideas, not even radical stuff just basic humanity 101, then it's best we go our separate ways.  Until then I'll be looking to support a real opposition party.  

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

Just to recap, the Warren campaign:

- pulled the contrived sexism stunt 2 weeks before Iowa, despite the fact Sanders pleaded with her to run for prez in 2016

- lost overwhelmingly in several primaries, hardly registering a blip and ultimately finishing 3rd in her own state, but stayed in race anyway while centrists/establishment consolidated

- went on celebrity tour of SNL, sat quietly on the sidelines while establishment concentrated behind Joe Biden with uncanny synchronicity; completely abdicated any notion of responsibility to the campaign representing the ideas she claimed to believe in at a crucial point when she could have made a difference

- reportedly clutched pearls over Sanders campaigning in Massachusetts; personal vanity more important than principles

- stayed in the race with a dead campaign that voters had rejected, on the strength of a billionaire-funded "PERSIST" superpac by donor that gave money to Joe Arpaio

- found time to complain about 'bernie bros' being mean online; completely ignored sexual assault allegations against Joe Biden

Gee, why don't Sanders supporters like Warren?  Why don't they like the person whose only functional purpose was screwing Sanders and helping Joe Biden?  It's a huge mystery???

If the Warren campaign was as lifeless as you say, soundly rejected by the voters and propped up by big money, I can’t imagine an earlier exit or an endorsement helping Bernie very much.

Edited by caustic
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ren hoek said:

What part of Joe Biden supporting the Iraq War, mass incarceration, drug war, bank bailouts, Patriot Act and pharma/insurance/weapons lobbies makes you think I want him for president.  What part of him being an alleged rapist in obvious mental decline am I supposed to like.  I don't have an attachment to the Democratic party like you do. 

It's no problem for me to watch them lose to Trump again.  Because they don't represent my value system, and Trump doesn't either.  I'm not happy about it but that's what it is.  

If they think this little of left/populist ideas, not even radical stuff just basic humanity 101, then it's best we go our separate ways.  Until then I'll be looking to support a real opposition party.  

It's not about Democrat vs Republican.

It's about competent vs incompetent.  It's about rule of law vs nepotism and dysfunction.

Biden has his flaws, sure, but Trump's flaws are legion, numerically and spiritually.

Trump represents basically the opposite of everything Bernie stands for.  Biden isn't a perfect Bernie replacement, but the overlap between Bernie and Biden is CONSIDERABLY higher than Bernie and Trump.

I'm not saying support Democrats.  I'm saying support society.  Support rule of law.  Support checks and balances.  Support expert leadership.  Support functioning government.  Support a leader who won't plead for the friendship of dictators.  Support a leader who will take steps, many steps closer to what Bernie envisions in terms of our country, rather than 4 more years of Trump where the country will be clearly pillaged and sold to the richest bidders.

It's a clear choice.  Society/Civilization, or Trump.  Talk all you want about principles, about ideas, about value systems.  The bottom line is that 4 more years of Trump will GUT our republican democracy, our ideals, our standing in the world.  For those who care about America, who care about our system, our government, our reputation in the world, the free press, our judicial system, checks and balances, having someone in office who isn't in it just for what it can do for him or his family...for these and thousands of other reasons, vote for Biden.

If you can't get past the ways in which Biden isn't ideal, in which Biden isn't your perfect candidate, you might as well be a MAGA supporter.  You might as well be donning the red hats, attending the rallies, cheering when Trump attacks the press, or the judiciary, or appoints a family member to high positions in office, or fires IG's, or lambasts war heroes.  You might as well be applauding all of the terrible things he's done AND be willing to accept all the terrible things another 4 years of Trump would bring because THAT is exactly what you''ll be doing.  You, and anyone else who can't get past Bernie, or who gets hung up on pieces of Biden but can't see the clear and present danger that Trump presents the country, will be voting in favor of the further destruction of everything this country stands for.

So, feel free to think you're taking a principled stand to not vote for Biden, and to stir up as much controversy about him as you'd like.  Every leader should be held accountable.  But at the end of the day, if it is Biden vs Trump, and a ballot has to be cast, a vote for ANYONE but Biden is a vote for a considerably worse future for our country.  A vote for nepotism.  A vote for rampant sexism.  For disdain of our institutions.  Disdain for checks and balances.

