|
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 |
On February 25 2020 13:37 Nakajin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 13:01 Mohdoo wrote:
Final delegate counts
Sanders 24
Biden 9
Buttigieg 3
Warren's campaign is over. Bets if she blames sexism in her speech? Well she wouldn't be entirely wrong in the grand scheme of things.
She fucked up when she backstabbed Bernie, that pissed a lot of people off.
Also, when she backed away from medicare for all... Her whole campaign began leaning to centrist...
Her ENTIRE appeal was that she was hard left like Bernie... She was the Bernie alternative and fucked that up for herself by listening to Clinton advisors she hired, that's my understanding.
I can personally say at one point I considered switching from Bernie to her, because I appreciated her fight... but she lost me completely with her actions. I would vote for her in a primary, and still be very happy... But I've been shocked by her campaign, she should fire her advisors.
I don't know that I'll see her the same in the future.
|
On February 25 2020 15:26 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 15:10 ChristianS wrote:On February 25 2020 15:04 Mohdoo wrote:On February 25 2020 14:50 ChristianS wrote:On February 25 2020 14:16 Mohdoo wrote:On February 25 2020 13:37 Nakajin wrote:On February 25 2020 13:01 Mohdoo wrote:
Final delegate counts
Sanders 24
Biden 9
Buttigieg 3
Warren's campaign is over. Bets if she blames sexism in her speech? Well she wouldn't be entirely wrong in the grand scheme of things. A greater than 0 contribution, but the defining reason people backed Sanders over her as the voice of progressives? No, but don’t you get how people rolling their eyes every time a woman opens her mouth and saying “I bet she’s gonna talk about sexism again” kinda sucks? Not unlike mocking a black person for “playing the race card,” it legitimizes discrimination and delegitimizes calling it out. Maybe there’s a more nuanced way to talk about Warren and sexism? She recently tried to call Bernie a sexist. It's not out of nowhere. Sort of, I remember. But even if I grant that she maliciously fabricated that story herself as a cynical attempt to take down Bernie (not my read of that situation, but it doesn’t matter much by now so whatever), we’re still preemptively dismissing what the woman says because we disagreed with one time she tried to call out discrimination so now she’s “lost her privileges” or something. Still kinda feels like the race card thing to me, ya know? If it is assumed she tried to either misconstrue, fabricate or whatever a sexist attack, yes, any other accusations should mean nothing. Not disagreed, I'm assuming malicious intent. When I look at the many positions Bernie holds pertaining to empowering the weak, the idea that he would not only be sexist but tell a woman a woman can't be president is insane. There is no conceivable way that Bernie said or meant anything remotely close to what Warren described. I can only assume her story is malicious. But it seems we just disagree on that point. We agree on what conclusion should be reached based on which assumption is true.
From the way both Bernie and Warren talked about it, it felt to me like a “Bernie said something about Trump using sexism and Warren overinterpreted” situation. But admittedly that’s mostly a guess on my part, and that’s old drama at this point anyway, which is why I was willing to concede the point.
But no, we don’t agree on the conclusion of that assumption, because even if we think a woman made up an accusation of sexism, it still kinda sucks to wink and nudge every time she’s about to speak and mockingly ask your buddies “hey guys, do you think she’s gonna talk about sexism again?” Now you’ve decided that woman deserves only mockery, even if she’s not talking about sexism, or if she’s talking about the broader problem rather than against her specifically.
It might be unintentional, but I still think it legitimizes discrimination and delegitimizes calling it out. Other men will see that and feel like sexism isn’t such a big deal/not a “real problem;” other women will see that and feel less like speaking out will end well for them.
Again, the analogy in which a black person accuses a person you like and respect of racism, and you deride them for fraudulently “playing the race card,” feels pretty similar to me. In my experience, white people will acknowledge that racism exists, and might even be common, but they’re deeply skeptical of any particular accusation of it, and never go much further than shrug their shoulders like “yeah, what can you do?” But any possibility of a white person being falsely accused of racism? An outrage! Injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere! They will not rest until the culprits are found and discredited!
