|
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 April 09 2020 04:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 03:49 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 03:37 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 02:22 Zambrah wrote:
Maybe if Trump wins the DNC will stop shoving their shit sandwich centrist crown prince(ss) at us.
Ha, nah, they'll keep doing it, anyone want to start a really early pool on who they force through as the nominee for 2024? Think Booker has a shot? Think they'll aim for a Buttigieg? Or will they try and get the woman angle going with Klobuchar again? What do you mean by "shoving" and "force"? With the possible exception of the Iowa caucus being super shady (which didn't help Biden anyway), Biden pretty much won this primary fair and square. Superdelegates didn't play a role in it, like can be argued in the 2016 primary. I'm a progressive and a Bernie supporter, but my team lost this time around. Definitively. My team had fewer supporters and fewer voters. I won't argue that more people voted for Biden, but I think its really clear that the DNC does not want progressive candidates and will do what they can (like all of the moderates dropping out to support Biden despite them having no reason to do so other than to consolidate around a moderate, not like Buttigieg's campaign was hopeless) to prevent progressives from holding any sway over the party. I'm not alleging intentional foul play, to be clear. Understood. I agree with you that the DNC does not want progressive candidates, although I do think that the writing was on the wall pretty early (before Super Tuesday) for every other moderate candidate becoming irrelevant in the Democratic primary. While Buttigieg performed well in Iowa and NH, it had been already established that he had virtually no non-white support; it was all but predestined that this was going to be Sanders vs. Biden, and that if the moderates wanted one of their own to win, the best strategy was to not pull from Biden's voter base. It's frustrating, but I'm not particularly surprised that the DNC keeps fielding moderates because 1. The DNC is mostly moderate and 2. The Democratic party is mostly moderate. I'd argue the Democrats are mostly conservative, but yes, I think this was always going to be Bernie vs. WhoeverTheDNCDecided EDIT: I also want to offhandedly bitch that a state like SOUTH CAROLINA that will definitely vote Republican is weighed so highly, lol. America's system just kind of sucks as a whole though, I guess. Oh, definitely... American moderates are really conservatives in most other first-world countries afaik. And I don't know if there's a better setup for the primary than that. Any ideas?
We should be honest with ourselves, examine which states have swung between red and blue within the last twenty years, and exclude any states that haven't.
|
On April 09 2020 03:49 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 03:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 03:37 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 02:22 Zambrah wrote:
Maybe if Trump wins the DNC will stop shoving their shit sandwich centrist crown prince(ss) at us.
Ha, nah, they'll keep doing it, anyone want to start a really early pool on who they force through as the nominee for 2024? Think Booker has a shot? Think they'll aim for a Buttigieg? Or will they try and get the woman angle going with Klobuchar again? What do you mean by "shoving" and "force"? With the possible exception of the Iowa caucus being super shady (which didn't help Biden anyway), Biden pretty much won this primary fair and square. Superdelegates didn't play a role in it, like can be argued in the 2016 primary. I'm a progressive and a Bernie supporter, but my team lost this time around. Definitively. My team had fewer supporters and fewer voters. I won't argue that more people voted for Biden, but I think its really clear that the DNC does not want progressive candidates and will do what they can (like all of the moderates dropping out to support Biden despite them having no reason to do so other than to consolidate around a moderate, not like Buttigieg's campaign was hopeless) to prevent progressives from holding any sway over the party. I'm not alleging intentional foul play, to be clear. Understood. I agree with you that the DNC does not want progressive candidates, although I do think that the writing was on the wall pretty early (before Super Tuesday) for every other moderate candidate becoming irrelevant in the Democratic primary. While Buttigieg performed well in Iowa and NH, it had been already established that he had virtually no non-white support; it was all but predestined that this was going to be Sanders vs. Biden, and that if the moderates wanted one of their own to win, the best strategy was to not pull from Biden's voter base. It's frustrating, but I'm not particularly surprised that the DNC keeps fielding moderates because 1. The DNC is mostly moderate and 2. The Democratic party is mostly moderate. I'd argue the Democrats are mostly conservative, but yes, I think this was always going to be Bernie vs. WhoeverTheDNCDecided EDIT: I also want to offhandedly bitch that a state like SOUTH CAROLINA that will definitely vote Republican is weighed so highly, lol. America's system just kind of sucks as a whole though, I guess. I imagine there would be a lot of complaints if you only held a primary in the 13? swing states because they are the only states that matter.