In short - if it comes down to Biden vs Trump, all of this stuff should fall away.  It's not a choice between two ideals, it's a choice between destruction, and something better than destruction.  If you still choose destruction in spite of a better choice, than my conclusion must be that you really didn't care about the country in the first place OR you get too wrapped up around things that don't matter ultimately in the decision making process.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, caustic said:

If the Warren campaign was as lifeless as you say, soundly rejected by the voters and propped up by big money, I can’t imagine an earlier exit or an endorsement would’ve helped Bernie very much.

She had a lot more influence, I think, in the earlier parts of the campaign.  It seems like a long time ago now, but I don't think it was until she started waffling on M4A, trying to triangulate between the progressive left and the party's corporate center, and kneecapping Sanders (the only other competitive progressive in the race, whom she'd acted like an ally toward), that she started to lose credibility.  But earlier on I think it would have made a huge difference.  Late in the primary, especially after SC when she had no path to the nomination, it just looked like she was choosing her future with the party establishment over supporting progressive policy.  

That might not have been her intent but that was her ultimate impact on the race.  

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

She had a lot more influence, I think, in the earlier parts of the campaign.  It seems like a long time ago now, but I don't think it was until she started waffling on M4A, trying to triangulate between the progressive left and the party's corporate center, and kneecapping Sanders (the only other competitive progressive in the race, whom she'd acted like an ally toward), that she started to lose credibility.  But earlier on I think it would have made a huge difference.  Late in the primary, especially after SC when she had no path to the nomination, it just looked like she was choosing her future with the party establishment over supporting progressive policy.  

That might not have been her intent but that was her ultimate impact on the race.  

I dunno Ren. I just don’t think the progressives’ time has come yet- that’s the real problem. 

It will come. I won’t like it but it will. Prior to this latest crisis I thought it might be a decade away. Now I think it will be sooner. Just not in 2020. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

She had a lot more influence, I think, in the earlier parts of the campaign.  It seems like a long time ago now, but I don't think it was until she started waffling on M4A, trying to triangulate between the progressive left and the party's corporate center, and kneecapping Sanders (the only other competitive progressive in the race, whom she'd acted like an ally toward), that she started to lose credibility.  But earlier on I think it would have made a huge difference.  Late in the primary, especially after SC when she had no path to the nomination, it just looked like she was choosing her future with the party establishment over supporting progressive policy.  

That might not have been her intent but that was her ultimate impact on the race.  

I don’t think she had much of an impact on the race at all. Even if she had dropped out after IA/NH, when it became clear that her base of educated white liberals had fizzled, it wouldn’t have made a difference.

-Bernie still crushes the field in NV;

-Biden still wins SC in a landslide;

-The moderates still consolidate around Biden afterwards.

On Super Tuesday, Warren earned a whopping 5% of available delegates. Bernie could pick up all 5% and it wouldn’t have mattered — Biden had already opened a double-digit lead in the national polls at that point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great.  Seven months of being told if I don't vote for Biden, it will be my fault that Trump gets elected.   

Always the fault of someone else except the DNC as usual.  Let the shaming begin!

  • Like 2
  • Love 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, adonis said:

It's about competent vs incompetent.  It's about rule of law vs nepotism and dysfunction.

Right.  Joe Biden is incompetent.  He makes horrible decisions and doesn't regret them at all.  His family cashes in on the family name.  

53 minutes ago, adonis said:

Biden has his flaws, sure, but Trump's flaws are legion, numerically and spiritually.

See to me you sort of minimize these crippling deficiencies as, "flaws".  Voting for the Iraq War is a nonstarter for me, let alone the Patriot Act and being an alleged rapist.  If a guy was alleged to have committed sexual assault, I wouldn't say 'well that's a little flawed but the guy's still decent overall.'

1 hour ago, adonis said:

Trump represents basically the opposite of everything Bernie stands for.  Biden isn't a perfect Bernie replacement, but the overlap between Bernie and Biden is CONSIDERABLY higher than Bernie and Trump.

Bernie was already the compromise.  I know he's painted as a radical but he really isn't.  He's worked within the confines of the party for a very long time.  You see a lot more daylight between Biden & Trump than I do.  

1 hour ago, adonis said:

I'm not saying support Democrats.  I'm saying support society.  Support rule of law.  Support checks and balances.  Support expert leadership.  Support functioning government.  Support a leader who won't plead for the friendship of dictators.  Support a leader who will take steps, many steps closer to what Bernie envisions in terms of our country, rather than 4 more years of Trump where the country will be clearly pillaged and sold to the richest bidders.

