• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 19:22
CEST 01:22
KST 08:22
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 20252Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202575RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18
Community News
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced15BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8
StarCraft 2
General
What tournaments are world championships? #1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 2025 Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 I offer completely free coaching services
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 $25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced $5,000 WardiTV Summer Championship 2025 WardiTV Mondays FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $10,000 live event
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced Flash Announces (and Retracts) Hiatus From ASL BW General Discussion BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Dewalt's Show Matches in China
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance
Strategy
[G] Mineral Boosting Does 1 second matter in StarCraft? Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Total Annihilation Server - TAForever [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread UK Politics Mega-thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Eight Anniversary as a TL…
Mizenhauer
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 630 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1817

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 5126 Next
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting!

NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.

Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.


If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23221 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-09-23 00:07:25
September 22 2019 23:52 GMT
#36321
On September 23 2019 07:25 IgnE wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 23 2019 04:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 03:48 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 03:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 02:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]

That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

[quote]

done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


This is what I mean by not reconciling. I'm saying that a clear media bias is manipulating the voting public with the intention to lead them to your conclusion with that specific poll and narrative, despite the contradictions I've pointed out in this exchange and previously (and more will come).

That Warren is "fine" is also the narrative being driven by the same corrupt forces she's supposed to be challenging, and that should be troubling, if not disqualifying. (EDIT2: Obama should have taught any of us that lived through his campaign/admin that).



I understand that bad people want Bernie to fail and that they use Warren to subdue legitimate, full-throttle revolution by placating the masses by massaging them into accepting conditional changes that still fundamentally make us live under the foot of the ultra-wealthy class. I fully recognize that. But she still actively pushes the idea of "The ultra rich are too rich and they are conning people into turning against each other rather than fighting the actual ultra-rich overlords that are ruining society". I don't accept your idea that she isn't a net positive on the path to chipping away at our overlord's powers. You are welcome to believe that.

On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]

That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

[quote]

done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


In order to sell a narrative and knowing people rarely read past headlines most people didn't notice only 12% of Warrens supporters in that poll are sure they will be voting for her. Meaning 88% of that support isn't.



I am not committed to voting for any candidate either. If I was asked if I was sure I would vote for Bernie, who I currently 99% sure I will vote for, I would say no. Too much could happen and expecting people to be sure 5 months from a primary is silly.

On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]

That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

[quote]

done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


I'd mention you're not a passive international observer in this (iirc) you could be campaigning for the better candidate without a wand.

EDIT:+ Show Spoiler +
As an aside and without being able to see the actual data (like what percentage/size of the sample said they caucused for Sanders?) I think Sanders getting less of his supporters than Warren is probably indicative of some sampling error compared to who will actually be at the caucuses.

Also Obama was 3rd and Sanders down by 30% at this point in their campaigns so we might not want to rely too heavily on that poll as much more than a snapshot of a trend that seems to have secured her a spot in the top tier of candidates.




I wouldn't say I am campaigning for anyone right now. I should be, but I'm not. I intend to start. Not really sure what else to say other than I failed myself in that way. I am just pointing out that the fact that it looks like Warren will likely overtake Biden, after 2016 giving us freaking Clinton, I am pleased with this direction, even if it isn't what I wish it was. I feel better. It seems like when we have these conversations, it is that you aren't able to be happy about something other than the ideal. And while I realize people are actively dying as a result of income/wealth inequality, I am for some reason relieved at an improvement while still realizing it isn't good enough. Innocent people die every year as an indirect result of the rich consolidating power, and more of those people would die under Warren than Bernie. But watching the world go in a worse rather than better direction has been so nauseating that even the prospect of mild relief is enough to give me chills of optimism.

I want better than Warren and being truthful, Bernie does not go nearly far enough for what I genuinely would do if I was supreme ruler of Earth. Oligarchs even being allowed freedom isn't remotely tolerable to me. They need to be imprisoned, not just taxed. Oligarchs have actual blood on their hands.

On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]

That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

[quote]

done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


EDIT:+ Show Spoiler +
As an aside and without being able to see the actual data (like what percentage/size of the sample said they caucused for Sanders?) I think Sanders getting less of his supporters than Warren is probably indicative of some sampling error compared to who will actually be at the caucuses.

Also Obama was 3rd and Sanders down by 30% at this point in their campaigns so we might not want to rely too heavily on that poll as much more than a snapshot of a trend that seems to have secured her a spot in the top tier of candidates.




