If this thread turns into a USPMT 2.0, we will not hesitate to shut it down. Do not even bother posting if all you're going to do is shit on the Democratic candidates while adding nothing of value.
Rules: - Don't post meaningless one-liners. - Don't turn this into a X doesn't stand a chance against Trump debate. - Sources MUST have a supporting comment that summarizes the source beforehand. - Do NOT turn this thread into a Republicans vs. Democrats shit-storm.
This thread will be heavily moderated. Expect the same kind of strictness as the USPMT.
On February 10 2020 08:40 pmh wrote: Its nice to see buttigieg doing so well,i hope he makes it.
Given the incredibly transparent cheating going on in Iowa (IDP/ DNC/ Buttigieg), which just gave Buttigieg 3 of Sanders's delegates, plus the incoming setup for a repeat collusion in Nevada to boost Buttigieg further, I can't support him in good conscience. I don't think he has the worst ideas ever, but given the controversies of the 2016 primary and the ease with which the moderates are sabotaging the primary for 2020 just to make Sanders lose, I hope Buttigieg fails miserably. This is absolutely ridiculous, it's undemocratic, and I've lost all respect for that guy.
The other day you told me that you'd give your vote to any Democrat for the sake of beating Trump.
If Buttgieg wins the nomination, will you give him your vote?
Yes I will. 100%. In the primary, I'm all for scrutinizing over different candidates, but after one is chosen to go up against Trump, I'm falling in line and unifying behind whatever alternative we "choose". We can't afford another 4 years of not addressing climate change, not addressing healthcare, not addressing education, etc. Also, RBG is going to almost certainly retire or die over the next four years, and if she gets replaced by a conservative SCJ... Ugh.
What would they gain from you as a voter from not cheating you out of your choice then?
I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Are you pointing out that if I'm going to vote for them anyway, then there's no reason for them not to cheat? If so: 1. Not everyone falls in line the way I do, so they still have to worry about all voters, especially those in swing states. (I'm in New Jersey, so my vote won't matter anyway in the general election.) 2. I can certainly vote for or against them or their allies in executive and legislative primaries, and I can make one of my most important criteria their willingness to not cheat. But accountability certainly has to come from our "elected" leaders, or else we get situations like Republican senators not giving Trump a fair trial, etc.
On February 10 2020 08:40 pmh wrote: Its nice to see buttigieg doing so well,i hope he makes it.
Given the incredibly transparent cheating going on in Iowa (IDP/ DNC/ Buttigieg), which just gave Buttigieg 3 of Sanders's delegates, plus the incoming setup for a repeat collusion in Nevada to boost Buttigieg further, I can't support him in good conscience. I don't think he has the worst ideas ever, but given the controversies of the 2016 primary and the ease with which the moderates are sabotaging the primary for 2020 just to make Sanders lose, I hope Buttigieg fails miserably. This is absolutely ridiculous, it's undemocratic, and I've lost all respect for that guy.
The other day you told me that you'd give your vote to any Democrat for the sake of beating Trump.
If Buttgieg wins the nomination, will you give him your vote?
Yes I will. 100%. In the primary, I'm all for scrutinizing over different candidates, but after one is chosen to go up against Trump, I'm falling in line and unifying behind whatever alternative we "choose". We can't afford another 4 years of not addressing climate change, not addressing healthcare, not addressing education, etc. Also, RBG is going to almost certainly retire or die over the next four years, and if she gets replaced by a conservative SCJ... Ugh.
What would they gain from you as a voter from not cheating you out of your choice then?
I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Are you pointing out that if I'm going to vote for them anyway, then there's no reason for them not to cheat? If so: 1. Not everyone falls in line the way I do, so they still have to worry about all voters, especially those in swing states. (I'm in New Jersey, so my vote won't matter anyway in the general election.) 2. I can certainly vote for or against them or their allies in executive and legislative primaries, and I can make one of my most important criteria their willingness to not cheat. But accountability certainly has to come from our "elected" leaders, or else we get situations like Republican senators not giving Trump a fair trial, etc.
I was seeing if there was anything to be gained by not cheating you out of your choice. Seems not, but the people that don't fall in line, cheating them comes with real risk.
On February 10 2020 08:40 pmh wrote: Its nice to see buttigieg doing so well,i hope he makes it.