It's because I support those things that I reject Biden.  

1 hour ago, adonis said:

It's a clear choice.  Society/Civilization, or Trump.  Talk all you want about principles, about ideas, about value systems.  The bottom line is that 4 more years of Trump will GUT our republican democracy, our ideals, our standing in the world.  For those who care about America, who care about our system, our government, our reputation in the world, the free press, our judicial system, checks and balances, having someone in office who isn't in it just for what it can do for him or his family...for these and thousands of other reasons, vote for Biden.

Again you have a radically different view of Joe Biden than me.  I don't think you consider the aftermath of Joe Biden's decisions in the same sense I do.  Do you think about the million+ people that were killed as a result of the Iraq War?  The torture, the blood, the soldiers that were disfigured and traumatized forever?  The families that were locked up in the cages that Biden & Obama built?  The shredding of our bill of rights that happened in the wake of 9/11, that Joe Biden had been trying to ram through since 1995?  "Plumbing the depths" of Anita HIll's credibility?  What planet do you live on where this is good governance? 

On Julian Assange- whose only "crime" was publishing US war crimes- Biden, echoing Mitch McConnell, referred to him as a "high-tech terrorist."  In other words, that a publisher should be tried as a terrorist.  So he's horrible on freedom of press as well.  

It seems like you don't think in terms of tangible policy.  "Our ideals, our standing in the world"- these are vague platitudes that don't mean anything.  Because your definition of ideals & standing in the world are almost certainly different from mine.  There is a massive difference between a proud liberal's vision of America and an Iraqi civilian's.  

You understand right?  Like, I don't want the guy that launches the Iraq War and looks dignified and serious while doing it, who the media treats as normal and good.  I want someone that learns stuff from history, and chooses to stand on the right side of it.  

1 hour ago, adonis said:

If you can't get past the ways in which Biden isn't ideal, in which Biden isn't your perfect candidate, you might as well be a MAGA supporter.  You might as well be donning the red hats, attending the rallies, cheering when Trump attacks the press, or the judiciary, or appoints a family member to high positions in office, or fires IG's, or lambasts war heroes.  You might as well be applauding all of the terrible things he's done AND be willing to accept all the terrible things another 4 years of Trump would bring because THAT is exactly what you''ll be doing.  You, and anyone else who can't get past Bernie, or who gets hung up on pieces of Biden but can't see the clear and present danger that Trump presents the country, will be voting in favor of the further destruction of everything this country stands for.

So, feel free to think you're taking a principled stand to not vote for Biden, and to stir up as much controversy about him as you'd like.  Every leader should be held accountable.  But at the end of the day, if it is Biden vs Trump, and a ballot has to be cast, a vote for ANYONE but Biden is a vote for a considerably worse future for our country.  A vote for nepotism.  A vote for rampant sexism.  For disdain of our institutions.  Disdain for checks and balances.

In short - if it comes down to Biden vs Trump, all of this stuff should fall away.  It's not a choice between two ideals, it's a choice between destruction, and something better than destruction.  If you still choose destruction in spite of a better choice, than my conclusion must be that you really didn't care about the country in the first place OR you get too wrapped up around things that don't matter ultimately in the decision making process.

Look, I get it.  Trump is very dangerous.  But he's funny to me and he has a bit of a point with the media and he exposes the system in a way that just doesn't happen when a 'normal' president is in office.  It's surprising that people still don't understand the appeal.  I don't want 'normal' ever again- because what 'normal' really means is a collective state of slumber for the powerful. 

Biden is very dangerous too, for what it's worth.  But I'm not supporting either of them.  That's a choice I refuse to make.  I don't want to pick the one I think is going to do less corrupt, bad #### that I don't want.  I want to vote FOR someone that I LIKE.  Ok?  That's all.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, timschochet said:

I dunno Ren. I just don’t think the progressives’ time has come yet- that’s the real problem. 

It will come. I won’t like it but it will. Prior to this latest crisis I thought it might be a decade away. Now I think it will be sooner. Just not in 2020. 

It won't come until the progressives start showing up at the polls

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ren hoek said:

Look, I get it.  Trump is very dangerous.  But he's funny to me and he has a bit of a point with the media and he exposes the system in a way that just doesn't happen when a 'normal' president is in office.  It's surprising that people still don't understand the appeal.  I don't want 'normal' ever again- because what 'normal' really means is a collective state of slumber for the powerful. 