I'm by no means saying Sanders is down and out, but given the fact that he's already a well known candidate and the fact that Warren is continuing to grow rapidly, its not looking good for Bernie OR Biden.


Don't you think it's more probable that someone that does things like vote for increasing Trump's military budget (even if she just thought it politically expedient) is just giving the kind of lip service Obama did that got us 0 accountability for banksters, Bush, or Obama's bombs/bombing and culminated in Michelle literally embracing Bush and people like Kristol and Nicole Wallace being rehabilitated to the point they are regularly on MSNBC (Wallace with her own show)?

Obama's major "progressive" accomplishment was passing what was a rehash of Nixon's healthcare plan.

Warren should only be acceptable to those refusing the necessity of the kind of revolutionary changes Bernie at least broaches. Not just for some political ideal but for the survival of our species and some semblance of a society we'd want to live in. A refusal that basically boils down to a liberal version of climate denial and/or disregard for people outside their immediate circle of empathy.

I know people always assume the worst tone so I say this humbly but doesn't that feel naive/malicious to you?


You see Obamacare and think of Nixon, I think of protections for pre-existing conditions. We just look at the world in a different way and that's ok. I enjoy hearing your views on things, but I don't look at us disagreeing as something to fix. I'm not trying to convince you that you are wrong.


That's kinda the point, it's not okay, it's terrifying to me. You consider yourself and others would probably presume you to be left/far-left. But your view has been so distorted that what was seen as an insufficient idea of a corrupt right-wing bigot for Democrats 50 years ago, is now "protections for pre-existing conditions"/a progressive accomplishment.

It assures me that should Bernie not win, 50 years from now (once the consequences of climate change are really kicking in), they'll be ostensibly left people thinking passing Trump era policy will be satisfactory because his opponent will be some sort of Leopold II/Immortan Joe type figure and they'll be others arguing that not supporting the Trump like candidate doesn't solve anything.

Whether people realize it or not I think the reason it doesn't scare them into being more proactive is a combination of apathy, fatalism, and/or the feeling they'll be fine through it all.


Nathan J Robinson is pretty left, and he says maybe Warren/Sanders should make a VP pact that whoever loses the first primaries should agree to be the other’s VP.


He and Kline are a lot more confident she's not deceitful than I can muster. I'd also put him in the "confident they'll be fine regardless" group that finds them interchangeable.

As for which should drop out it should be Warren hands down if winning is the priority. He's clearly got the stronger base and grassroots. Just look at the donor map

[image loading]



NYT accompanying reporting on Sanders huge lead
+ Show Spoiler +

Bernie Sanders has a huge lead.

Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is not dominating in the polls, but he is in a class of his own when it comes to picking up individual donors.

Mr. Sanders had an estimated 746,000 donors through the end of June — far more than the No. 2 candidate, Ms. Warren, who had an estimated 421,000 donors. Mr. Sanders entered the race in a strong position to raise money, having built an enormous network of online donors when he ran for president in 2016.

In 44 states, Mr. Sanders had more individual donors than any other candidate. The six states where he was not No. 1 are the home states of other candidate.

www.nytimes.com


Obviously outdated since he's reported more than 250,000 new donors since then.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
pmh
Profile Joined March 2016
1352 Posts
September 23 2019 01:14 GMT
#36322
On September 23 2019 02:46 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:11 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.
didn't we have this conversation 2 days ago?
Not voting Democrat and giving Trump another 4 years of making things worse doesn't solve anything.

Cutting off the nose to spite the face


That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

On September 22 2019 23:14 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.

I don't know what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?


done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


This is what I mean by not reconciling. I'm saying that a clear media bias is manipulating the voting public with the intention to lead them to your conclusion with that specific poll and narrative, despite the contradictions I've pointed out in this exchange and previously (and more will come).

That Warren is "fine" is also the narrative being driven by the same corrupt forces she's supposed to be challenging, and that should be troubling, if not disqualifying. (EDIT2: Obama should have taught any of us that lived through his campaign/admin that).



I understand that bad people want Bernie to fail and that they use Warren to subdue legitimate, full-throttle revolution by placating the masses by massaging them into accepting conditional changes that still fundamentally make us live under the foot of the ultra-wealthy class. I fully recognize that. But she still actively pushes the idea of "The ultra rich are too rich and they are conning people into turning against each other rather than fighting the actual ultra-rich overlords that are ruining society". I don't accept your idea that she isn't a net positive on the path to chipping away at our overlord's powers. You are welcome to believe that.