Please understand, my goal isn’t to deride you, and I don’t think your a misogynist or anything. I just think there are better ways to talk about stuff like this. Isn’t that worth striving for?
|
On February 25 2020 15:57 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 15:26 Mohdoo wrote:On February 25 2020 15:10 ChristianS wrote:On February 25 2020 15:04 Mohdoo wrote:On February 25 2020 14:50 ChristianS wrote:On February 25 2020 14:16 Mohdoo wrote:On February 25 2020 13:37 Nakajin wrote:On February 25 2020 13:01 Mohdoo wrote:
Final delegate counts
Sanders 24
Biden 9
Buttigieg 3
Warren's campaign is over. Bets if she blames sexism in her speech? Well she wouldn't be entirely wrong in the grand scheme of things. A greater than 0 contribution, but the defining reason people backed Sanders over her as the voice of progressives? No, but don’t you get how people rolling their eyes every time a woman opens her mouth and saying “I bet she’s gonna talk about sexism again” kinda sucks? Not unlike mocking a black person for “playing the race card,” it legitimizes discrimination and delegitimizes calling it out. Maybe there’s a more nuanced way to talk about Warren and sexism? She recently tried to call Bernie a sexist. It's not out of nowhere. Sort of, I remember. But even if I grant that she maliciously fabricated that story herself as a cynical attempt to take down Bernie (not my read of that situation, but it doesn’t matter much by now so whatever), we’re still preemptively dismissing what the woman says because we disagreed with one time she tried to call out discrimination so now she’s “lost her privileges” or something. Still kinda feels like the race card thing to me, ya know? If it is assumed she tried to either misconstrue, fabricate or whatever a sexist attack, yes, any other accusations should mean nothing. Not disagreed, I'm assuming malicious intent. When I look at the many positions Bernie holds pertaining to empowering the weak, the idea that he would not only be sexist but tell a woman a woman can't be president is insane. There is no conceivable way that Bernie said or meant anything remotely close to what Warren described. I can only assume her story is malicious. But it seems we just disagree on that point. We agree on what conclusion should be reached based on which assumption is true. From the way both Bernie and Warren talked about it, it felt to me like a “Bernie said something about Trump using sexism and Warren overinterpreted” situation. But admittedly that’s mostly a guess on my part, and that’s old drama at this point anyway, which is why I was willing to concede the point. But no, we don’t agree on the conclusion of that assumption, because even if we think a woman made up an accusation of sexism, it still kinda sucks to wink and nudge every time she’s about to speak and mockingly ask your buddies “hey guys, do you think she’s gonna talk about sexism again?” Now you’ve decided that woman deserves only mockery, even if she’s not talking about sexism, or if she’s talking about the broader problem rather than against her specifically. It might be unintentional, but I still think it legitimizes discrimination and delegitimizes calling it out. Other men will see that and feel like sexism isn’t such a big deal/not a “real problem;” other women will see that and feel less like speaking out will end well for them. Again, the analogy in which a black person accuses a person you like and respect of racism, and you deride them for fraudulently “playing the race card,” feels pretty similar to me. In my experience, white people will acknowledge that racism exists, and might even be common, but they’re deeply skeptical of any particular accusation of it, and never go much further than shrug their shoulders like “yeah, what can you do?” But any possibility of a white person being falsely accused of racism? An outrage! Injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere! They will not rest until the culprits are found and discredited! Please understand, my goal isn’t to deride you, and I don’t think your a misogynist or anything. I just think there are better ways to talk about stuff like this. Isn’t that worth striving for?
The things you say about white people I think probably are many times true, I can agree with you there.
In the case of Warren I think what is most important is the intent of her statement... and the context... Accusing Sanders who has a public record for like 30 some years of doing things in opposition of her accusation... does 30 years of being an outstanding person mean nothing in an instant if someone says, "He's a sexist."?
Her intent was political character assassination, full stop... and she was in it with CNN.
In situations like this, do you think this is something that actually warrants looking into, and people doing anything about?
If so what should be done?
In your post it seems mostly like you are directly addressing the way in which other people are talking about this issue, which I don't mean to take the attention from... but here I think the real blame should be placed on the accuser, who's motivation has nothing to do with righting sexism... she was purely using it as political leverage based on the shitty advice of an advisor to gain political advantage.