Biden is very dangerous too, for what it's worth.  But I'm not supporting either of them.  That's a choice I refuse to make.  I don't want to pick the one I think is going to do less corrupt, bad #### that I don't want.  I want to vote FOR someone that I LIKE.  Ok?  That's all.  

Look, I get it.  I would have preferred Sanders too.  I would have voted for Bernie in 2016.  I would vote for him this year.  But...  We're talking about Donald ####### Trump.  The man is downright evil.  I despise Hillary Clinton, and yet if I lived in anything remotely approaching a swing state, I would have held my nose and voted for her in 2016.

Without going into details, and without saying "neither", just answer two questions for me.

1. Do you believe Biden or Trump would be better for the country for the next four years?

2. Do you believe Biden or Trump in office for the next four years would be better for the country for the next fifty years?

Edit: I really can't see how there's any answer other than Biden to question 1.  I could see Trump being the answer to question 2, in a "have to hit rock bottom before you can climb out" kind of way, which is why I included that question for you.

Edited by Rich Conway
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Getzlaf15 said:

Great.  Seven months of being told if I don't vote for Biden, it will be my fault that Trump gets elected.   

Always the fault of someone else except the DNC as usual.  Let the shaming begin!

hmmm

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Getzlaf15 said:

Great.  Seven months of being told if I don't vote for Biden, it will be my fault that Trump gets elected.   

Always the fault of someone else except the DNC as usual.  Let the shaming begin!

I guess what I never understand is not voting. It's just such a beautiful right and so many people have sacrificed so much to have it. - Just ignore the R/D parties. Which third party candidate (or party) most closely resembles your values?

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Getzlaf15 said:

Great.  Seven months of being told if I don't vote for Biden, it will be my fault that Trump gets elected.   

Always the fault of someone else except the DNC as usual.  Let the shaming begin!

Why the DNC?  The voters chose this...

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

I guess what I never understand is not voting. It's just such a beautiful right and so many people have sacrificed so much to have it. - Just ignore the R/D parties. Which third party candidate (or party) most closely resembles your values?

SID, sometimes not voting is a protest of the system that is necessary. To partake in the act might be taken as a tacit endorsement of the system and the means by which it is operating. It's certainly disenfranchised or disaffected, but lump enough people into those categories, and you get something worthy of study whereby the system changes to re-enfranchise those voters.

Trump is a perfect example of this in the Rust Belt in 2016. Those are people that had dropped out of voting for reasons that coastal media and politicians both missed and couldn't understand.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, rockaction said:

SID, sometimes not voting is a protest of the system that is necessary. To partake in the act might be taken as a tacit endorsement of the system and the means by which it is operating. It's certainly disenfranchised or disaffected, but lump enough people into those categories, and you get something worthy of study whereby the system changes to re-enfranchise those voters.

Trump is a perfect example of this in the Rust Belt in 2016. Those are people that had dropped out of voting for reasons that coastal media and politicians both missed and couldn't understand.

Thanks. I do understand the reasoning and the effect of it. This is just my personal set of values and I'm sure everyone knows I'm unabashed at least how I feel about things. I try to respect people's values here, so I get that, but to me people should vote. And I don't agree with the system argument. - To me it's an open primary, find a candidate, find a party, go show how you feel and vote for the person or party you think represents you, that's republican democracy. But as usual I tip my hat, I'm not criticizing anyone just sharing how I feel personally. I feel great pride when I go vote and that's true even when I vote for some schmoe whom I view as a reformer who will be lucky to get 1% in a city/parish council race.

As for the effect, I really wonder about this. I personally think pursuing and getting Jim Clyburn's endorsement makes more sense, like a 1000x factor more sense, than getting Joe Rogan's. Based on values? Sure, see my point above. In terms of changing "the system", go for Clyburn. We are a huge country, massive, we're sort of a miracle. None of us are going to get everything we want, and the truth is that there is this massive middle that has been rubber-banding back and forth since the 80s. Get in power, then get change, then convince that group that they should stay with you. Sorry if people don't like how these soccer parents and middling middle managers busting their ### for some security day in day out think, but go to them, they are part of this democracy too.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I guess what I never understand is not voting. It's just such a beautiful right and so many people have sacrificed so much to have it. - Just ignore the R/D parties. Which third party candidate (or party) most closely resembles your values?