And I'll echo the sentiment that its easy to blame the DNC for shoving 'their' candidate but don't lose sight of the fact that Bernie lost.
No one wants to hear their political view is a minority especially if they strongly believe, rightfully, for it to be the best way forward but the numbers do look that way.
|
California can complain, but lets be real, their votes dont matter. Californians dont matter when it comes to deciding who is president because theyre so blue. Same for Texas.
Maybe we'd care about the root problem of our votes not mattering if it were made plainer to see.
|
On April 09 2020 04:08 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 04:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 03:49 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 03:37 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 02:22 Zambrah wrote:
Maybe if Trump wins the DNC will stop shoving their shit sandwich centrist crown prince(ss) at us.
Ha, nah, they'll keep doing it, anyone want to start a really early pool on who they force through as the nominee for 2024? Think Booker has a shot? Think they'll aim for a Buttigieg? Or will they try and get the woman angle going with Klobuchar again? What do you mean by "shoving" and "force"? With the possible exception of the Iowa caucus being super shady (which didn't help Biden anyway), Biden pretty much won this primary fair and square. Superdelegates didn't play a role in it, like can be argued in the 2016 primary. I'm a progressive and a Bernie supporter, but my team lost this time around. Definitively. My team had fewer supporters and fewer voters. I won't argue that more people voted for Biden, but I think its really clear that the DNC does not want progressive candidates and will do what they can (like all of the moderates dropping out to support Biden despite them having no reason to do so other than to consolidate around a moderate, not like Buttigieg's campaign was hopeless) to prevent progressives from holding any sway over the party. I'm not alleging intentional foul play, to be clear. Understood. I agree with you that the DNC does not want progressive candidates, although I do think that the writing was on the wall pretty early (before Super Tuesday) for every other moderate candidate becoming irrelevant in the Democratic primary. While Buttigieg performed well in Iowa and NH, it had been already established that he had virtually no non-white support; it was all but predestined that this was going to be Sanders vs. Biden, and that if the moderates wanted one of their own to win, the best strategy was to not pull from Biden's voter base. It's frustrating, but I'm not particularly surprised that the DNC keeps fielding moderates because 1. The DNC is mostly moderate and 2. The Democratic party is mostly moderate. I'd argue the Democrats are mostly conservative, but yes, I think this was always going to be Bernie vs. WhoeverTheDNCDecided EDIT: I also want to offhandedly bitch that a state like SOUTH CAROLINA that will definitely vote Republican is weighed so highly, lol. America's system just kind of sucks as a whole though, I guess. Oh, definitely... American moderates are really conservatives in most other first-world countries afaik. And I don't know if there's a better setup for the primary than that. Any ideas? We should be honest with ourselves, examine which states have swung between red and blue within the last twenty years, and exclude any states that haven't.
You mean remove entire states from voting in the primary, if they've traditionally voted for the opposing party in the general election? No more Texas in the Democratic primary, no more California in the Republican primary, etc.? Doesn't that just mean that half the country will be disenfranchised from voting twice - no primary at all and their general election vote probably won't matter either?
|
On April 09 2020 04:10 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 03:49 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 03:37 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 02:22 Zambrah wrote:
Maybe if Trump wins the DNC will stop shoving their shit sandwich centrist crown prince(ss) at us.