Given the incredibly transparent cheating going on in Iowa (IDP/ DNC/ Buttigieg), which just gave Buttigieg 3 of Sanders's delegates, plus the incoming setup for a repeat collusion in Nevada to boost Buttigieg further, I can't support him in good conscience. I don't think he has the worst ideas ever, but given the controversies of the 2016 primary and the ease with which the moderates are sabotaging the primary for 2020 just to make Sanders lose, I hope Buttigieg fails miserably. This is absolutely ridiculous, it's undemocratic, and I've lost all respect for that guy.
The other day you told me that you'd give your vote to any Democrat for the sake of beating Trump.
If Buttgieg wins the nomination, will you give him your vote?
Yes I will. 100%. In the primary, I'm all for scrutinizing over different candidates, but after one is chosen to go up against Trump, I'm falling in line and unifying behind whatever alternative we "choose". We can't afford another 4 years of not addressing climate change, not addressing healthcare, not addressing education, etc. Also, RBG is going to almost certainly retire or die over the next four years, and if she gets replaced by a conservative SCJ... Ugh.
What would they gain from you as a voter from not cheating you out of your choice then?
I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Are you pointing out that if I'm going to vote for them anyway, then there's no reason for them not to cheat? If so: 1. Not everyone falls in line the way I do, so they still have to worry about all voters, especially those in swing states. (I'm in New Jersey, so my vote won't matter anyway in the general election.) 2. I can certainly vote for or against them or their allies in executive and legislative primaries, and I can make one of my most important criteria their willingness to not cheat. But accountability certainly has to come from our "elected" leaders, or else we get situations like Republican senators not giving Trump a fair trial, etc.
I was seeing if there was anything to be gained by not cheating you out of your choice. Seems not, but the people that don't fall in line, cheating them comes with real risk.
Agreed. From a practical perspective, I still see my two choices as Donald Trump or being stuck with a cheating Democratic candidate... and as much as I may dislike the latter, I think their policies are far better, and I think it would be in the best interest of myself, my family and friends, my country, and even the world that we have even a moderate Democrat in the White House than Donald Trump.
On February 10 2020 08:40 pmh wrote: Its nice to see buttigieg doing so well,i hope he makes it.
Given the incredibly transparent cheating going on in Iowa (IDP/ DNC/ Buttigieg), which just gave Buttigieg 3 of Sanders's delegates, plus the incoming setup for a repeat collusion in Nevada to boost Buttigieg further, I can't support him in good conscience. I don't think he has the worst ideas ever, but given the controversies of the 2016 primary and the ease with which the moderates are sabotaging the primary for 2020 just to make Sanders lose, I hope Buttigieg fails miserably. This is absolutely ridiculous, it's undemocratic, and I've lost all respect for that guy.
The other day you told me that you'd give your vote to any Democrat for the sake of beating Trump.
If Buttgieg wins the nomination, will you give him your vote?
Yes I will. 100%. In the primary, I'm all for scrutinizing over different candidates, but after one is chosen to go up against Trump, I'm falling in line and unifying behind whatever alternative we "choose". We can't afford another 4 years of not addressing climate change, not addressing healthcare, not addressing education, etc. Also, RBG is going to almost certainly retire or die over the next four years, and if she gets replaced by a conservative SCJ... Ugh.
What would they gain from you as a voter from not cheating you out of your choice then?
I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Are you pointing out that if I'm going to vote for them anyway, then there's no reason for them not to cheat? If so: 1. Not everyone falls in line the way I do, so they still have to worry about all voters, especially those in swing states. (I'm in New Jersey, so my vote won't matter anyway in the general election.) 2. I can certainly vote for or against them or their allies in executive and legislative primaries, and I can make one of my most important criteria their willingness to not cheat. But accountability certainly has to come from our "elected" leaders, or else we get situations like Republican senators not giving Trump a fair trial, etc.
I was seeing if there was anything to be gained by not cheating you out of your choice. Seems not, but the people that don't fall in line, cheating them comes with real risk.
Agreed. From a practical perspective, I still see my two choices as Donald Trump or being stuck with a cheating Democratic candidate... and as much as I may dislike the latter, I think their policies are far better, and I think it would be in the best interest of myself, my family and friends, my country, and even the world that we have even a moderate Democrat in the White House than Donald Trump.
Now you know why people vote Trump despite his blatant lying and would accept him cheating you out of your choice. They too think despite the corruption, he is "in the best interest of myself, my family and friends, my country"
They just envision those things differently than you, but you're both making the same concession to open corruption for your perceived personal benefit.