Show nested quote +
On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:11 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.
didn't we have this conversation 2 days ago?
Not voting Democrat and giving Trump another 4 years of making things worse doesn't solve anything.

Cutting off the nose to spite the face


That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

On September 22 2019 23:14 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.

I don't know what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?


done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


In order to sell a narrative and knowing people rarely read past headlines most people didn't notice only 12% of Warrens supporters in that poll are sure they will be voting for her. Meaning 88% of that support isn't.



I am not committed to voting for any candidate either. If I was asked if I was sure I would vote for Bernie, who I currently 99% sure I will vote for, I would say no. Too much could happen and expecting people to be sure 5 months from a primary is silly.

Show nested quote +
On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:11 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.
didn't we have this conversation 2 days ago?
Not voting Democrat and giving Trump another 4 years of making things worse doesn't solve anything.

Cutting off the nose to spite the face


That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

On September 22 2019 23:14 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.

I don't know what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?


done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


I'd mention you're not a passive international observer in this (iirc) you could be campaigning for the better candidate without a wand.

EDIT:+ Show Spoiler +
As an aside and without being able to see the actual data (like what percentage/size of the sample said they caucused for Sanders?) I think Sanders getting less of his supporters than Warren is probably indicative of some sampling error compared to who will actually be at the caucuses.

Also Obama was 3rd and Sanders down by 30% at this point in their campaigns so we might not want to rely too heavily on that poll as much more than a snapshot of a trend that seems to have secured her a spot in the top tier of candidates.




I wouldn't say I am campaigning for anyone right now. I should be, but I'm not. I intend to start. Not really sure what else to say other than I failed myself in that way. I am just pointing out that the fact that it looks like Warren will likely overtake Biden, after 2016 giving us freaking Clinton, I am pleased with this direction, even if it isn't what I wish it was. I feel better. It seems like when we have these conversations, it is that you aren't able to be happy about something other than the ideal. And while I realize people are actively dying as a result of income/wealth inequality, I am for some reason relieved at an improvement while still realizing it isn't good enough. Innocent people die every year as an indirect result of the rich consolidating power, and more of those people would die under Warren than Bernie. But watching the world go in a worse rather than better direction has been so nauseating that even the prospect of mild relief is enough to give me chills of optimism.

I want better than Warren and being truthful, Bernie does not go nearly far enough for what I genuinely would do if I was supreme ruler of Earth. Oligarchs even being allowed freedom isn't remotely tolerable to me. They need to be imprisoned, not just taxed. Oligarchs have actual blood on their hands.

Show nested quote +
On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:11 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.
didn't we have this conversation 2 days ago?
Not voting Democrat and giving Trump another 4 years of making things worse doesn't solve anything.

Cutting off the nose to spite the face


That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

On September 22 2019 23:14 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.

I don't know what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?


done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


EDIT:+ Show Spoiler +
As an aside and without being able to see the actual data (like what percentage/size of the sample said they caucused for Sanders?) I think Sanders getting less of his supporters than Warren is probably indicative of some sampling error compared to who will actually be at the caucuses.

Also Obama was 3rd and Sanders down by 30% at this point in their campaigns so we might not want to rely too heavily on that poll as much more than a snapshot of a trend that seems to have secured her a spot in the top tier of candidates.




I'm by no means saying Sanders is down and out, but given the fact that he's already a well known candidate and the fact that Warren is continuing to grow rapidly, its not looking good for Bernie OR Biden.




Warren is better then biden but far worse then sanders. I am not sure she is a net positive for the cause that you mention and i can see her beeing even an obstacle in a similar way as obama was.
If revolutionairy changes are needed like GH says (and which i also do believe) then you need a revolutionairy candidate. You dont want a candidate who has the right image but who ends up changing not all that much. That will lead to another disapointment for a large part of the voters and a subsequent loss for the cause as a whole in every election after. In such a way she would be a danger for the cause.

