Michael Bloomberg for President 2020

[Biff Tannen 45,696]

3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Bloomberg has no redeeming qualities to speak of. He's a piece of shit. He's less better than Trump than any of the other candidates with the possible exception of Tulsi Gabbard. If he wins, he'll do nothing to address any of the underlying conditions that led to Trump (well, he might exacerbate them further). He will appoint centrist judges at best, he won't actually do anything serious to address global warming, he won't even fight for a public option, etc.

His presidency would cement the US as an oligarchy run by and for the insanely wealthy and from then on our best hope would be to maintain a pseudo-fascist oligarchy that isn't committed to racial genocide to avoid having a fully fascist oligarchy that is.  I truly hope a black hole swallows him tomorrow and removes him from this conversation because there's a part of me that feels like if that's where we're headed we might as well get to the inflection point sooner rather than later. But if this truly is hell and he's the nominee I'm still voting for him, because even if America is fucked even marginal policy improvements during the next 4 years would be substantially better for the rest of the world. Hell, even 4 years of absolutely no improvement on climate would be hugely preferable to another 4 years of further GOP destruction and would absolutely save lives over the long term. The GOP is an actual death cult that wants to bring about the end times. Bloomberg is a ton of awful shit, but he's not Jim Jones.

But all that's a conversation for later and one that we shouldn't have to have. Instead of normalizing the idea of Bloomberg as a nominee now, we should be telling everyone we know why he's fucking terrible and why he's not nearly the sure thing to beat Trump that so many people want to think he is. He very clearly hates everyone who isn't a multimillionaire and he's got a long history of very publicly shitting on nearly every person in this country.  Those clips will continue to be dug up and they'll be aired non-stop in every swing state. Running Donald Trump but without the racism won't appeal to anybody, meaning his only enthusiastic voters will be voters enthusiastic to vote against Trump, who would support any other nominee. 

Email that to Tom Perez.

[Hank Scorpio 17,729]

Other than Bloomberg being a member of the Republican Party while he was mayor of NYC, what evidence do you have that he was a Republican? 

[jimmyjazz 46,001]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

The evidence for his "Republican leanings" is that he was a Republican his whole life and "changed parties" (whatever that actually means) in late 2018.

Is this a joke?

Did you notice the GIANT fucking circle directly over NYC? I explained it in the post. He funded projects for local officials via his charity and bought their allegiance doing so.

Yeah, that's a giant fucking reach.  You implied he paid off the local government (presumably councilmembers).  Don't walk it back now.

I don't think he's change his perspective one bit.  He is to some degree a centrist, meaning he supports some left policy and some right.  I understand the concern, given his wealth, and my thoughts are completely antithetical to his regarding race and crime, etc., but this bullshit about "sexual assault" and "paid off the government" needs to stop.  He has enough shit on his track record as it is.  

Dwell.  In.  The.  Truth.

I know it's hard for you.

[jimmyjazz 46,001]

News flash:  Elizabeth Warren was a Republican.  Donald Trump was a Democrat.  I'm pretty sure we can all dig deep into the microfiche files and find evidence of others switching parties.

God, y'all get completely swayed by shiny objects.  Stop focusing on the labels.

[wildcat09 29,360]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

News flash:  Elizabeth Warren was a Republican.  Donald Trump was a Democrat.  I'm pretty sure we can all dig deep into the microfiche files and find evidence of others switching parties.

God, y'all get completely swayed by shiny objects.  Stop focusing on the labels.

Warren didn't just switch parties a year ago. She wasn't financially supporting GOP politicians and GOP causes in 2018. The only reason Bloomberg switched parties is he thinks the openness of the GOP's racism is a little too boorish for his sophisticated elite sensibilities. He hasn't grown as a person or substantially changed any of his other shitty Republican political beliefs and he's not about to start at the ripe young age of 78.

[bad_teammate 13,221]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

Yeah, that's a giant fucking reach.  You implied he paid off the local government (presumably councilmembers).  Don't walk it back now.

In your mind, is the only way to buy influence with a politician to hand them an envelope full of cash?

Because if so, you're wrong

Bloomberg, an independent candidate, has spent $245 million of his $16 billion fortune on this and his previous two mayoral campaigns. He has also come under fire for using political leverage to circumvent term limits that would have precluded the third term he is now all but guaranteed.

Quote

I don't think he's change his perspective one bit.  He is to some degree a centrist, meaning he supports some left policy and some right.  I understand the concern, given his wealth, and my thoughts are completely antithetical to his regarding race and crime, etc., but this bullshit about "sexual assault" and "paid off the government" needs to stop.  He has enough shit on his track record as it is. 

Why did you put quotation marks around "sexual assault"? Who said that?

It's very sad that you're doing all this for Mike for free. So many out there getting paid by him but here you are... it's pathetic, really.