Otherwise it was a private conversation she could have had with Sanders at anytime, "Hey Bernie, what did you mean by that statement?" ... "The one I'm bringing up 2-3 years later because all of a sudden it feels really important to me, now that we are in this race together."
To me, the accuser in this case is doing more than just crying wolf, they are leveraging the issue of sexism and in doing so, hurt the cause more than anyone talking bout it after the fact.
People should be upset about this, and outraged... it's outrageous.
If people want any issue to be taken seriously don't you think the accusations made should reflect the same degree of seriousness in how people want it addressed?
|
Warren's attack on Bernie felt very Jussie Smollett-ish. Sure, there's sexism out there, but you're doing nobody any favors by faking it there in that manner.
|
To me it's a matter of... If Bernie messed up and said something awful about Warren, or put his foot in his mouth about women, intentional or not, would we be holding a similar grudge? Or would there be some attempt to downplay it and get on supporting Bernie? I'm extremely uncomfortable with this waiting for Warren to play into my confirmation bias thing, and it has a whiff of the very misogyny she's being ridiculed for bringing up in the first place. There's her making a gaffe in context, and having an appropriate reaction, and then there's making her point for her by overreacting. Let's not.
|
I personally see it as a signal of strategic inadequacy in a vein somewhat similar to her prior Okie idpol issues, but agree that it needn't be harped on or set forth like some kind of self-satisfying trap. She messed up, did a meh job of addressing the mistake, and we all move on. Bernie walked that path and I see no reason not to follow his lead on it.
|
Northern Ireland25655 Posts
On February 25 2020 13:01 Mohdoo wrote:
Final delegate counts
Sanders 24
Biden 9
Buttigieg 3
Warren's campaign is over. Bets if she blames sexism in her speech?
My bet is she’ll be gracious in the immediate aftermath of withdrawing if/when she does, but it’ll come up in subsequent interviews.
Sexism is obviously still a factor in such matters, although it’s a bit nebulous to figure out exactly how it is empirically.
I’d consider a woman is probably running with some stat debuffs. Whether they’re crippling enough to preclude one getting into the White House I don’t think so, but they’d need to be a great candidate.
Aside from the Bernie controversy, her recent ‘all the men have super PACs and the women don’t’ was even more tactically baffling. She not only sort of sidestepped the whole Bernie funding model, equally it was only last cycle and I haven’t checked but I’m pretty sure Clinton had one or two of those behind her?
There seems to me a stark difference in Senator Warren and Running Warren, sure there’s more scrutiny in the latter but I don’t recall her saying much that really baffled me in the past.
Perhaps it’s bad advice from staffers or something, but poor judgement nonetheless. Kind of smacks of the Clinton campaign management all over again. Must be the best gig in the world that one where you can lose an election to Donald bloody Trump but you’re rehired immediately for your ‘expertise’
|
Not to belabor the point, but when there's Buttigieg who is unpopular, imo out of touch, and is all but confirmed to try to cheat a handful of primaries, and then you have Biden, also out of touch, and so centrist we'd go nowhere fast, and then you have Bloomberg, a pseudo-Republican who's trying to literally buy an election, and the one we're upset about is the woman who maybe messed up a little bit in a debate, I'm a touch skeptical. I still prefer Warren to all 3 of those men, and I don't think she merits getting shit on like that. I've said it before, Warren's supporters are the most likely to become Bernie supporters if he nabs the nomination, so I think it's gratuitously foolish to antagonize her and her supporters like this.
|
On February 25 2020 23:13 NewSunshine wrote:
Not to belabor the point, but when there's Buttigieg who is unpopular, imo out of touch, and is all but confirmed to try to cheat a handful of primaries, and then you have Biden, also out of touch, and so centrist we'd go nowhere fast, and then you have Bloomberg, a pseudo-Republican who's trying to literally buy an election, and the one we're upset about is the woman who maybe messed up a little bit in a debate, I'm a touch skeptical. I still prefer Warren to all 3 of those men, and I don't think she merits getting shit on like that. I've said it before, Warren's supporters are the most likely to become Bernie supporters if he nabs the nomination, so I think it's gratuitously foolish to antagonize her and her supporters like this.
What else would they do, vote for Trump? Just give up on voting altogether because some Bernie supporters were rude to them?