Though i have to admit i am also not sure that sanders is the right candidate,his support and movement seem less strong then 4 years ago. He also is a somewhat easy target with his outspoken opinion.
Warren would be the 2nd women who runs against trump,she is very different from hillary.
It probably is heresy to say but maybe trump has some sort of advantage when running against female candidates (probably every man has,society is still not 100% equal).
You could think women would be a weak point for trump, beeing such an outspoken "macho" man. But its his whole personna and style,its just him and the people expect it from him. He sort of is invincible to the backlash from beeing rude and a bit of a bully (which most man would face when acting like he does against women or in general).

Then there is biden,maybe for the cause of fighting the overlords it would actually be best if biden wins the nomination (i am thinking long term here). Biden would give the progressive (and for a large part young) base not what they want. They will be more angry and more motivated to make a change next time and then maybe a bernie type candidate could win.
Warren for me is a bit in the middle (which probably is why she seems like an acceptable choice for many people). And a "bit in the middle" imo is the worst in a time like this with heavy polarization. Its a sensible point of vieuw but not one that can win an election in time like this. She is not fully convincing for the progressives nor for the conservatives in the party and i dont think she can win from such a position.

But noone can beat trump i think. The only one who could is michelle obama
Gahlo
Profile Joined February 2010
United States35143 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-09-23 01:47:17
September 23 2019 01:42 GMT
#36323
On September 23 2019 10:14 pmh wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 23 2019 02:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:11 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.
didn't we have this conversation 2 days ago?
Not voting Democrat and giving Trump another 4 years of making things worse doesn't solve anything.

Cutting off the nose to spite the face


That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

On September 22 2019 23:14 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.

I don't know what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?


done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


This is what I mean by not reconciling. I'm saying that a clear media bias is manipulating the voting public with the intention to lead them to your conclusion with that specific poll and narrative, despite the contradictions I've pointed out in this exchange and previously (and more will come).

That Warren is "fine" is also the narrative being driven by the same corrupt forces she's supposed to be challenging, and that should be troubling, if not disqualifying. (EDIT2: Obama should have taught any of us that lived through his campaign/admin that).



I understand that bad people want Bernie to fail and that they use Warren to subdue legitimate, full-throttle revolution by placating the masses by massaging them into accepting conditional changes that still fundamentally make us live under the foot of the ultra-wealthy class. I fully recognize that. But she still actively pushes the idea of "The ultra rich are too rich and they are conning people into turning against each other rather than fighting the actual ultra-rich overlords that are ruining society". I don't accept your idea that she isn't a net positive on the path to chipping away at our overlord's powers. You are welcome to believe that.

On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:11 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.
didn't we have this conversation 2 days ago?
Not voting Democrat and giving Trump another 4 years of making things worse doesn't solve anything.

Cutting off the nose to spite the face


That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

On September 22 2019 23:14 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.

I don't know what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?


done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


In order to sell a narrative and knowing people rarely read past headlines most people didn't notice only 12% of Warrens supporters in that poll are sure they will be voting for her. Meaning 88% of that support isn't.



I am not committed to voting for any candidate either. If I was asked if I was sure I would vote for Bernie, who I currently 99% sure I will vote for, I would say no. Too much could happen and expecting people to be sure 5 months from a primary is silly.

On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:11 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.
didn't we have this conversation 2 days ago?
Not voting Democrat and giving Trump another 4 years of making things worse doesn't solve anything.

Cutting off the nose to spite the face


That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

On September 22 2019 23:14 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.

I don't know what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?


done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


I'd mention you're not a passive international observer in this (iirc) you could be campaigning for the better candidate without a wand.

EDIT:+ Show Spoiler +
As an aside and without being able to see the actual data (like what percentage/size of the sample said they caucused for Sanders?) I think Sanders getting less of his supporters than Warren is probably indicative of some sampling error compared to who will actually be at the caucuses.

Also Obama was 3rd and Sanders down by 30% at this point in their campaigns so we might not want to rely too heavily on that poll as much more than a snapshot of a trend that seems to have secured her a spot in the top tier of candidates.




I wouldn't say I am campaigning for anyone right now. I should be, but I'm not. I intend to start. Not really sure what else to say other than I failed myself in that way. I am just pointing out that the fact that it looks like Warren will likely overtake Biden, after 2016 giving us freaking Clinton, I am pleased with this direction, even if it isn't what I wish it was. I feel better. It seems like when we have these conversations, it is that you aren't able to be happy about something other than the ideal. And while I realize people are actively dying as a result of income/wealth inequality, I am for some reason relieved at an improvement while still realizing it isn't good enough. Innocent people die every year as an indirect result of the rich consolidating power, and more of those people would die under Warren than Bernie. But watching the world go in a worse rather than better direction has been so nauseating that even the prospect of mild relief is enough to give me chills of optimism.