There's a non-zero chance your position leads you to vote for a Republican billionaire known to be responsible for one of the most egregiously unconstitutional and racist programs of most of our lives.
An absolutely corrupt democrat is still miriads better than Trump.
Trump brings 0 change, he just makes things worse. Corrupt democrate may not bring redemption but at least ends the total bullshit.
letting trump win again is not proving a point, its just cementing that your a stupid country full of retarded people. After the fact saying "well, i didnt vote for the superultraasshole because the other was kinda an ass" will not paint a pretty picture of you.
On February 11 2020 08:23 Velr wrote: An absolutely corrupt democrat is still miriads better than Trump.
Trump brings 0 change, he just makes things worse. Corrupt democrate may not bring redemption but at least ends the total bullshit.
There is no choice, only sanity.
Probably long term Trump is fucking over everyone. But short term, people are seeing improvements or little to no difference in their daily lives despite Democrats warnings that Trump would be the end of the world.
If you're someone relatively unaffected or even benefiting from Trump's reign, the idea that an absolutely corrupt democrat is still better than Trump is laughable.
On February 10 2020 08:40 pmh wrote: Its nice to see buttigieg doing so well,i hope he makes it.
Given the incredibly transparent cheating going on in Iowa (IDP/ DNC/ Buttigieg), which just gave Buttigieg 3 of Sanders's delegates, plus the incoming setup for a repeat collusion in Nevada to boost Buttigieg further, I can't support him in good conscience. I don't think he has the worst ideas ever, but given the controversies of the 2016 primary and the ease with which the moderates are sabotaging the primary for 2020 just to make Sanders lose, I hope Buttigieg fails miserably. This is absolutely ridiculous, it's undemocratic, and I've lost all respect for that guy.
The other day you told me that you'd give your vote to any Democrat for the sake of beating Trump.
If Buttgieg wins the nomination, will you give him your vote?
Yes I will. 100%. In the primary, I'm all for scrutinizing over different candidates, but after one is chosen to go up against Trump, I'm falling in line and unifying behind whatever alternative we "choose". We can't afford another 4 years of not addressing climate change, not addressing healthcare, not addressing education, etc. Also, RBG is going to almost certainly retire or die over the next four years, and if she gets replaced by a conservative SCJ... Ugh.
What would they gain from you as a voter from not cheating you out of your choice then?
I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Are you pointing out that if I'm going to vote for them anyway, then there's no reason for them not to cheat? If so: 1. Not everyone falls in line the way I do, so they still have to worry about all voters, especially those in swing states. (I'm in New Jersey, so my vote won't matter anyway in the general election.) 2. I can certainly vote for or against them or their allies in executive and legislative primaries, and I can make one of my most important criteria their willingness to not cheat. But accountability certainly has to come from our "elected" leaders, or else we get situations like Republican senators not giving Trump a fair trial, etc.
I was seeing if there was anything to be gained by not cheating you out of your choice. Seems not, but the people that don't fall in line, cheating them comes with real risk.
Agreed. From a practical perspective, I still see my two choices as Donald Trump or being stuck with a cheating Democratic candidate... and as much as I may dislike the latter, I think their policies are far better, and I think it would be in the best interest of myself, my family and friends, my country, and even the world that we have even a moderate Democrat in the White House than Donald Trump.
Now you know why people vote Trump despite his blatant lying and would accept him cheating you out of your choice. They too think despite the corruption, he is "in the best interest of myself, my family and friends, my country"
They just envision those things differently than you, but you're both making the same concession to open corruption for your perceived personal benefit.
There's a non-zero chance your position leads you to vote for a Republican billionaire known to be responsible for one of the most egregiously unconstitutional and racist programs of most of our lives.
Yep, and from a practical perspective, it's wayyy more justifiable than the alternative. Saying "but I didn't support a cheater!" won't do anyone any good as the rights and freedoms of various demographics get taken away. When it comes to politics that affects our lives, our country, and our world, winning is wayyyy more important than morally losing. I hate that it often comes down to having to swallow my pride, but that's reality. Q: What do you call a person who compromises some of the battles in order to win the war? A: The winner.
I'm curious as to what your opinion is of this video; I found it to be very persuasive, and relevant to this conversation.
Yeah, lets vote in the Mafia directly, they control everything anyway right?