I'll vote.  That's not the problem.     Although I will say those same people sacrificed for ones right not to vote either.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Thanks. I do understand the reasoning and the effect of it. This is just my personal set of values and I'm sure everyone knows I'm unabashed at least how I feel about things. I try to respect people's values here, so I get that, but to me people should vote. And I don't agree with the system argument. - To me it's an open primary, find a candidate, find a party, go show how you feel and vote for the person or party you think represents you, that's republican democracy. But as usual I tip my hat, I'm not criticizing anyone just sharing how I feel personally. I feel great pride when I go vote and that's true even when I vote for some schmoe whom I view as a reformer who will be lucky to get 1% in a parish council race.

As for the effect, I really wonder about this. I personally think pursuing and getting Jim Clyburn's endorsement makes more sense, like a 1000x factor more sense, than getting Joe Rogan's. Based on values? Sure, see my point above. In terms of changing "the system", go for Clyburn. We are a huge country, massive, we're sort of a miracle. None of us are going to get everything we want, and the truth is that there is this massive middle that has been rubber-banding back and forth since the 80s. Get in power, then get change, then convince that group that they should stay with you. Sorry if people don't like how these soccer parents and middling middle managers busting their ### for some security day in day out think, but go to them, they are part of this democracy too.

Yeah, it's always harder to argue the "#### it" argument against the civics argument. Lose every time. And per usual, you've provided well thought-out reasoning for the engagement in civic behavior. It is, indeed, tough to argue against your passion and involvement, especially considering that democracies are based on informed participation. And especially when it seems like the know-nothing, non-pragmatic margins are running the show for both parties, an unusual state of affairs to be sure. But that the margins are running the show speaks to something civic-minded, to something deep. To something that's even more small "d" democratic than informed citizenry. And that is the seeming desire to get back to one-man, one-vote. We've constructed all of these systems to help us be secure, to be safe, to reduce the amount of democratic push and pull there is, but people seem to be fed up with systemic removals of power from them, now entrusted to institutions, organizations, and larger, bigger entities than a simple vote from a single person.

I think that's where the discontent comes in. Everything is too big. The government, the banks, the PACs, the schools, the workforce employers, everything is just out of the reach of the average and singular man, it seems. So they've reacted. With Trump and Sanders leading the way for the disenfranchised, the disaffected. The people who felt like their votes were counted, but didn't really count. And that's what you're seeing here, I think.

Anyway, I'm rambling. But this should at least make introductory sense on some level...

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, rockaction said:

you get something worthy of study whereby the system changes to re-enfranchise those voters

Except this never happens.  If you look it's often 3rd party voting for serious candidates that often forces major shifts in the two major parties.

Not voting or voting for fringe lunatic 3rd party candidates just makes it easier for extremists to seize power.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

Except this never happens.  If you look it's often 3rd party voting for serious candidates that often forces major shifts in the two major parties.

Hmm...that's a good point. Like I said in my last comment, it's very tough to argue for civic disengagement in a society with democratic prejudices. Especially if one is a democrat, like I am.

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

Except this never happens.  If you look it's often 3rd party voting for serious candidates that often forces major shifts in the two major parties.

Not voting or voting for fringe lunatic 3rd party candidates just makes it easier for extremists to seize power.

The extremists right now are the two, corporate controlled parties.  They already seized that power a long time ago .

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate the concerns of Bernie supporters. I'm pretty far left by US standards, too. But I think it's also reasonable to point out that a Trump re-election means that he'll get to replace Ruth Ginsberg and the Supreme Court will then be impeding progressive issues in this country for the next two decades. Biden may not be your cup of tea -- he's not my first choice, either -- but not voting for him in November puts us even further away from our end goals.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some good news and bad news out recently. First, polling indicates that Bernie supporters are far less likely to pull the trigger for Trump this November than they actually did four years ago. But every point will matter this fall (see below) so now I'm thinking that Joe needs a lefty on the ticket to keep that rate of defection as low as possible. Maybe Beto, who could actually connect with the young voters that we'll need to turn out.

OTOH, Dave Wasserman, a pretty knowledgeable political scientist and a guy who always tempers my optimism, says that about 23 million white men without college degrees didn't vote in 2016, 459,000 in Wisconsin alone. If that's true, then Trump has a much deeper well of support to draw from than I have believed during the past four years. Og help us if a substantial number of them get off their butts and to the polls this time while the lefty youngsters can't be bothered. Now, that didn't happen in the most recent midterms but that doesn't mean it won't when Donald's reign is actually on the line.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1248329839372730369

The Biden camp is set to develop two new policy proposals in an effort to reach Sanders voters.