I want better than Warren and being truthful, Bernie does not go nearly far enough for what I genuinely would do if I was supreme ruler of Earth. Oligarchs even being allowed freedom isn't remotely tolerable to me. They need to be imprisoned, not just taxed. Oligarchs have actual blood on their hands.

On September 23 2019 02:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:46 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 23 2019 01:06 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:20 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:11 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.
didn't we have this conversation 2 days ago?
Not voting Democrat and giving Trump another 4 years of making things worse doesn't solve anything.

Cutting off the nose to spite the face


That's a non-sequitur?

The issue was (now months before any votes are cast) reconciling a clear media/establishment bias in favor of anyone but Bernie, the latest addition being Warren, and how that conflicts with her rhetoric against corruption and the policy they allegedly support.

On September 22 2019 23:14 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:07 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 22 2019 23:05 Mohdoo wrote:
Warren is looking pretty unstoppable. She's totally won me over at this point. I also think a lot of #neverbiden people will also continue to gravitate to her as buttigieg and others finally fucking drop out.


I suppose it's quite possible they just don't reconcile it as it appears you are going with.

I don't know what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?


done^


For me, Bernie simply isn't doing well enough and it was obvious from a while ago that either him or Warren would be the "more progressive than Biden" candidate. If either Warren or Bernie were to drop out tomorrow, Biden would need to drop out the day after. He's completely screwed once it is a 2 candidate race. If Warren ends up being the candidate to get people more comfortable with progressive policies so we can one day move towards democratic socialism, sign me up. I'd choose Bernie to be president if I was a wizard, but I'm not going to pretend I'd be anything less than ecstatic seeing Warren replace Trump.


There's a lot more to unpack there than it probably seems but lets start with:

Bernie simply isn't doing well enough


and reconciling it with how her rhetoric is undermined by the media/establishment bias/support and how it is intended to manipulate you to the very conclusion you've drawn.

For instance, Bernie's record breaking grassroots donor support is the only one capable or intending to actually reject the corrupting money someone like Warren alleges she's intending to remove despite it making up a significant portion of her presidential campaign spending thus far and will necessarily corrupt her potential general election campaign.


We aren't talking about the same topic. You are saying Bernie is significantly better from a transformation/revolution perspective, and no one is arguing against that. A Bernie presidency would fundamentally shift not just American but global culture much more significantly than Warren. I'd choose Bernie over Warren, but I am thrilled at the prospect of Warren winning.

Warren has been winning over people really effectively. Bernie got 50% of Iowa in 2016 but is only polling at 11% there (from this poll https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2019/09/22/iowa-poll-election-2020-iowa-caucus-elizabeth-warren-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-democrat-candidates/2370015001/ )

I'm not cheering for him to be losing. I'm saying he is losing and pointing out that Warren beating Biden, but also beating Bernie, is something I can be fine with.


EDIT:+ Show Spoiler +
As an aside and without being able to see the actual data (like what percentage/size of the sample said they caucused for Sanders?) I think Sanders getting less of his supporters than Warren is probably indicative of some sampling error compared to who will actually be at the caucuses.

Also Obama was 3rd and Sanders down by 30% at this point in their campaigns so we might not want to rely too heavily on that poll as much more than a snapshot of a trend that seems to have secured her a spot in the top tier of candidates.




I'm by no means saying Sanders is down and out, but given the fact that he's already a well known candidate and the fact that Warren is continuing to grow rapidly, its not looking good for Bernie OR Biden.




Warren is better then biden but far worse then sanders. I am not sure she is a net positive for the cause that you mention and i can see her beeing even an obstacle in a similar way as obama was.
If revolutionairy changes are needed like GH says (and which i also do believe) then you need a revolutionairy candidate. You dont want a candidate who has the right image but who ends up changing not all that much. That will lead to another disapointment for a large part of the voters and a subsequent loss for the cause as a whole in every election after. In such a way she would be a danger for the cause.

