|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On May 10 2016 23:18 LemOn wrote:
And I'm wondering to Bernie supporters here - will you get up and vote for Hillary in the general election?
I really hope you won't be bitter and her beating Bernie won't stop you from helping Trump lose.
I would ask even more specifically:
Would people support Hillary if she made Elizabeth Warren her VP?
As a Bernie-Fan (I don't think you can call a foreigner who can't even vote supporter), that would really sway me into thinking she's on the right track and doesn't just pretend to be slightly left of Reagan.
|
If you think Hillary is only "slightly left of Reagan" you really need to do your research
Like seriously this 'Hillary is basically a Republican" meme is one of the dumbest things to come out of this election
|
On May 10 2016 23:18 LemOn wrote:
And I'm wondering to Bernie supporters here - will you get up and vote for Hillary in the general election?
I really hope you won't be bitter and her beating Bernie won't stop you from helping Trump lose.
I will not, because I don't support Hillary. I understand the logic behind voting for Hillary because you think she is better than other candidates (trump), but it's not the logic I use. It has nothing to do with being bitter, if Bernie never existed I still wouldn't be voting for Hillary. I do not vote for candidates that I do not believe hold general welfare above all else.
Some people strongly believe that it is morally wrong to not vote against the worse candidate. I think there is an interesting philosophical discussion to be had there, it's one I have thought about a lot. It's not the conclusion I have come to.
|
Bill James has a very interesting piece of comparing Republican party's tea party / mainstream alliance to post civil rights southern democratic / northern liberal split. Unfortunately it's behind a paywall...
|
On May 10 2016 23:22 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2016 23:08 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 10 2016 22:58 travis wrote:
I am very pro-bernie and it's annoying as shit to come in here and like 5 times on every page be told what I am thinking by someone who is extremely biased and actually has no clue what I am thinking. Please click the post button less often unless you are actually going to post something that has a purpose other than circlejerking with likeminded people. (to mohdoo and oneofthem) Lets talk specifics in policy then! Bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east and his foreign policy plan is hoping to throw more dark skinned people into the meat grinder--how do you think that will help resolve issues in the middle east or do you simple don't care about trying to help people in need? Why would I reply to this? "bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east" ehhhh. no thanks to this conversation
Another Bernie policy then.
How does telling Democrats not to trust the DNC help liberals retake the house and senate during the midterms? Is the Bernie plan to ensure no liberal support in laws and bills to ensure an even stronger GOP foothold in the american way of life?
|
On May 10 2016 23:26 ticklishmusic wrote:
If you think Hillary is only "slightly left of Reagan" you really need to do your research
Like seriously this 'Hillary is basically a Republican" meme is one of the dumbest things to come out of this election
It's really not. Though it has very little to do with Hillary and more to do with how much the whole spectrum shifted to right.
Well, it depends I guess. It is true for fiscal policy but not so much for most other issues. On the other hand majority of the complains in US politics on a national level revolve around fiscal policy.
|
On May 10 2016 23:37 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2016 23:22 travis wrote:On May 10 2016 23:08 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 10 2016 22:58 travis wrote:
I am very pro-bernie and it's annoying as shit to come in here and like 5 times on every page be told what I am thinking by someone who is extremely biased and actually has no clue what I am thinking. Please click the post button less often unless you are actually going to post something that has a purpose other than circlejerking with likeminded people. (to mohdoo and oneofthem) Lets talk specifics in policy then! Bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east and his foreign policy plan is hoping to throw more dark skinned people into the meat grinder--how do you think that will help resolve issues in the middle east or do you simple don't care about trying to help people in need? Why would I reply to this? "bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east" ehhhh. no thanks to this conversation Another Bernie policy then. How does telling Democrats not to trust the DNC help liberals retake the house and senate during the midterms? Is the Bernie plan to ensure no liberal support in laws and bills to ensure an even stronger GOP foothold in the american way of life?
This seems like an odd question. You realize you are loading these questions with how you phrase them, right? That's why I didn't reply to the last one.
But anyways, I'll reply to it. The DNC is not the same as "congressional and senatorial candidates". I expect Bernie would directly give his supportfor most democratic candidates to these positions.
What you are suggesting is that he can't denounce mistreatment by the DNC, which is hilariously stupid.
|
The debates about the ideological purity of a candidate have always been an exercise in gate keeping and goal posting shifting. Obama was both liberal and not liberal enough. And after his time in office, where ideological purity is impossible and compromise is part of the job, people started to claim he was never really liberal at all.