The first is to lower the Medicare age to 60

The second is to forgive student debt for low- and middle-income borrowers who attended public colleges or HBCUs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/09/biden-makes-his-first-big-overture-sanders-voters/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, roadkill1292 said:

Some good news and bad news out recently. First, polling indicates that Bernie supporters are far less likely to pull the trigger for Trump this November than they actually did four years ago. But every point will matter this fall (see below) so now I'm thinking that Joe needs a lefty on the ticket to keep that rate of defection as low as possible. Maybe Beto, who could actually connect with the young voters that we'll need to turn out.

OTOH, Dave Wasserman, a pretty knowledgeable political scientist and a guy who always tempers my optimism, says that about 23 million white men without college degrees didn't vote in 2016, 459,000 in Wisconsin alone. If that's true, then Trump has a much deeper well of support to draw from than I have believed during the past four years. Og help us if a substantial number of them get off their butts and to the polls this time while the lefty youngsters can't be bothered. Now, that didn't happen in the most recent midterms but that doesn't mean it won't when Donald's reign is actually on the line.

Biden is already committed to choosing a woman. 

He has not said, but I believe, he is committed to taking an African American as well. I think Clyburn and others expect this (I even think it’s very possible that Clyburn demanded it in exchange for his endorsement which- let’s be clear- won Biden the nomination. 

So I’m thinking it’s going to be Abrams or Harris. There’s nobody else with their name recognition. Abrams is more likely because she puts Georgia into possible play, plus maybe other southern states, and Biden might still be pissed at Kamala for that first debate. 

Edited by timschochet
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, squistion said:

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1248329839372730369

The Biden camp is set to develop two new policy proposals in an effort to reach Sanders voters.

The first is to lower the Medicare age to 60

The second is to forgive student debt for low- and middle-income borrowers who attended public colleges or HBCUs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/09/biden-makes-his-first-big-overture-sanders-voters/

 

Sorry what is an HBCU? 

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

Historically black colleges and universities

OK thanks. 

Well- its all fine but it’s also all for show (like most of the proposals from both Biden and Sanders.) if elected Biden will be consumed with one overriding task: helping the economy to recover from the current crisis. He’ll have to work with Republicans to do so. These new ideas might be part of that process but it doesn’t seem likely. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Twitter is abuzz about pending reports coming that Joe will announce lowering the age of Medicare to 60 and a pretty serious college debt forgiveness plan. Apparently in an effort to win over the Bernie supporters who weren't planning to vote blue no matter who.

I had completely forgotten about Biden pledging to name a woman veep and so of course I was corrected on not one but two different message boards. I still think he could stand a little bit of a leftward lean with that choice; he's got the moderate side of the party locked down. I don't think Harris gets it done for the progressives and we'll need them (us?) too.

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

So I’m thinking it’s going to be Abrams or Harris. There’s nobody else with their name recognition. Harris is more likely because she puts Georgia into possible play, plus maybe other southern states, and Biden might still be pissed at Kamala for that first debate. 

My knowledge about the Democrats vying for VP is limited, but are you sure you mean Harris is more likely because Biden is still pissed at her? It's Kamala Harris, right? What does she have to do with the South?

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

My knowledge about the Democrats vying for VP is limited, but are you sure you mean Harris is more likely because Biden is still pissed at her? It's Kamala Harris, right? What does she have to do with the South?

Sorry I meant Abrams is more likely than Kamala Harris. Stacy Abrams from Georgia. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike Prysner @MikePrysner

We already had Biden in the White House and we spent those 8 years organizing & mobilizing against their war escalations, immigrant mass detention/deportation, violent smashing of Occupy, Black Lives Matter & Standing Rock, etc. Don’t pretend it’ll be different this time around

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

Sorry I meant Abrams is more likely than Kamala Harris. Stacy Abrams from Georgia. 

I probably should have known that right off of the bat and then wouldn't have needed to question the easy slip. So Stacy Abrams, huh?

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

Mike Prysner @MikePrysner

We already had Biden in the White House and we spent those 8 years organizing & mobilizing against their war escalations, immigrant mass detention/deportation, violent smashing of Occupy, Black Lives Matter & Standing Rock, etc. Don’t pretend it’ll be different this time around

I swear sometimes if you scratch hard enough you'll get a squis.