Though i have to admit i am also not sure that sanders is the right candidate,his support and movement seem less strong then 4 years ago. He also is a somewhat easy target with his outspoken opinion.
Warren would be the 2nd women who runs against trump,she is very different from hillary.
It probably is heresy to say but maybe trump has some sort of advantage when running against female candidates (probably every man has,society is still not 100% equal).
You could think women would be a weak point for trump, beeing such an outspoken "macho" man. But its his whole personna and style,its just him and the people expect it from him. He sort of is invincible to the backlash from beeing rude and a bit of a bully (which most man would face when acting like he does against women or in general).

Then there is biden,maybe for the cause of fighting the overlords it would actually be best if biden wins the nomination (i am thinking long term here). Biden would give the progressive (and for a large part young) base not what they want. They will be more angry and more motivated to make a change next time and then maybe a bernie type candidate could win.
Warren for me is a bit in the middle (which probably is why she seems like an acceptable choice for many people). And a "bit in the middle" imo is the worst in a time like this with heavy polarization. Its a sensible point of vieuw but not one that can win an election in time like this. She is not fully convincing for the progressives nor for the conservatives in the party and i dont think she can win from such a position.

But noone can beat trump i think. The only one who could is michelle obama

Biden would be the worst choice. He'd evoke more of a "who fucking cares" that Hillary did, which is risky. One would hope it wouldn't matter, and that all of them would beat Trump anyway, but the amount of that sentiment was also non-0 last election too.

With Biden as president, 2024 would be protect the incumbent if he chose again. 2028 would be the next time an actual progressive candidate would have a chance, but given the US's shit political memory I'm not trusting enough to think that the Republicans would get punished 3 elections in a row for having a president as shit as Trump is.

Trump is no way unbeatable as long as he's taken seriously by the electorate. Last election he wasn't, after his term he should.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42654 Posts
September 23 2019 14:56 GMT
#36324
On September 23 2019 08:03 Taelshin wrote:
My standards are there was no strike.

Per his description of events the strike was only avoided by the last minute intervention of another person who explained to him that weapons are dangerous. That had there been no intervention he would have done the strike. You don’t get to call yourself a pacifist if someone stops you going to war.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
Nouar
Profile Joined May 2009
France3270 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-09-23 17:03:56
September 23 2019 17:00 GMT
#36325
On September 23 2019 06:53 Taelshin wrote:
You answered your own question Kwark, He cancelled the strike. That makes me happy, That should make you happy, In fact I think everyone should be happy, The USA didn't incinerate another 150 people on that given day, HAZAAA.

... Should I remind you this?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/19/us-drone-strike-deaths-afghanistan-pine-nut-workers
Should you really be happy? The madman decides on (without thinking), then cancels (with other people thinking) in the same day? It's just frightening.
NoiR
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15686 Posts
September 23 2019 17:40 GMT
#36326
Until something bad actually happens, I have a hard time pretending Trump is causing military conflict. He causes a lot of relationship conflict and economic conflict, but nothing military yet.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42654 Posts
September 23 2019 17:50 GMT
#36327
On September 24 2019 02:40 Mohdoo wrote:
Until something bad actually happens, I have a hard time pretending Trump is causing military conflict. He causes a lot of relationship conflict and economic conflict, but nothing military yet.

Bad as in what? Full war? Because the buildup in the Persian Gulf is entirely due to his policy of antagonism.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15686 Posts
September 23 2019 17:57 GMT
#36328
On September 24 2019 02:50 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 24 2019 02:40 Mohdoo wrote:
Until something bad actually happens, I have a hard time pretending Trump is causing military conflict. He causes a lot of relationship conflict and economic conflict, but nothing military yet.

Bad as in what? Full war? Because the buildup in the Persian Gulf is entirely due to his policy of antagonism.


Right, when someone dies, I'll say he is doing bad military stuff. But tensions being high don't really mean anything until they mean something. A bunch of diplomats sweating doesn't really bother me until someone is actually harmed. We may be inching closer and closer to something bad, but based on what I know about the Cuban missile crisis, that doesn't necessarily mean it will be badly.

Trump essentially uses antagonism to cheat out minor concessions to make himself look good. It hasn't worked yet, but it also hasn't killed anyone yet. Unless I am being an idiot and forgetting something. We've still been bombing lots of innocent people etc but as I understand, no one is dying yet with the whole Iran nonsense.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42654 Posts
September 23 2019 18:45 GMT
#36329
On September 24 2019 02:57 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 24 2019 02:50 KwarK wrote:
On September 24 2019 02:40 Mohdoo wrote:
Until something bad actually happens, I have a hard time pretending Trump is causing military conflict. He causes a lot of relationship conflict and economic conflict, but nothing military yet.