Ha, nah, they'll keep doing it, anyone want to start a really early pool on who they force through as the nominee for 2024? Think Booker has a shot? Think they'll aim for a Buttigieg? Or will they try and get the woman angle going with Klobuchar again? What do you mean by "shoving" and "force"? With the possible exception of the Iowa caucus being super shady (which didn't help Biden anyway), Biden pretty much won this primary fair and square. Superdelegates didn't play a role in it, like can be argued in the 2016 primary. I'm a progressive and a Bernie supporter, but my team lost this time around. Definitively. My team had fewer supporters and fewer voters. I won't argue that more people voted for Biden, but I think its really clear that the DNC does not want progressive candidates and will do what they can (like all of the moderates dropping out to support Biden despite them having no reason to do so other than to consolidate around a moderate, not like Buttigieg's campaign was hopeless) to prevent progressives from holding any sway over the party. I'm not alleging intentional foul play, to be clear. Understood. I agree with you that the DNC does not want progressive candidates, although I do think that the writing was on the wall pretty early (before Super Tuesday) for every other moderate candidate becoming irrelevant in the Democratic primary. While Buttigieg performed well in Iowa and NH, it had been already established that he had virtually no non-white support; it was all but predestined that this was going to be Sanders vs. Biden, and that if the moderates wanted one of their own to win, the best strategy was to not pull from Biden's voter base. It's frustrating, but I'm not particularly surprised that the DNC keeps fielding moderates because 1. The DNC is mostly moderate and 2. The Democratic party is mostly moderate. I'd argue the Democrats are mostly conservative, but yes, I think this was always going to be Bernie vs. WhoeverTheDNCDecided EDIT: I also want to offhandedly bitch that a state like SOUTH CAROLINA that will definitely vote Republican is weighed so highly, lol. America's system just kind of sucks as a whole though, I guess. I imagine there would be a lot of complaints if you only held a primary in the 13? swing states because they are the only states that matter. And I'll echo the sentiment that its easy to blame the DNC for shoving 'their' candidate but don't lose sight of the fact that Bernie lost. No one wants to hear their political view is a minority especially if they strongly believe, rightfully, for it to be the best way forward but the numbers do look that way.
We won all the non-old demographics and our ideas garnered over 50% support in all states as they kept voting against a way for those ideas to be realized. If it wasn't for climate change, we would have been fine.
|
On April 09 2020 04:14 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 04:10 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2020 03:49 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 03:37 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 02:22 Zambrah wrote:
Maybe if Trump wins the DNC will stop shoving their shit sandwich centrist crown prince(ss) at us.
Ha, nah, they'll keep doing it, anyone want to start a really early pool on who they force through as the nominee for 2024? Think Booker has a shot? Think they'll aim for a Buttigieg? Or will they try and get the woman angle going with Klobuchar again? What do you mean by "shoving" and "force"? With the possible exception of the Iowa caucus being super shady (which didn't help Biden anyway), Biden pretty much won this primary fair and square. Superdelegates didn't play a role in it, like can be argued in the 2016 primary. I'm a progressive and a Bernie supporter, but my team lost this time around. Definitively. My team had fewer supporters and fewer voters. I won't argue that more people voted for Biden, but I think its really clear that the DNC does not want progressive candidates and will do what they can (like all of the moderates dropping out to support Biden despite them having no reason to do so other than to consolidate around a moderate, not like Buttigieg's campaign was hopeless) to prevent progressives from holding any sway over the party. I'm not alleging intentional foul play, to be clear. Understood. I agree with you that the DNC does not want progressive candidates, although I do think that the writing was on the wall pretty early (before Super Tuesday) for every other moderate candidate becoming irrelevant in the Democratic primary. While Buttigieg performed well in Iowa and NH, it had been already established that he had virtually no non-white support; it was all but predestined that this was going to be Sanders vs. Biden, and that if the moderates wanted one of their own to win, the best strategy was to not pull from Biden's voter base. It's frustrating, but I'm not particularly surprised that the DNC keeps fielding moderates because 1. The DNC is mostly moderate and 2. The Democratic party is mostly moderate. I'd argue the Democrats are mostly conservative, but yes, I think this was always going to be Bernie vs. WhoeverTheDNCDecided EDIT: I also want to offhandedly bitch that a state like SOUTH CAROLINA that will definitely vote Republican is weighed so highly, lol. America's system just kind of sucks as a whole though, I guess. I imagine there would be a lot of complaints if you only held a primary in the 13? swing states because they are the only states that matter. And I'll echo the sentiment that its easy to blame the DNC for shoving 'their' candidate but don't lose sight of the fact that Bernie lost. No one wants to hear their political view is a minority especially if they strongly believe, rightfully, for it to be the best way forward but the numbers do look that way. We won all the non-old demographics and our ideas garnered over 50% support in all states as they kept voting against a way for those ideas to be realized. If it wasn't for climate change, we would have been fine.