No, I take his point. He speaks for the 10-15% of people that share his worldview and that is not an insignificant number when races are so close. I know. I know.

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

I swear sometimes if you scratch hard enough you'll get a squis.

No, I take his point. He speaks for the 10-15% of people that share his worldview and that is not an insignificant number when races are so close. I know. I know.

No need to insult squistion like that.  

I don't know what the percentages are but it's clear Biden fails on issues that matter to young people.  Biden's just a disaster on this stuff.  

I think these sort of activists are arguing from a stronger sense of conviction, and from a much more informed perspective, than most people who would dismiss them as fringe and out of touch.  

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

No need to insult squistion like that.  

I don't know what the percentages are but it's clear Biden fails on issues that matter to young people.  Biden's just a disaster on this stuff.  

I think these sort of activists are arguing from a stronger sense of conviction, and from a much more informed perspective, than most people who would dismiss them as fringe and out of touch.  

Heh. We can all handle insults.

As for the tweet and its adherents, I don't doubt their sincerity nor ideological consistency, nor do I doubt that 10-15% is a significant amount of people when it comes to democratic elections between two very close candidates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Mike Prysner @MikePrysner

We already had Biden in the White House and we spent those 8 years organizing & mobilizing against their war escalations, immigrant mass detention/deportation, violent smashing of Occupy, Black Lives Matter & Standing Rock, etc. Don’t pretend it’ll be different this time around

I really liked this follow up quote, especially the highlighted/underlined part

"Nobody is saying “Biden & Trump are the same.” They’re not. But whoever wins it’s going to take a militant, independent movements that hits them hard to win any of our demands. That struggle & that pressure starts now, not after we help get the less-reprehensible one get elected"

https://twitter.com/MikePrysner/status/1248340244564328450

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rich Conway said:

Look, I get it.  I would have preferred Sanders too.  I would have voted for Bernie in 2016.  I would vote for him this year.  But...  We're talking about Donald ####### Trump.  The man is downright evil.  I despise Hillary Clinton, and yet if I lived in anything remotely approaching a swing state, I would have held my nose and voted for her in 2016.

Without going into details, and without saying "neither", just answer two questions for me.

1. Do you believe Biden or Trump would be better for the country for the next four years?

2. Do you believe Biden or Trump in office for the next four years would be better for the country for the next fifty years?

Edit: I really can't see how there's any answer other than Biden to question 1.  I could see Trump being the answer to question 2, in a "have to hit rock bottom before you can climb out" kind of way, which is why I included that question for you.

It's not a choice I'm going to make.  It's a bad hypothetical, because there IS a "neither."  Just because other people want to jump off a bridge doesn't mean I have to as well.  Joe Biden is an abhorrent human being- he just hides it better and the media treats him more credulously.  How bad do these choices have to get before you say enough is enough, you're not going to support it anymore?

But yes I see another Trump win as the more likely path to wiping out Democratic Party, which I view as the real impediment to progress (Pelosi gives him his war budgets, gives him his child prison camps, gives him his $4T Mnuchin-controlled slush funds, gives his intelligence apparatus unchecked power, gives him everything for nothing at all). 

It's easy to criticize the Republicans, which they deserve of course.  But the more insidious element is the group that pretends to care about us and be the 'good guys' while throwing us under the bus behind closed doors.  It's more important to recognize that our entire democracy is defunct and decaying, to stop acting like 'voting out' one team is going to make it better.  Matter of fact I think voting is too passive of a response now, we need direct, coordinated action like general strikes, boycotts and to start trashing these politicians.  

These CNN/MSNBC boomers were deluded into thinking Biden's the strongest candidate to run against Trump, that he's good and decent and can return us to normalcy.  They said screw young people, ignored Biden's shoddy record, consolidated behind him and now they get to live with him.  Ball's in their court now chief 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ren hoek said:

See to me you sort of minimize these crippling deficiencies as, "flaws".  Voting for the Iraq War is a nonstarter for me, let alone the Patriot Act and being an alleged rapist. 

More Americans died from cv19 *this week* (Sunday to today) than died in all of the Iraq War.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, The General said:

One of these women will be the VP pick:

Who do people like?

schochet likes Abrams and makes a good case about her regional appeal. I think it's Harris, though traditionally VPs help win swing states of some sort. Or, like Pence, they ground the candidate in the base's graces. 

  • Like 1
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.


×
×
  • Create New...