I think it's unnecessary, but ultimately only upsets them before they vote blue no matter who anyway.
|
On February 25 2020 23:24 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 23:13 NewSunshine wrote:
Not to belabor the point, but when there's Buttigieg who is unpopular, imo out of touch, and is all but confirmed to try to cheat a handful of primaries, and then you have Biden, also out of touch, and so centrist we'd go nowhere fast, and then you have Bloomberg, a pseudo-Republican who's trying to literally buy an election, and the one we're upset about is the woman who maybe messed up a little bit in a debate, I'm a touch skeptical. I still prefer Warren to all 3 of those men, and I don't think she merits getting shit on like that. I've said it before, Warren's supporters are the most likely to become Bernie supporters if he nabs the nomination, so I think it's gratuitously foolish to antagonize her and her supporters like this. What else would they do, vote for Trump? Just give up on voting altogether because some Bernie supporters were rude to them? I think it's unnecessary, but ultimately only upsets them before they vote blue no matter who anyway.
Some would. There were people who chose not to vote or to vote for Trump, because it was Hillary. I think it's a valid point. There's no gains to be made being unnecessarily shitty to potential allies, even less so with potential enemies. Vote Blue no matter who is going to be necessary imo, but people don't always work like that.
|
On February 25 2020 15:10 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 15:04 Mohdoo wrote:On February 25 2020 14:50 ChristianS wrote:On February 25 2020 14:16 Mohdoo wrote:On February 25 2020 13:37 Nakajin wrote:On February 25 2020 13:01 Mohdoo wrote:
Final delegate counts
Sanders 24
Biden 9
Buttigieg 3
Warren's campaign is over. Bets if she blames sexism in her speech? Well she wouldn't be entirely wrong in the grand scheme of things. A greater than 0 contribution, but the defining reason people backed Sanders over her as the voice of progressives? No, but don’t you get how people rolling their eyes every time a woman opens her mouth and saying “I bet she’s gonna talk about sexism again” kinda sucks? Not unlike mocking a black person for “playing the race card,” it legitimizes discrimination and delegitimizes calling it out. Maybe there’s a more nuanced way to talk about Warren and sexism? She recently tried to call Bernie a sexist. It's not out of nowhere. Sort of, I remember. But even if I grant that she maliciously fabricated that story herself as a cynical attempt to take down Bernie (not my read of that situation, but it doesn’t matter much by now so whatever), we’re still preemptively dismissing what the woman says because we disagreed with one time she tried to call out discrimination so now she’s “lost her privileges” or something. Still kinda feels like the race card thing to me, ya know?
She tried to accuse Bernie of being a sexist (which is obviously idiotic), then she said “The only people on this stage who have won every single election that they’ve been in are women." So in other words she tried to take points by making a big thing of her own gender while implicitly attacking the other candidates because of their gender. Now imagine the consequences of a man doing that.
|
On February 25 2020 23:31 Elroi wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 15:10 ChristianS wrote:On February 25 2020 15:04 Mohdoo wrote:On February 25 2020 14:50 ChristianS wrote:On February 25 2020 14:16 Mohdoo wrote:On February 25 2020 13:37 Nakajin wrote:On February 25 2020 13:01 Mohdoo wrote:
Final delegate counts
Sanders 24
Biden 9
Buttigieg 3
Warren's campaign is over. Bets if she blames sexism in her speech? Well she wouldn't be entirely wrong in the grand scheme of things. A greater than 0 contribution, but the defining reason people backed Sanders over her as the voice of progressives? No, but don’t you get how people rolling their eyes every time a woman opens her mouth and saying “I bet she’s gonna talk about sexism again” kinda sucks? Not unlike mocking a black person for “playing the race card,” it legitimizes discrimination and delegitimizes calling it out. Maybe there’s a more nuanced way to talk about Warren and sexism? She recently tried to call Bernie a sexist. It's not out of nowhere. Sort of, I remember. But even if I grant that she maliciously fabricated that story herself as a cynical attempt to take down Bernie (not my read of that situation, but it doesn’t matter much by now so whatever), we’re still preemptively dismissing what the woman says because we disagreed with one time she tried to call out discrimination so now she’s “lost her privileges” or something. Still kinda feels like the race card thing to me, ya know? She tried to accuse Bernie of being a sexist (which is obviously idiotic), then she said “The only people on this stage who have won every single election that they’ve been in are women." So in other words she tried to take points by making a big thing of her own gender while implicitly attacking the other candidates because of their gender. Now imagine the consequences of a man doing that.