Sanders won a bunch of demographics. Biden also won a bunch of demographics. It turns out that more people voted for Biden though. Obviously, if we prevent some states from voting and ignore the votes of some demographics, then yes, Sanders would have won. But that's moving the goalposts into a pretty irresponsible and arbitrary area just to rig the election for the candidate we want. It certainly doesn't hold up to the veil of ignorance.
|
On April 09 2020 04:10 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 03:49 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 03:37 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 02:22 Zambrah wrote:
Maybe if Trump wins the DNC will stop shoving their shit sandwich centrist crown prince(ss) at us.
Ha, nah, they'll keep doing it, anyone want to start a really early pool on who they force through as the nominee for 2024? Think Booker has a shot? Think they'll aim for a Buttigieg? Or will they try and get the woman angle going with Klobuchar again? What do you mean by "shoving" and "force"? With the possible exception of the Iowa caucus being super shady (which didn't help Biden anyway), Biden pretty much won this primary fair and square. Superdelegates didn't play a role in it, like can be argued in the 2016 primary. I'm a progressive and a Bernie supporter, but my team lost this time around. Definitively. My team had fewer supporters and fewer voters. I won't argue that more people voted for Biden, but I think its really clear that the DNC does not want progressive candidates and will do what they can (like all of the moderates dropping out to support Biden despite them having no reason to do so other than to consolidate around a moderate, not like Buttigieg's campaign was hopeless) to prevent progressives from holding any sway over the party. I'm not alleging intentional foul play, to be clear. Understood. I agree with you that the DNC does not want progressive candidates, although I do think that the writing was on the wall pretty early (before Super Tuesday) for every other moderate candidate becoming irrelevant in the Democratic primary. While Buttigieg performed well in Iowa and NH, it had been already established that he had virtually no non-white support; it was all but predestined that this was going to be Sanders vs. Biden, and that if the moderates wanted one of their own to win, the best strategy was to not pull from Biden's voter base. It's frustrating, but I'm not particularly surprised that the DNC keeps fielding moderates because 1. The DNC is mostly moderate and 2. The Democratic party is mostly moderate. I'd argue the Democrats are mostly conservative, but yes, I think this was always going to be Bernie vs. WhoeverTheDNCDecided EDIT: I also want to offhandedly bitch that a state like SOUTH CAROLINA that will definitely vote Republican is weighed so highly, lol. America's system just kind of sucks as a whole though, I guess. I imagine there would be a lot of complaints if you only held a primary in the 13? swing states because they are the only states that matter. And I'll echo the sentiment that its easy to blame the DNC for shoving 'their' candidate but don't lose sight of the fact that Bernie lost. No one wants to hear their political view is a minority especially if they strongly believe, rightfully, for it to be the best way forward but the numbers do look that way.
For me I'm less concerned about how popular my politics are than how necessary. MLK was assassinated an unpopular but necessary figure advocating unpopular but necessary change.
+ Show Spoiler +No I'm not comparing myself to MLK for those who probably jumped to that. I'm saying that "it's easy to blame Democrats, but your position isn't popular enough" isn't a great argument and doesn't absolve one from its moral content (or lack thereof).
EDIT: If I were drawing a parallel about the politics specifically it would be the necessity of his poor people's campaign and the necessity of one now as well as confronting climate change with similar vigor
|
I'm sorry but I can't vote for Biden. The credible allegations against him and the racist stances/comments of his from the past, and his obvious cognitive decline are already too much. On top of that, none of his policies address the real problems this country and this world have like income inequality, climate change, student loan debt, and healthcare. I will not vote to watch the world burn blue instead of red. I'll vote in the other elections that I can vote in, but Biden simply will not bring forth the change this country needs and I will not cast a "compromise" vote so I can watch more people die.
|
On April 09 2020 04:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 04:14 Nebuchad wrote:On April 09 2020 04:10 Gorsameth wrote:On April 09 2020 03:49 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 03:37 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 02:22 Zambrah wrote:
Maybe if Trump wins the DNC will stop shoving their shit sandwich centrist crown prince(ss) at us.