Bad as in what? Full war? Because the buildup in the Persian Gulf is entirely due to his policy of antagonism.


Right, when someone dies, I'll say he is doing bad military stuff. But tensions being high don't really mean anything until they mean something. A bunch of diplomats sweating doesn't really bother me until someone is actually harmed. We may be inching closer and closer to something bad, but based on what I know about the Cuban missile crisis, that doesn't necessarily mean it will be badly.

Trump essentially uses antagonism to cheat out minor concessions to make himself look good. It hasn't worked yet, but it also hasn't killed anyone yet. Unless I am being an idiot and forgetting something. We've still been bombing lots of innocent people etc but as I understand, no one is dying yet with the whole Iran nonsense.

Yemen is partially Iran sponsored but we have no leverage with them because opened with breaking the sanction coalition and unilaterally imposing sanctions without China. There’s nothing to threaten if they don’t play ball because Trump already took his ball and went home. Contributing to the military buildup of SA is also directly linked to Iranian undermining of SA. He’s actively destabilizing the region and a lot of people are dying as a result.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
Rebs
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Pakistan10726 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-09-23 19:44:36
September 23 2019 18:53 GMT
#36330
On September 24 2019 02:57 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 24 2019 02:50 KwarK wrote:
On September 24 2019 02:40 Mohdoo wrote:
Until something bad actually happens, I have a hard time pretending Drumpf is causing military conflict. He causes a lot of relationship conflict and economic conflict, but nothing military yet.

Bad as in what? Full war? Because the buildup in the Persian Gulf is entirely due to his policy of antagonism.


Right, when someone dies, .


What do you mean when?, ya'll should really start exploring international news outlets.

The US reneged on a deal Iran was compliant with, enforced crippling sanctions without support, but since its the US who can say no. The Europeans tried to byass that and failed Iran still got fucked and is continuing to get fucked to level that is crippling them because there isnt enough trade outside the dollar. .

Instead of the sanctions getting Iran to bend to their will the US now has cornered them into poking the Saudi's through the Houthi's and the people of Yemen are dying and will continue to die at an accelerated rate for nothing more than the fact that they are Shi'a's.

You could blame Iran aswell, they arent saints here, but you drive someone into a corner where there are having less and less to lose, they will swipe. Meanwhile the Saudi's are categorically evil but they buy your weapons so its all ok while the desperate country trying to get leverage anyway it can is the evil one . The fallacy's make your head spin really. Every person that has died in that region since the deal was reneged on can be traced back to the US pulling the deal.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15686 Posts
September 23 2019 19:25 GMT
#36331
On September 24 2019 03:53 Rebs wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 24 2019 02:57 Mohdoo wrote:
On September 24 2019 02:50 KwarK wrote:
On September 24 2019 02:40 Mohdoo wrote:
Until something bad actually happens, I have a hard time pretending Drumpf is causing military conflict. He causes a lot of relationship conflict and economic conflict, but nothing military yet.

Bad as in what? Full war? Because the buildup in the Persian Gulf is entirely due to his policy of antagonism.


Right, when someone dies, .


What do you mean when?, ya'll should really start exploring international news outlets.

The US reneged on a deal Iran was compliant with, enforced crippling sanctions without support, but since its the US who can say no. The Europeans tried to byass that and failed Iran still got fucked and is continuing to get fucked to level that is crippling them because there isnt enough trade outside the dollar. .

Instead of the sanctions getting Iran to bend to their will the US now has cornered them into poking the Saudi's through the Houthi's and the people of Yemen are dying and will continue to die at an accelerated rate for nothing more than the fact that they are Shi'a's.

You could blame Iran aswell, they arent saints here, but you drive someone into a corner where there are having less and less to lose, they will swipe. Meanwhile the Saudi's are categorically evil but they buy your weapons so its all ok while the desperate country trying to get leverage anyway it can is the evil one . The fallacy's make your head spin really. Everything person that has died in that region since the deal was reneged on can be traced back to the US pulling the deal.