But every election the topic rises from the ashes on both ends of the spectrum.
|
On May 10 2016 23:47 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2016 23:37 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 10 2016 23:22 travis wrote:On May 10 2016 23:08 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 10 2016 22:58 travis wrote:
I am very pro-bernie and it's annoying as shit to come in here and like 5 times on every page be told what I am thinking by someone who is extremely biased and actually has no clue what I am thinking. Please click the post button less often unless you are actually going to post something that has a purpose other than circlejerking with likeminded people. (to mohdoo and oneofthem) Lets talk specifics in policy then! Bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east and his foreign policy plan is hoping to throw more dark skinned people into the meat grinder--how do you think that will help resolve issues in the middle east or do you simple don't care about trying to help people in need? Why would I reply to this? "bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east" ehhhh. no thanks to this conversation Another Bernie policy then. How does telling Democrats not to trust the DNC help liberals retake the house and senate during the midterms? Is the Bernie plan to ensure no liberal support in laws and bills to ensure an even stronger GOP foothold in the american way of life? What you are suggesting is that he can't denounce mistreatment by the DNC, which is hilariously stupid.
Which mistreatment specifically are you referring to?
|
Off course its not morally wrong to not vote against the worst candidate,nor is it morally wrong to not vote at all.
The underlying principle of this is quiet trivial and it has backfired multiple time in international politics:my enemys enemy is my friend.
Voting for someone is seen as an act of support for the one you vote for. Not as an act of rebellion against the worst candidate. The more votes the more the elected official gets validated.
If I don't want to support the worst candidate,but at the same time want to send a message that I do not support the second worst candidate either then I would simply not vote at all.
Its a sign on the wall that the best arguments for the democrats in this election are not arguments in favor of Hillary and her policys, but arguments against trump. Its a negative approach,not a positive.
Trump on the other hand has his own message why people should vote for him. Fight for the middle class and America,build a wall and make good trade deals.
Honestly,how are the democrats trying to sell Hillary,what is her message?
Maybe its the media not giving it much attention. Other then the usual bla bla every politician says during elections i have no clue what her unique message is.
Democrats should start working on selling Hillary,instead of trying to convince people that trump will be a disaster.
Sanders as VP would be a good start. He has a clear message that sells and that does appeal to many people.
|
On May 10 2016 23:59 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2016 23:47 travis wrote:On May 10 2016 23:37 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 10 2016 23:22 travis wrote:On May 10 2016 23:08 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 10 2016 22:58 travis wrote:
I am very pro-bernie and it's annoying as shit to come in here and like 5 times on every page be told what I am thinking by someone who is extremely biased and actually has no clue what I am thinking. Please click the post button less often unless you are actually going to post something that has a purpose other than circlejerking with likeminded people. (to mohdoo and oneofthem) Lets talk specifics in policy then! Bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east and his foreign policy plan is hoping to throw more dark skinned people into the meat grinder--how do you think that will help resolve issues in the middle east or do you simple don't care about trying to help people in need? Why would I reply to this? "bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east" ehhhh. no thanks to this conversation Another Bernie policy then. How does telling Democrats not to trust the DNC help liberals retake the house and senate during the midterms? Is the Bernie plan to ensure no liberal support in laws and bills to ensure an even stronger GOP foothold in the american way of life? What you are suggesting is that he can't denounce mistreatment by the DNC, which is hilariously stupid. Which mistreatment specifically are you referring to?
I didn't refer to any mistreatment. My reply didn't claim he was mistreated, and I feel like it would be pointless to get into that.
|
On May 11 2016 00:01 pmh wrote:
Off course its not morally wrong to not vote against the worst candidate,nor is it morally wrong to not vote at all.
The underlying principle of this is quiet trivial and it has backfired multiple time in international politics:my enemys enemy is my friend.
Voting for someone is seen as an act of support for the one you vote for. Not as an act of rebellion against the worst candidate. The more votes the more the elected official gets validated.
If I don't want to support the worst candidate,but at the same time want to send a message that I do not support the second worst candidate either then I would simply not vote at all.
Its a sign on the wall that the best arguments for the democrats in this election are not arguments in favor of Hillary and her policys, but arguments against trump. Its a negative approach,not a positive.
Trump on the other hand has his own message why people should vote for him. Fight for the middle class and America,build a wall and make good trade deals.