Ha, nah, they'll keep doing it, anyone want to start a really early pool on who they force through as the nominee for 2024? Think Booker has a shot? Think they'll aim for a Buttigieg? Or will they try and get the woman angle going with Klobuchar again? What do you mean by "shoving" and "force"? With the possible exception of the Iowa caucus being super shady (which didn't help Biden anyway), Biden pretty much won this primary fair and square. Superdelegates didn't play a role in it, like can be argued in the 2016 primary. I'm a progressive and a Bernie supporter, but my team lost this time around. Definitively. My team had fewer supporters and fewer voters. I won't argue that more people voted for Biden, but I think its really clear that the DNC does not want progressive candidates and will do what they can (like all of the moderates dropping out to support Biden despite them having no reason to do so other than to consolidate around a moderate, not like Buttigieg's campaign was hopeless) to prevent progressives from holding any sway over the party. I'm not alleging intentional foul play, to be clear. Understood. I agree with you that the DNC does not want progressive candidates, although I do think that the writing was on the wall pretty early (before Super Tuesday) for every other moderate candidate becoming irrelevant in the Democratic primary. While Buttigieg performed well in Iowa and NH, it had been already established that he had virtually no non-white support; it was all but predestined that this was going to be Sanders vs. Biden, and that if the moderates wanted one of their own to win, the best strategy was to not pull from Biden's voter base. It's frustrating, but I'm not particularly surprised that the DNC keeps fielding moderates because 1. The DNC is mostly moderate and 2. The Democratic party is mostly moderate. I'd argue the Democrats are mostly conservative, but yes, I think this was always going to be Bernie vs. WhoeverTheDNCDecided EDIT: I also want to offhandedly bitch that a state like SOUTH CAROLINA that will definitely vote Republican is weighed so highly, lol. America's system just kind of sucks as a whole though, I guess. I imagine there would be a lot of complaints if you only held a primary in the 13? swing states because they are the only states that matter. And I'll echo the sentiment that its easy to blame the DNC for shoving 'their' candidate but don't lose sight of the fact that Bernie lost. No one wants to hear their political view is a minority especially if they strongly believe, rightfully, for it to be the best way forward but the numbers do look that way. We won all the non-old demographics and our ideas garnered over 50% support in all states as they kept voting against a way for those ideas to be realized. If it wasn't for climate change, we would have been fine. Sanders won a bunch of demographics. Biden also won a bunch of demographics. It turns out that more people voted for Biden though. Obviously, if we prevent some states from voting and ignore the votes of some demographics, then yes, Sanders would have won. But that's moving the goalposts into a pretty irresponsible and arbitrary area just to rig the election for the candidate we want. It certainly doesn't hold up to the veil of ignorance.
I'm not a child, I don't need this explained to me slowly, thank you though.
Read the post I was answering, it was about how it was hard to accept that people didn't like our ideas. My answer was entirely pertinent in that context.
|
On April 09 2020 04:20 StasisField wrote:
I'm sorry but I can't vote for Biden. The credible allegations against him and the racist stances/comments of his from the past, and his obvious cognitive decline are already too much. On top of that, none of his policies address the real problems this country and this world have like income inequality, climate change, student loan debt, and healthcare. I will not vote to watch the world burn blue instead of red. I'll vote in the other elections that I can vote in, but Biden simply will not bring forth the change this country needs and I will not cast a "compromise" vote so I can watch more people die.
We'll get into this a lot more in October and November, but the next president of the United States will absolutely either be Donald Trump (again) or Joe Biden. It's a dichotomy and one of them will be selected, regardless of whether or not you vote. While there is certainly a legitimate critique about voting in a non-swing state, we still shouldn't be downplaying the importance of voting in this next election. Biden and Trump are not politically equivalent. They're not even close to being politically equivalent.