That makes more sense and so I think it is reasonable to say that blood is on Trump's hands.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15686 Posts
September 23 2019 19:26 GMT
#36332
Separate topic: Why in the fuck is the threshold only 3% to participate in the debate? This is so stupid.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/462633-dnc-raises-qualifying-thresholds-for-fifth-presidential-debate

Get O'Rourke and all the other irrelevant candidates out of here so we can move on.
semantics
Profile Blog Joined November 2009
10040 Posts
September 23 2019 20:48 GMT
#36333
On September 24 2019 04:26 Mohdoo wrote:
Separate topic: Why in the fuck is the threshold only 3% to participate in the debate? This is so stupid.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/462633-dnc-raises-qualifying-thresholds-for-fifth-presidential-debate

Get O'Rourke and all the other irrelevant candidates out of here so we can move on.

They want to keep it lax so they don't get calls for being unfair. The convention isn't until July if next year so plenty of time to widdle it down to top 2. Plus it's better for the DNC press wise if there are more people as it's more coverage and it makes more headlines.
TheTenthDoc
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
United States9561 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-09-23 20:58:59
September 23 2019 20:56 GMT
#36334
Considering like 30% of the Democratic primary electorate is undecided, I don't think a 3% cutoff is too low. Especially given the potential for no one getting a delegate majority. Consider that right now in 2015 none of Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich were polling above 6%, yet they ended up with a collective 30% of the delegates (proportionally much more before they withdrew) and ~50% of the votes.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15686 Posts
September 23 2019 21:08 GMT
#36335
On September 24 2019 05:48 semantics wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 24 2019 04:26 Mohdoo wrote:
Separate topic: Why in the fuck is the threshold only 3% to participate in the debate? This is so stupid.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/462633-dnc-raises-qualifying-thresholds-for-fifth-presidential-debate

Get O'Rourke and all the other irrelevant candidates out of here so we can move on.

They want to keep it lax so they don't get calls for being unfair. The convention isn't until July if next year so plenty of time to widdle it down to top 2. Plus it's better for the DNC press wise if there are more people as it's more coverage and it makes more headlines.


The funny thing is that they ended up with an opportunity to tip the scale in favor of Biden in all this. Most people are in an "anyone but Biden" camp except for Biden supporters. The people who don't currently support Biden never will. The Buttigieg/Harris/Yang/etc folks will not be gravitating towards Biden after they drop out.
semantics
Profile Blog Joined November 2009
10040 Posts
September 23 2019 22:22 GMT
#36336
The debates don't cut a canadiate off from running. Only the canadiate themselves can do that.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15686 Posts
September 23 2019 22:59 GMT
#36337
On September 24 2019 07:22 semantics wrote:
The debates don't cut a canadiate off from running. Only the canadiate themselves can do that.


True, but exclusion from debates is a as close to a snapped neck a campaign can receive. So long as we don't end up with 5+ names for the actual primary, I'll be satisfied.

What I don't want is a bunch of dumbfucks with no chance of winning using their shitty primary campaign to make a case why they should get a cabinet position.
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18826 Posts
September 23 2019 23:00 GMT
#36338
Beto as press secretary would be pretty great lol
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Gahlo
Profile Joined February 2010
United States35143 Posts
September 23 2019 23:11 GMT
#36339
Beto back in Texas would be better.
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18826 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-09-23 23:14:32
September 23 2019 23:13 GMT
#36340
I fear that ship has sailed, but yes, speaking seriously, he ought to go the way of Hickenlooper.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Prev 1 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 5126 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
18:00
RO8 Round Robin Group - Day 3
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
ZZZero.O168
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nina 155
StarCraft: Brood War
ZZZero.O 168
Aegong 111
Zeus 76
HiyA 42
NaDa 28
JulyZerg 21
MaD[AoV]17
Dota 2
syndereN751
monkeys_forever726
League of Legends
Grubby4537
febbydoto9
Counter-Strike
fl0m2621
flusha407
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox1155
Mew2King328
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor233
Other Games
tarik_tv19433
gofns10324
FrodaN2241
JimRising 361
shahzam346
ViBE28
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick2114
BasetradeTV21
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 18 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• musti20045 50
• StrangeGG 44
• HeavenSC 32
• Kozan
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• sooper7s
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• HerbMon 22
• FirePhoenix3
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota22341
League of Legends
• Doublelift4520
Other Games
• imaqtpie1220
Upcoming Events
FEL
9h 38m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
14h 38m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
18h 38m
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
Online Event
2 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
3 days
The PondCast
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Korean StarCraft League
6 days
CranKy Ducklings
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Esports World Cup 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
BSL Team Wars
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
WardiTV Summer 2025
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.