4 years ago most of the stuff trump does was unthinkable, im staggered that you guys just eat it and it eat and eat it and now start to normalise it by saying: "who cares, if i dont like the democrat im fine with more trump".
On February 11 2020 08:35 Velr wrote: Yeah, lets vote in the Mafia directly, they control everything anyway right?
4 years ago most of the stuff trump does was unthinkable, im staggered that you guys just eat it and it eat and eat it and now start to normalise it by saying: "who cares, if i dont like the democrat im fine with more trump".
Seriously, do you hear yourself?
lmao it isn't about pride or liking the candidate. I'm not even talking about my vote because it doesn't matter (because of our broken system).
I'm pointing out that if Democrats support cheaters there's nothing for Republicans to gain by not supporting cheaters that lean their way instead.
On February 10 2020 08:40 pmh wrote: Its nice to see buttigieg doing so well,i hope he makes it.
Given the incredibly transparent cheating going on in Iowa (IDP/ DNC/ Buttigieg), which just gave Buttigieg 3 of Sanders's delegates, plus the incoming setup for a repeat collusion in Nevada to boost Buttigieg further, I can't support him in good conscience. I don't think he has the worst ideas ever, but given the controversies of the 2016 primary and the ease with which the moderates are sabotaging the primary for 2020 just to make Sanders lose, I hope Buttigieg fails miserably. This is absolutely ridiculous, it's undemocratic, and I've lost all respect for that guy.
The other day you told me that you'd give your vote to any Democrat for the sake of beating Trump.
If Buttgieg wins the nomination, will you give him your vote?
Yes I will. 100%. In the primary, I'm all for scrutinizing over different candidates, but after one is chosen to go up against Trump, I'm falling in line and unifying behind whatever alternative we "choose". We can't afford another 4 years of not addressing climate change, not addressing healthcare, not addressing education, etc. Also, RBG is going to almost certainly retire or die over the next four years, and if she gets replaced by a conservative SCJ... Ugh.
What would they gain from you as a voter from not cheating you out of your choice then?
I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Are you pointing out that if I'm going to vote for them anyway, then there's no reason for them not to cheat? If so: 1. Not everyone falls in line the way I do, so they still have to worry about all voters, especially those in swing states. (I'm in New Jersey, so my vote won't matter anyway in the general election.) 2. I can certainly vote for or against them or their allies in executive and legislative primaries, and I can make one of my most important criteria their willingness to not cheat. But accountability certainly has to come from our "elected" leaders, or else we get situations like Republican senators not giving Trump a fair trial, etc.
I was seeing if there was anything to be gained by not cheating you out of your choice. Seems not, but the people that don't fall in line, cheating them comes with real risk.
Agreed. From a practical perspective, I still see my two choices as Donald Trump or being stuck with a cheating Democratic candidate... and as much as I may dislike the latter, I think their policies are far better, and I think it would be in the best interest of myself, my family and friends, my country, and even the world that we have even a moderate Democrat in the White House than Donald Trump.
Now you know why people vote Trump despite his blatant lying and would accept him cheating you out of your choice. They too think despite the corruption, he is "in the best interest of myself, my family and friends, my country"
They just envision those things differently than you, but you're both making the same concession to open corruption for your perceived personal benefit.
There's a non-zero chance your position leads you to vote for a Republican billionaire known to be responsible for one of the most egregiously unconstitutional and racist programs of most of our lives.
Yep, and from a practical perspective, it's wayyy more justifiable than the alternative. Saying "but I didn't support a cheater!" won't do anyone any good as the rights and freedoms of various demographics get taken away. When it comes to politics that affects our lives, our country, and our world, winning is wayyyy more important than morally losing. I hate that it often comes down to having to swallow my pride, but that's reality. Q: What do you call a person who compromises some of the battles in order to win the war? A: The winner.
I didn't watch it all meticulously but I understand it to be explaining why liberalism/Democrats are helpless against the rise of fascism.
Because it ends up with them voting for more superficially polite fascists that are less likely to target them specifically and calling it the only rational choice.
That they have mixed Democrats/liberals up so bad as to genuinely think of electing a Republican billionaire oligarch that has already used his wealth to supersede the law and extend his reign when he was a local leader as a "win" is astonishing.
On February 11 2020 08:35 Velr wrote: Yeah, lets vote in the Mafia directly, they control everything anyway right?