If you want to abstain from voting in the general election because you're mad that the Democrats are fielding Biden instead of your ideal candidate, then I implore you to consider the following:
1. At least one Supreme Court Justice (RBG, arguably the most progressive SCJ we have) will be almost certainly stepping down (or passing away) over the next 4 years;
2. Slight, gradual progress in our healthcare system is better than continuing to demolish it;
3. Recognizing that climate change exists and that it needs to be dealt with is a better option than denying and ignoring it;
4. Funding science and education are better than defunding them;
5. A whole bunch of other relatively liberal policy positions: https://joebiden.com/joes-vision/
Joe Biden might not be as progressive as you want - he certainly isn't as progressive as I want - but we should still be choosing the lesser of two evils here. At least he's facing in the right direction, whereas Trump would continue to have us regress as a society. When faced with the decision to move either one step forwards or one step backwards, after the option to move five steps forwards has been taken off the table, we shouldn't say they're the same. Even if you think that Biden is zero steps forward, the same idea applies.
|
All that argument does is serve to normalize the horrific violence perpetrated under Obama-Biden and others and force people to only consider the variance between the exacerbation of those violent underlying conditions through a guise of civility, reasonableness, and harm reduction.
It is MLK's white moderate argument personified in Biden's candidacy.
|
On April 09 2020 04:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 04:20 StasisField wrote:
I'm sorry but I can't vote for Biden. The credible allegations against him and the racist stances/comments of his from the past, and his obvious cognitive decline are already too much. On top of that, none of his policies address the real problems this country and this world have like income inequality, climate change, student loan debt, and healthcare. I will not vote to watch the world burn blue instead of red. I'll vote in the other elections that I can vote in, but Biden simply will not bring forth the change this country needs and I will not cast a "compromise" vote so I can watch more people die. We'll get into this a lot more in October and November, but the next president of the United States will absolutely either be Donald Trump (again) or Joe Biden. It's a dichotomy and one of them will be selected, regardless of whether or not you vote. While there is certainly a legitimate critique about voting in a non-swing state, we still shouldn't be downplaying the importance of voting in this next election. Biden and Trump are not politically equivalent. They're not even close to being politically equivalent. If you want to abstain from voting in the general election because you're mad that the Democrats are fielding Biden instead of your ideal candidate, then I implore you to consider the following: 1. At least one Supreme Court Justice (RBG, arguably the most progressive SCJ we have) will be almost certainly stepping down (or passing away) over the next 4 years; 2. Slight, gradual progress in our healthcare system is better than continuing to demolish it; 3. Recognizing that climate change exists and that it needs to be dealt with is a better option than denying and ignoring it; 4. Funding science and education are better than defunding them; 5. A whole bunch of other relatively liberal policy positions: https://joebiden.com/joes-vision/Joe Biden might not be as progressive as you want - he certainly isn't as progressive as I want - but we should still be choosing the lesser of two evils here. At least he's facing in the right direction, whereas Trump would continue to have us regress as a society. When faced with the decision to move either one step forwards or one step backwards, after the option to move five steps forwards has been taken off the table, we shouldn't say they're the same. Even if you think that Biden is zero steps forward, the same idea applies.
Part of why Im not going to vote for Biden is so that if he does lose, maybe we can defeat this "electability" idea. I've heard almost nothing else about why people voted for Biden, despite an utter lack of any policy or really anything. Its always TrumpTrumpTrump and frankly I think its gross. Every election is going to have to tackle this, "BUT THE OTHER GUUUYYYYYY" to justify a shitty fuckin' candidate. Maybe if that doesnt work for them (TWICE, lets count Hillary here) then we might move past this "but the other guy!" as good enough for a candidate.
EDIT: mierin posted my point in a better way.
|
2024: "Vote for this moderate/right democratic candidate...think of the consequences if his Republican opponent is elected!!
2028: "Vote for this moderate/right democratic candidate...think of the consequences if his Republican opponent is elected!!"
...and so on.