Honestly,how are the democrats trying to sell Hillary,what is her message?
Maybe its the media not giving it much attention. Other then the usual bla bla every politician says during elections i have no clue what her unique message is.
Democrats should start working on selling Hillary,instead of trying to convince people that trump will be a disaster.
Sanders as VP would be a good start. He has a clear message that sells and that does appeal to many people.
This. People need a reason to vote for Hillary that isn't just "don't vote Trump."
|
Given that Bernie supporters keep harassing super-delegates and then crying that the system is foul, I am not sure I would want to include them in the first place. Super-delegates are human, like the rest of us. Sending them wishes that they die or saying they are stupid is NOT okay.
At this point, a lot of moderate people have switched sides, and you get people that are more and more desperate to win, and then they do stuff that loses their message's original meaning in the first place.
|
howabout
improving healthcare access/cost by lowering drug prices and high insurance premiums
focus on early education and k-12 education
controlling the rising cost of college
reinvesting in heavy industry/ extraction communities
reducing emissions and investing in clean energy
regulating shadow banking, i e insurance, private markets and derivatives
increased research $ for alzheimers
creating an infrastructure bank + bond program to support development
criminal justice reform
etc
these are the ones off the top of my head/ the ones i care about the most
there are plenty of reasons to support hillary but people kind of try to ignore them and reduce it to a "well shes a dislikeable person and corrupt etc etc"
|
On May 11 2016 00:02 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2016 23:59 kwizach wrote:On May 10 2016 23:47 travis wrote:On May 10 2016 23:37 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 10 2016 23:22 travis wrote:On May 10 2016 23:08 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 10 2016 22:58 travis wrote:
I am very pro-bernie and it's annoying as shit to come in here and like 5 times on every page be told what I am thinking by someone who is extremely biased and actually has no clue what I am thinking. Please click the post button less often unless you are actually going to post something that has a purpose other than circlejerking with likeminded people. (to mohdoo and oneofthem) Lets talk specifics in policy then! Bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east and his foreign policy plan is hoping to throw more dark skinned people into the meat grinder--how do you think that will help resolve issues in the middle east or do you simple don't care about trying to help people in need? Why would I reply to this? "bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east" ehhhh. no thanks to this conversation Another Bernie policy then. How does telling Democrats not to trust the DNC help liberals retake the house and senate during the midterms? Is the Bernie plan to ensure no liberal support in laws and bills to ensure an even stronger GOP foothold in the american way of life? What you are suggesting is that he can't denounce mistreatment by the DNC, which is hilariously stupid. Which mistreatment specifically are you referring to? I didn't refer to any mistreatment. My reply didn't claim he was mistreated, and I feel like it would be pointless to get into that.
In response to TM asking you about Sanders' criticism of the DNC, you replied that he should be able to "denounce mistreatment by the DNC". Unless I'm missing something, you're implying he's been mistreated by the DNC and that this explains his attacks on the DNC and the "Democratic establishment" in general?
|
On May 11 2016 00:01 pmh wrote:
Off course its not morally wrong to not vote against the worst candidate,nor is it morally wrong to not vote at all.
The underlying principle of this is quiet trivial and it has backfired multiple time in international politics:my enemys enemy is my friend.
Voting for someone is seen as an act of support for the one you vote for. Not as an act of rebellion against the worst candidate. The more votes the more the elected official gets validated.
If I don't want to support the worst candidate,but at the same time want to send a message that I do not support the second worst candidate either then I would simply not vote at all.
Its a sign on the wall that the best arguments for the democrats in this election are not arguments in favor of Hillary and her policys, but arguments against trump. Its a negative approach,not a positive.
Trump on the other hand has his own message why people should vote for him. Fight for the middle class and America,build a wall and make good trade deals.
Honestly,how are the democrats trying to sell Hillary,what is her message?
Maybe its the media not giving it much attention. Other then the usual bla bla every politician says during elections i have no clue what her unique message is.
Democrats should start working on selling Hillary,instead of trying to convince people that trump will be a disaster.
Sanders as VP would be a good start. He has a clear message that sells and that does appeal to many people.
It has two problem:
If you think what the other side promote is dumpster fire in making it is essential to make that clear. A big problem is that apparent dueling ideals gets comparable treatment instead of proportionate. It's kind of a global warming issue, when it is represented on TV as a 1 on 1 debate when in fact it is a 99 on 1 debate, how is public suppose to get accurate information?