4 years ago most of the stuff trump does was unthinkable, im staggered that you guys just eat it and it eat and eat it and now start to normalise it by saying: "who cares, if i dont like the democrat im fine with more trump".
Seriously, do you hear yourself?
How is getting Trump out of office going to fix our country? Having a manchild as president is bad for sure, but it has done a lot to reveal how broken our country is to people paying attention. And yet for the average person who doesn't follow politics, nothing has really changed. Most of Trump's fuckups are things to do with foreign policy that doesn't effect your average citizen in a tangible way (yet), but there are a lot of problems that have existed for years before Trump took office, that will not change as long as "the Mafia" as you put it is still picking the two candidates.
People say they are going to fall into line and put in a cheating candidate, without thinking about why people are cheating in the first place or what they are trying to stop. Do you think a party that is saying "any of our candidates except Bernie" are okay with Bernie's policies of M4A or fighting climate change? That they are going to actually fight for equality rather than just pay lip service without actually doing anything? Do you think we're going to fight climate change if Biden is elected even though he's told the rich wall street men that nothing will change under him?
I don't understand this mindset that Trump is the end-all be-all evil and if we get anyone but him things will get better. He's just a tumor that reveals the cancer beneath.
On February 11 2020 08:35 Velr wrote: Yeah, lets vote in the Mafia directly, they control everything anyway right?
4 years ago most of the stuff trump does was unthinkable, im staggered that you guys just eat it and it eat and eat it and now start to normalise it by saying: "who cares, if i dont like the democrat im fine with more trump".
Seriously, do you hear yourself?
How is getting Trump out of office going to fix our country? Having a manchild as president is bad for sure, but it has done a lot to reveal how broken our country is to people paying attention. And yet for the average person who doesn't follow politics, nothing has really changed. Most of Trump's fuckups are things to do with foreign policy that doesn't effect your average citizen in a tangible way (yet), but there are a lot of problems that have existed for years before Trump took office, that will not change as long as "the Mafia" as you put it is still picking the two candidates.
People say they are going to fall into line and put in a cheating candidate, without thinking about why people are cheating in the first place or what they are trying to stop. Do you think a party that is saying "any of our candidates except Bernie" are okay with Bernie's policies of M4A or fighting climate change? That they are going to actually fight for equality rather than just pay lip service without actually doing anything? Do you think we're going to fight climate change if Biden is elected even though he's told the rich wall street men that nothing will change under him?
I don't understand this mindset that Trump is the end-all be-all evil and if we get anyone but him things will get better. He's just a tumor that reveals the cancer beneath.
I think Trump has been a net-positive for the country, and for all the negatives that may grow and turn that upside down for me, the country can survive another four years. So that having been said ....
The recipe of always voting for the other guy for whatever unfathomable Republican is nominated will always play into the establishment politicians, donors, and large media companies selecting the candidate. Period. The country is broken in the sense that both sides voted in huge numbers against the establishment candidates in 2016 primaries. And it isn't because suddenly something like half the country is racist and sexist. Still sticking with a strategy of voting for the other guy no matter how he or she was elected will breed bitter elections and unhappy marriages until kingdom come.
Iowa only had 41 pledged, so whatever 14/12 split or tie between the frontrunners doesn't matter too much. It's just the popular vote showing who has momentum early, and if the polls are pegging sentiment correctly. Sanders obviously has momentum. Warren and Biden are really lagging. But, seriously, 20% of the number of Iowa pledged from the caucuses are still superdelegates. They can pick whoever at convention. If you remember 2016, tons of superdelegates pledged early for Clinton and that affected Sanders support in early primaries. The scales felt tipped against Bernie Sanders because they were, and people stayed home in primaries and in the general election from that fact.
I want a healthy opposition, even if ultimately my views aren't partially held by a single one of the Democratic candidates. Yang's probably closest to my sentiments in terms of what I want to see in upsetting the established order in how campaigns are run. I don't like most of his positions, but I like how he argues for them and debates them on the stage. Warren, Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar (mostly), and previously Beto, Kamala, and Castro are all that's wrong with politics and the sound-bitization of intraparty debates. Yang, and to a lesser extent Bernie, are the better direction for the country in terms of campaigning and politicking.
The question feels a little bit irrelevant because Buttigieg is not going to beat Trump, it's probably not going to be even close. He won't win back Michigan or Pennsylvania with milquetoast liberalism and I don't see a red-leaning state where Trump is unpopular enough that the "I'm not Trump" sticker on top of that policy platform would win. With the alienation of populists he might not even win the popular vote.