Yeah, no.
|
United States24813 Posts
I'm not convinced there will even be an election in 2028 following that logic.
|
On April 09 2020 04:52 micronesia wrote:
I'm not convinced there will even be an election in 2028 following that logic.
If Trump beats Biden, it will then be Don Jr as President, then Ivanka, then Kushner...
If Trump wins these won't actually be "elections" either.
|
United States24813 Posts
To use an extreme example, if nearly 50% of the voting population wants to vote a sith lord into power, what does the rest of the voting population do? The long-term goal should be to figure out why nearly 50% of the voting population wants to vote a sith lord into power, and do something about it. The short-term goal should be to prevent a sith lord from getting into power, such as by getting a jedi into power. Now, not all jedi are created equal, and honestly some of them kind of suck, but people who refuse to vote for the kinda crappy jedi because they aren't satisfied are avoiding taking the only action they can take that prevents the creation of the empire.
|
In your example 75% of the voting population advocates AGAINST the Jedi, and instead would prefer you to vote for Darth Vader, though collectively a lot of them agree that Darth Sidious is worse.
|
On April 09 2020 04:48 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 04:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 04:20 StasisField wrote:
I'm sorry but I can't vote for Biden. The credible allegations against him and the racist stances/comments of his from the past, and his obvious cognitive decline are already too much. On top of that, none of his policies address the real problems this country and this world have like income inequality, climate change, student loan debt, and healthcare. I will not vote to watch the world burn blue instead of red. I'll vote in the other elections that I can vote in, but Biden simply will not bring forth the change this country needs and I will not cast a "compromise" vote so I can watch more people die. We'll get into this a lot more in October and November, but the next president of the United States will absolutely either be Donald Trump (again) or Joe Biden. It's a dichotomy and one of them will be selected, regardless of whether or not you vote. While there is certainly a legitimate critique about voting in a non-swing state, we still shouldn't be downplaying the importance of voting in this next election. Biden and Trump are not politically equivalent. They're not even close to being politically equivalent. If you want to abstain from voting in the general election because you're mad that the Democrats are fielding Biden instead of your ideal candidate, then I implore you to consider the following: 1. At least one Supreme Court Justice (RBG, arguably the most progressive SCJ we have) will be almost certainly stepping down (or passing away) over the next 4 years; 2. Slight, gradual progress in our healthcare system is better than continuing to demolish it; 3. Recognizing that climate change exists and that it needs to be dealt with is a better option than denying and ignoring it; 4. Funding science and education are better than defunding them; 5. A whole bunch of other relatively liberal policy positions: https://joebiden.com/joes-vision/Joe Biden might not be as progressive as you want - he certainly isn't as progressive as I want - but we should still be choosing the lesser of two evils here. At least he's facing in the right direction, whereas Trump would continue to have us regress as a society. When faced with the decision to move either one step forwards or one step backwards, after the option to move five steps forwards has been taken off the table, we shouldn't say they're the same. Even if you think that Biden is zero steps forward, the same idea applies. Part of why Im not going to vote for Biden is so that if he does lose, maybe we can defeat this "electability" idea. I've heard almost nothing else about why people voted for Biden, despite an utter lack of any policy or really anything. Its always TrumpTrumpTrump and frankly I think its gross. Every election is going to have to tackle this, "BUT THE OTHER GUUUYYYYYY" to justify a shitty fuckin' candidate. Maybe if that doesnt work for them (TWICE, lets count Hillary here) then we might move past this "but the other guy!" as good enough for a candidate. EDIT: mierin posted my point in a better way.
Except that argument was literally disproven by Biden winning the 2020 primary after Clinton lost the 2016 general election. I also don't even like discussing the "electability" term because it's so nebulous, and plenty of Sanders supporters consistently argued that Sanders was more electable too, in the same way that Biden supporters argued that Biden is more electable.
On April 09 2020 04:49 mierin wrote:
2024: "Vote for this moderate/right democratic candidate...think of the consequences if his Republican opponent is elected!!
2028: "Vote for this moderate/right democratic candidate...think of the consequences if his Republican opponent is elected!!"
...and so on.
Yeah, no.