Men don't have a history of being suppressed and downplayed by women. I think this reaction to Warren is being massively overblown.
|
On February 25 2020 23:29 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 23:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 25 2020 23:13 NewSunshine wrote:
Not to belabor the point, but when there's Buttigieg who is unpopular, imo out of touch, and is all but confirmed to try to cheat a handful of primaries, and then you have Biden, also out of touch, and so centrist we'd go nowhere fast, and then you have Bloomberg, a pseudo-Republican who's trying to literally buy an election, and the one we're upset about is the woman who maybe messed up a little bit in a debate, I'm a touch skeptical. I still prefer Warren to all 3 of those men, and I don't think she merits getting shit on like that. I've said it before, Warren's supporters are the most likely to become Bernie supporters if he nabs the nomination, so I think it's gratuitously foolish to antagonize her and her supporters like this. What else would they do, vote for Trump? Just give up on voting altogether because some Bernie supporters were rude to them? I think it's unnecessary, but ultimately only upsets them before they vote blue no matter who anyway. Some would. There were people who chose not to vote or to vote for Trump, because it was Hillary. I think it's a valid point. There's no gains to be made being unnecessarily shitty to potential allies, even less so with potential enemies. Vote Blue no matter who is going to be necessary imo, but people don't always work like that.
How many people supporting Warren do you think care more about their feelings being hurt by Bernie supporters than getting Trump out of office?
|
On February 25 2020 23:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 23:29 NewSunshine wrote:On February 25 2020 23:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 25 2020 23:13 NewSunshine wrote:
Not to belabor the point, but when there's Buttigieg who is unpopular, imo out of touch, and is all but confirmed to try to cheat a handful of primaries, and then you have Biden, also out of touch, and so centrist we'd go nowhere fast, and then you have Bloomberg, a pseudo-Republican who's trying to literally buy an election, and the one we're upset about is the woman who maybe messed up a little bit in a debate, I'm a touch skeptical. I still prefer Warren to all 3 of those men, and I don't think she merits getting shit on like that. I've said it before, Warren's supporters are the most likely to become Bernie supporters if he nabs the nomination, so I think it's gratuitously foolish to antagonize her and her supporters like this. What else would they do, vote for Trump? Just give up on voting altogether because some Bernie supporters were rude to them? I think it's unnecessary, but ultimately only upsets them before they vote blue no matter who anyway. Some would. There were people who chose not to vote or to vote for Trump, because it was Hillary. I think it's a valid point. There's no gains to be made being unnecessarily shitty to potential allies, even less so with potential enemies. Vote Blue no matter who is going to be necessary imo, but people don't always work like that. How many people supporting Warren do you think care more about their feelings being hurt by Bernie supporters than getting Trump out of office?
Probably not many. But the point is valid as long as the number is higher than 0. People don't fit into a formula like that.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Honestly, each of these campaigns will, if they get heated enough, have at least a few jabs that are going to be regretted after the fact. Warren took a pretty shitty gamble at salvaging her failing campaign that backfired. I didn't like it, but at this point I'd say we're well past that (and dirtier things have been pulled by other candidates, which does kind of soften the blow here).
My personal beef is that she isn't dropping out yet. Her campaign is finished; that much is clear. Three bad results in a row aren't going to be reversed by some decent debate performance. Now is the time to drop out, and if she really believes the things she notionally says she does (rather than just touting them for opportunistic progressive cred), to endorse Bernie Sanders. I am definitely somewhat miffed that she in particular seems to be stubbornly refusing to acknowledge that dead end.