A year ago I was of the opinion that most candidates would beat Trump; with the context today of impeachment failing and the possibility of talking about the "great economy" in a way that can't be refuted by a liberal, only by a leftist, there is a lot less margin right now.
On February 10 2020 22:41 LegalLord wrote: I think I’d actually vote for Trump in that scenario. After 2016, I’m not really willing to humor a “lesser of two evils” false dichotomy anymore.
Why is it a false dichotomy? I suppose you could vote for a third-party candidate or not vote at all, but in the sense of deciding on who actually has a chance of becoming president, there are exactly two options: Donald Trump or the Democratic candidate. One of them will necessarily become president next year.
It's a false dichotomy in the sense that it's saying "your options are to vote for Trump, or for someone who you don't like but is better than Trump." The latter isn't true, because if said candidate is not really different on substance than Trump, you're really just propagating the message that it's ok to be terrible as long as you're marginally more favorable than the opposition. Not buying it.
And I want to draw attention to this very poignant GH post:
On February 11 2020 08:27 GreenHorizons wrote: Probably long term Trump is fucking over everyone. But short term, people are seeing improvements or little to no difference in their daily lives despite Democrats warnings that Trump would be the end of the world.
If you're someone relatively unaffected or even benefiting from Trump's reign, the idea that an absolutely corrupt democrat is still better than Trump is laughable.
He's right. Purely selfishly, Trump's handouts to the well-to-do are a moderate boon for me, since I'm reasonably well-positioned to benefit economically from it. It's true that it's only a short-term benefit, and that in the long term we're all going to suffer from his reckless and self-serving policy. I'd rather him be ousted, because I know this relatively positive situation is just the calm before the storm. But since it is generally positive, I'm not really desperate to see him removed. If the candidate being sold is truly only marginally better, what's really being sold is the same old shtick in a marginally more palatable package. No thanks.
On top of that, I would dispute that Buttman or Bloomberg in particular even qualify as "marginally better." If anything, they're worse.
On February 10 2020 22:41 LegalLord wrote: I think I’d actually vote for Trump in that scenario. After 2016, I’m not really willing to humor a “lesser of two evils” false dichotomy anymore.
Why is it a false dichotomy? I suppose you could vote for a third-party candidate or not vote at all, but in the sense of deciding on who actually has a chance of becoming president, there are exactly two options: Donald Trump or the Democratic candidate. One of them will necessarily become president next year.
It's a false dichotomy in the sense that it's saying "your options are to vote for Trump, or for someone who you don't like but is better than Trump." The latter isn't true, because if said candidate is not really different on substance than Trump, you're really just propagating the message that it's ok to be terrible as long as you're marginally more favorable than the opposition. Not buying it.
Absolutely none of the current Democratic candidates are the same on substance as Trump, but that's a red herring anyway; the fact of the matter is that either Trump or the Democratic candidate will become president. A false dichotomy would imply that there's actually a viable third candidate in the general election who's not being considered in this conversation, not that the two actual candidates are similar or different.
Perhaps you mean that the "lesser of two evils" argument doesn't persuade you, but that's not the same as referring to it as a logical fallacy. Either the lesser of two evils or the greater of two evils will be elected; it's up to you to figure out who you'd rather have run the country. No two candidates are identical.
Buttigieg, Biden, and Klobuchar cannot beat Trump - since the “moderate” candidates are less electable, you might as well double down on Bernie, who at least gets grassroots excitement.
Biden is senile, Klobuchar has severe character issues (staff abuser), and Pete has been branded as sleazy and unlikeable.
I really like Yang though - it shows the sad state of our electorate that he doesn’t get more support, as well as the corrupt nature of the media and DNC that he gets marginalized. From a character perspective he’s top notch, and I feel like he’s a pragmatic candidate who understands the changing world best.
Yang doesn't get support from the DNC and the media because his polling numbers are bad. His polling has never been good and he's never generated buzz around himself. He finished in Iowa exactly where he's been polling, behind all the top candidates at the top of all the nobodies who have done nothing in polling.
He isn't getting marginalized, he's getting exactly what he deserves.
Yang, though he has an impressive base of virulent supporters, is ultimately a pretty shallow candidate. Besides “implement basic income” I haven’t seen any real substance to what he is selling. He is about where he belongs in the polls.
EPT