The other issue is slow and steady is not sexy. This is especially true for people who are disadvantaged or otherwise vulnerable, human instinct make it boom or bust solutions more attractive than concrete incremental changes, even though latter is often times more appropriate.
|
On May 11 2016 00:13 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2016 00:02 travis wrote:On May 10 2016 23:59 kwizach wrote:On May 10 2016 23:47 travis wrote:On May 10 2016 23:37 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 10 2016 23:22 travis wrote:On May 10 2016 23:08 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 10 2016 22:58 travis wrote:
I am very pro-bernie and it's annoying as shit to come in here and like 5 times on every page be told what I am thinking by someone who is extremely biased and actually has no clue what I am thinking. Please click the post button less often unless you are actually going to post something that has a purpose other than circlejerking with likeminded people. (to mohdoo and oneofthem) Lets talk specifics in policy then! Bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east and his foreign policy plan is hoping to throw more dark skinned people into the meat grinder--how do you think that will help resolve issues in the middle east or do you simple don't care about trying to help people in need? Why would I reply to this? "bernie does not want to stop atrocities in the middle east" ehhhh. no thanks to this conversation Another Bernie policy then. How does telling Democrats not to trust the DNC help liberals retake the house and senate during the midterms? Is the Bernie plan to ensure no liberal support in laws and bills to ensure an even stronger GOP foothold in the american way of life? What you are suggesting is that he can't denounce mistreatment by the DNC, which is hilariously stupid. Which mistreatment specifically are you referring to? I didn't refer to any mistreatment. My reply didn't claim he was mistreated, and I feel like it would be pointless to get into that. In response to TM asking you about Sanders' criticism of the DNC, you replied that he should be able to "denounce mistreatment by the DNC". Unless I'm missing something, you're implying he's been mistreated by the DNC and that this explains his attacks on the DNC and the "Democratic establishment" in general?
All I am saying is that if Sanders campaign feel like they are mistreated by the DNC, they should be able to voice this opinion and why.
|
Those answers are pretty simple, TBH:
- Some sort of functioning immigration reform, rather than wasting money on a useless wall
- A economic plan based on reality that isn’t powered by voodoo magic and “printing more money”
- A president that doesn’t openly talk about defaulting on the national debt like it’s a good idea.
- The democrats platform includes a plan for campaign finance reform
- And so on…
But most of the points people bring up in the thread and the current discussion was about how unlikeable Hilary, while ignoring the fact that Trump has that problem but much worse.
|
On May 11 2016 00:07 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2016 00:01 pmh wrote:
Off course its not morally wrong to not vote against the worst candidate,nor is it morally wrong to not vote at all.
The underlying principle of this is quiet trivial and it has backfired multiple time in international politics:my enemys enemy is my friend.
Voting for someone is seen as an act of support for the one you vote for. Not as an act of rebellion against the worst candidate. The more votes the more the elected official gets validated.
If I don't want to support the worst candidate,but at the same time want to send a message that I do not support the second worst candidate either then I would simply not vote at all.
Its a sign on the wall that the best arguments for the democrats in this election are not arguments in favor of Hillary and her policys, but arguments against trump. Its a negative approach,not a positive.
Trump on the other hand has his own message why people should vote for him. Fight for the middle class and America,build a wall and make good trade deals.
Honestly,how are the democrats trying to sell Hillary,what is her message?
Maybe its the media not giving it much attention. Other then the usual bla bla every politician says during elections i have no clue what her unique message is.
Democrats should start working on selling Hillary,instead of trying to convince people that trump will be a disaster.
Sanders as VP would be a good start. He has a clear message that sells and that does appeal to many people. This. People need a reason to vote for Hillary that isn't just "don't vote Trump."
All you had to do was ask!
On May 11 2016 00:01 pmh wrote:
Sanders as VP would be a good start. He has a clear message that sells and that does appeal to many people.
To quote my reply to the post in which you previously asserted this: this is "the scenario that makes Clinton the weakest for the general election. Not only would all of Sanders' glaring weaknesses be happily exploited by the GOP to bring down the ticket, but you would have even more ads quoting Sanders' attacks on Clinton on loop until November. It's the worst idea possible."
|
Also Sanders is underwater in the newest PPP poll. Caveat about it being the one time, outlier, just one data point etc etc but his favorability being in the ballpark of Hillary's isn't exactly a testament to his strength as a candidate when you compare the treatment they've received in the media and elsewhere
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