I definitely dislike Bloomer and Butt as candidates and as individuals more than I do Warren, but at this point Warren feels like "the one that should know better." If she wants to be one of the four John Kasichs of this election, rather than the one that gives Bernie the endorsement that will cleanly put him over the finish line, then that will certainly diminish her standing as a progressive who should be given the level of respect some folks here say she should have.
|
Northern Ireland25655 Posts
On February 25 2020 23:13 NewSunshine wrote:
Not to belabor the point, but when there's Buttigieg who is unpopular, imo out of touch, and is all but confirmed to try to cheat a handful of primaries, and then you have Biden, also out of touch, and so centrist we'd go nowhere fast, and then you have Bloomberg, a pseudo-Republican who's trying to literally buy an election, and the one we're upset about is the woman who maybe messed up a little bit in a debate, I'm a touch skeptical. I still prefer Warren to all 3 of those men, and I don't think she merits getting shit on like that. I've said it before, Warren's supporters are the most likely to become Bernie supporters if he nabs the nomination, so I think it's gratuitously foolish to antagonize her and her supporters like this.
I’m not upset in a vacuum, I’m responding to this particular conversational thread. I still greatly prefer Warren myself.
She didn’t mess up on the debate stage this instance, she made a calculated decision and went with it. She refused to comment in the lead up to the debate to throw in that talking point that was soft balled to her by an (awful) moderator and was very much intended to negatively impact Bernie.
Solidarity works both ways. I don’t think she should be shit on as a candidate overall but in this specific instance I think she behaved rather poorly, either morally or tactically depending on where one thinks the truth lies on this unrecorded discussion the two had.
|
|
|
On February 25 2020 23:37 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 23:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 25 2020 23:29 NewSunshine wrote:On February 25 2020 23:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 25 2020 23:13 NewSunshine wrote:
Not to belabor the point, but when there's Buttigieg who is unpopular, imo out of touch, and is all but confirmed to try to cheat a handful of primaries, and then you have Biden, also out of touch, and so centrist we'd go nowhere fast, and then you have Bloomberg, a pseudo-Republican who's trying to literally buy an election, and the one we're upset about is the woman who maybe messed up a little bit in a debate, I'm a touch skeptical. I still prefer Warren to all 3 of those men, and I don't think she merits getting shit on like that. I've said it before, Warren's supporters are the most likely to become Bernie supporters if he nabs the nomination, so I think it's gratuitously foolish to antagonize her and her supporters like this. What else would they do, vote for Trump? Just give up on voting altogether because some Bernie supporters were rude to them? I think it's unnecessary, but ultimately only upsets them before they vote blue no matter who anyway. Some would. There were people who chose not to vote or to vote for Trump, because it was Hillary. I think it's a valid point. There's no gains to be made being unnecessarily shitty to potential allies, even less so with potential enemies. Vote Blue no matter who is going to be necessary imo, but people don't always work like that. How many people supporting Warren do you think care more about their feelings being hurt by Bernie supporters than getting Trump out of office? Probably not many. But the point is valid as long as the number is higher than 0. People don't fit into a formula like that.
What if this sort of white knighting for Warren is more damaging electorally than the mild sexism?
|
On February 25 2020 23:41 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 23:13 NewSunshine wrote:
Not to belabor the point, but when there's Buttigieg who is unpopular, imo out of touch, and is all but confirmed to try to cheat a handful of primaries, and then you have Biden, also out of touch, and so centrist we'd go nowhere fast, and then you have Bloomberg, a pseudo-Republican who's trying to literally buy an election, and the one we're upset about is the woman who maybe messed up a little bit in a debate, I'm a touch skeptical. I still prefer Warren to all 3 of those men, and I don't think she merits getting shit on like that. I've said it before, Warren's supporters are the most likely to become Bernie supporters if he nabs the nomination, so I think it's gratuitously foolish to antagonize her and her supporters like this. I’m not upset in a vacuum, I’m responding to this particular conversational thread. I still greatly prefer Warren myself. She didn’t mess up on the debate stage this instance, she made a calculated decision and went with it. She refused to comment in the lead up to the debate to throw in that talking point that was soft balled to her by an (awful) moderator and was very much intended to negatively impact Bernie. Solidarity works both ways. I don’t think she should be shit on as a candidate overall but in this specific instance I think she behaved rather poorly, either morally or tactically depending on where one thinks the truth lies on this unrecorded discussion the two had.