I don't understand. What's wrong with voting for someone who shares some of your positions over someone who shares none of them? Do you completely disagree with all of Biden's positions listed in the link in my post that you replied to? Are you implying that we shouldn't be thinking of the consequences if Trump wins again? I need a little elaboration, please.
On April 09 2020 04:59 HelpMeGetBetter wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 04:52 micronesia wrote:
I'm not convinced there will even be an election in 2028 following that logic. If Trump beats Biden, it will then be Don Jr as President, then Ivanka, then Kushner... If Trump wins these won't actually be "elections" either.
And to think: We could easily stop this from happening if people just unified behind the person running against the Trumps. Why bother even having a primary if people aren't going to unify behind the winner, and instead basically help throw the election by not supporting the primary winner? I like this analogy: Voting isn't marriage; it's public transport... you're not waiting for "the one" who's absolutely perfect; you're taking whichever bus gets you closest to your destination.
|
The problem with voting for Biden in mierin's scenario is youre helping ensure ALL YOU GET IS BIDEN. Why does the DNC have to put forward anyone else when The Biden will win every time, despite his rape-y-ness, despite his serious cognitive decline, despite his shitty conservativeness. America might overall prefer rapey, senile, conservatives, but frankly I don't, and I will take any long shots to prevent those candidates from flourishing in the one party that MIGHT be able to shift from rapey-senile-conservative to something worthwhile.
|
On April 09 2020 04:08 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 04:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 03:49 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 03:37 Zambrah wrote:On April 09 2020 03:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 09 2020 02:22 Zambrah wrote:
Maybe if Trump wins the DNC will stop shoving their shit sandwich centrist crown prince(ss) at us.
Ha, nah, they'll keep doing it, anyone want to start a really early pool on who they force through as the nominee for 2024? Think Booker has a shot? Think they'll aim for a Buttigieg? Or will they try and get the woman angle going with Klobuchar again? What do you mean by "shoving" and "force"? With the possible exception of the Iowa caucus being super shady (which didn't help Biden anyway), Biden pretty much won this primary fair and square. Superdelegates didn't play a role in it, like can be argued in the 2016 primary. I'm a progressive and a Bernie supporter, but my team lost this time around. Definitively. My team had fewer supporters and fewer voters. I won't argue that more people voted for Biden, but I think its really clear that the DNC does not want progressive candidates and will do what they can (like all of the moderates dropping out to support Biden despite them having no reason to do so other than to consolidate around a moderate, not like Buttigieg's campaign was hopeless) to prevent progressives from holding any sway over the party. I'm not alleging intentional foul play, to be clear. Understood. I agree with you that the DNC does not want progressive candidates, although I do think that the writing was on the wall pretty early (before Super Tuesday) for every other moderate candidate becoming irrelevant in the Democratic primary. While Buttigieg performed well in Iowa and NH, it had been already established that he had virtually no non-white support; it was all but predestined that this was going to be Sanders vs. Biden, and that if the moderates wanted one of their own to win, the best strategy was to not pull from Biden's voter base. It's frustrating, but I'm not particularly surprised that the DNC keeps fielding moderates because 1. The DNC is mostly moderate and 2. The Democratic party is mostly moderate. I'd argue the Democrats are mostly conservative, but yes, I think this was always going to be Bernie vs. WhoeverTheDNCDecided EDIT: I also want to offhandedly bitch that a state like SOUTH CAROLINA that will definitely vote Republican is weighed so highly, lol. America's system just kind of sucks as a whole though, I guess. Oh, definitely... American moderates are really conservatives in most other first-world countries afaik. And I don't know if there's a better setup for the primary than that. Any ideas? We should be honest with ourselves, examine which states have swung between red and blue within the last twenty years, and exclude any states that haven't.
While I agree that's the pragmatic approach, it's also a virtually guaranteed neoliberal Democratic candidate for eternity (otherwise you'd see GH pushing for it). The purple primaries were not kind to Sanders this cycle (those margins in Michigan, North Carolina, and Florida...oof) nor are they kind to progressives in general. His "rust belt support" just failed to materialize-people in that area just really hated Clinton for (sometimes good) reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