I think it can be a slip-up on her part whether it was in the moment or in preparation, so I don't disagree with you, but I think the lasting implications of any mistake on her part are being blown out of proportion. I also believe any extent to which "she should know better and drop out" applies is enjoyed equally or more so by the more centrist candidates. I think it's hostile to consistently say she should bend the knee and make way for Bernie to assume his rightful place, when one of the main reasons Bernie has legitimacy now is because of folks like Warren echoing his feelings on many issues. She already has paved the way for someone like Bernie to win.
On February 25 2020 23:47 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 23:37 NewSunshine wrote:On February 25 2020 23:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 25 2020 23:29 NewSunshine wrote:On February 25 2020 23:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 25 2020 23:13 NewSunshine wrote:
Not to belabor the point, but when there's Buttigieg who is unpopular, imo out of touch, and is all but confirmed to try to cheat a handful of primaries, and then you have Biden, also out of touch, and so centrist we'd go nowhere fast, and then you have Bloomberg, a pseudo-Republican who's trying to literally buy an election, and the one we're upset about is the woman who maybe messed up a little bit in a debate, I'm a touch skeptical. I still prefer Warren to all 3 of those men, and I don't think she merits getting shit on like that. I've said it before, Warren's supporters are the most likely to become Bernie supporters if he nabs the nomination, so I think it's gratuitously foolish to antagonize her and her supporters like this. What else would they do, vote for Trump? Just give up on voting altogether because some Bernie supporters were rude to them? I think it's unnecessary, but ultimately only upsets them before they vote blue no matter who anyway. Some would. There were people who chose not to vote or to vote for Trump, because it was Hillary. I think it's a valid point. There's no gains to be made being unnecessarily shitty to potential allies, even less so with potential enemies. Vote Blue no matter who is going to be necessary imo, but people don't always work like that. How many people supporting Warren do you think care more about their feelings being hurt by Bernie supporters than getting Trump out of office? Probably not many. But the point is valid as long as the number is higher than 0. People don't fit into a formula like that. What if this sort of white knighting for Warren is more damaging electorally than the mild sexism?
I respect you too much to respond to this lazy mischaracterization of my position.
|
On February 25 2020 23:35 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2020 23:31 Elroi wrote:On February 25 2020 15:10 ChristianS wrote:On February 25 2020 15:04 Mohdoo wrote:On February 25 2020 14:50 ChristianS wrote:On February 25 2020 14:16 Mohdoo wrote:On February 25 2020 13:37 Nakajin wrote:On February 25 2020 13:01 Mohdoo wrote:
Final delegate counts
Sanders 24
Biden 9
Buttigieg 3
Warren's campaign is over. Bets if she blames sexism in her speech? Well she wouldn't be entirely wrong in the grand scheme of things. A greater than 0 contribution, but the defining reason people backed Sanders over her as the voice of progressives? No, but don’t you get how people rolling their eyes every time a woman opens her mouth and saying “I bet she’s gonna talk about sexism again” kinda sucks? Not unlike mocking a black person for “playing the race card,” it legitimizes discrimination and delegitimizes calling it out. Maybe there’s a more nuanced way to talk about Warren and sexism? She recently tried to call Bernie a sexist. It's not out of nowhere. Sort of, I remember. But even if I grant that she maliciously fabricated that story herself as a cynical attempt to take down Bernie (not my read of that situation, but it doesn’t matter much by now so whatever), we’re still preemptively dismissing what the woman says because we disagreed with one time she tried to call out discrimination so now she’s “lost her privileges” or something. Still kinda feels like the race card thing to me, ya know? She tried to accuse Bernie of being a sexist (which is obviously idiotic), then she said “The only people on this stage who have won every single election that they’ve been in are women." So in other words she tried to take points by making a big thing of her own gender while implicitly attacking the other candidates because of their gender. Now imagine the consequences of a man doing that. Men don't have a history of being suppressed and downplayed by women. I think this reaction to Warren is being massively overblown.
I'd give you right on the history of sexism (which is as horrible as it is long), but it seems to me that what Warren tried to do was to "suppress and downplay" the other candidates because of their gender. That is dirty and stupid and no man would have gotten away with it in the same way that Warren has. She might have lost a lot of support but if the roles were reversed and a man said that, his career would be over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