[jimmyjazz 46,001]

Just now, wildcat09 said:

Warren didn't just switch parties a year ago. She wasn't financially supporting GOP politicians and GOP causes in 2018. The only reason Bloomberg switched parties is he thinks the openness of the GOP's racism is a little too boorish for his sophisticated elite sensibilities. He hasn't grown as a person or substantially changed any of his other shitty Republican political beliefs and he's not about to start at the ripe young age of 78.

I don't disagree -- I'm just trying to get b_t and the others to actually show evidence of the claims they are making.

You know, the truth.

Democrats.  Eat.  Their.  Own.

Of course, b_t isn't a Democrat.  He's a fucking anarchist.

[bad_teammate 13,221]

Dear Tom Perez,

I am not going to vote for Mike Bloomberg. Hundreds of thousands, probably even millions of progressives like me are not, either. Most of us are going to actively encourage others not to, either.

Go ahead and cry about it if you want, but we are letting you know ahead of time so you can plan accordingly.

Best of luck!

b_t

[jimmyjazz 46,001]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Why did you put quotation marks around "sexual assault"? Who said that?

It's all over this fucking thread.  Maybe read?  I've asked for proof multiple times, and yet nobody seems to be able to corroborate.

Deal.  In.  The.  Truth.

 

Quote

It's very sad that you're doing all this for Mike for free. So many out there getting paid by him but here you are... it's pathetic, really.

Oh, fuck off.  He's not my candidate.  I just happen to get a perverse kick correcting you and yours when you step on your dicks, over and over again.

[bad_teammate 13,221]

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't disagree -- I'm just trying to get b_t and the others to actually show evidence of the claims they are making.

I gave you evidence of Bloomberg buying influence.

I gave you evidence of him being a Republican.

You have the truth, you just don't want to see it.

[David Dennison 18,940]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Dear Tom Perez,

I am not going to vote for Mike Bloomberg. Hundreds of thousands, probably even millions of progressives like me are not, either. Most of us are going to actively encourage others not to, either.

Go ahead and cry about it if you want, but we are letting you know ahead of time so you can plan accordingly.

Best of luck!

b_t

Millions of progressives will fall in line and vote for the nominee.

Others will shit their pants and pout because the nominee doesn't meet their purity test, politics be damned.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

The nominee will be Bernie at this point.

Will the supporters of other candidates fall in line, or shit their pants and pout because he doesn't meet their purity tests?

[bad_teammate 13,221]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Oh, fuck off.  He's not my candidate.

Who is?

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Others will shit their pants and pout because the nominee doesn't meet their purity test, politics be damned.

Yep.

[David Dennison 18,940]

Just now, washparkhorn said:

The nominee will be Bernie at this point.

Will the supporters of other candidates fall in line, or shit their pants and pout because he doesn't meet their purity tests?

Democrats will vote for Bernie. It's the independents and Republicans who won't.

[tantric superman 4,667]

So to me, it all comes down to the words of that immortal country song:

Throw the jew down the well,

So my country can be free.

[jimmyjazz 46,001]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Who is?

My heart?  Warren.  Actual alignment with my principles overall?  Probably Klobuchar.  

Still pulling for Warren, I admire her intellect and her toughness.

 

[bad_teammate 13,221]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Democrats will vote for Bernie. It's the independents and Republicans who won't.

Bernie does better with independents than any other candidate.

 

[David Dennison 18,940]

I hope Bernie Sanders wins the nomination just so we can finally see what happens when an unapologetic leftist runs head to head against a Republican.

Personally, I think Bernie will lose badly if he's the nominee, but he might win and that would be great.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I hope Bernie Sanders wins the nomination just so we can finally see what happens when an unapologetic leftist runs head to head against a Republican.

Personally, I think Bernie will lose badly if he's the nominee, but he might win and that would be great.

Cool. I understand the concern, but please remember how Trump entertains his supporters. He points out the hypocrisy of those who claim he is doing wrong. That hits harder on Biden and Bloomberg than others. For politicians with big money interests behind them, he brushes them off and says they are just errand boys - like the ones he paid off to get his deals done. That hits harder on those with corporate interests. If the best he has against Bernie is a label (in a mixed economy where socialistic programs, like the Ag bill, are part and parcel of the American economy), he has nothing. 

Beating Trump is not the only criteria for picking Sanders, but the polling shows Sanders will beat him among the candidates fully vetted if that is the concern. 

[bad_teammate 13,221]

Sanders would've won in 2016. He will win in 2020.

[David Dennison 18,940]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Sanders would've won in 2016. He will win in 2020.

It would be fun to find out. I'm not convinced the party will allow it to happen.

[GSU&UT 1,798]

Jimmy, he's a fucking Republican because he isn't one of the most racist policing policies in NYC and only had to see it when the courts told him to. 

[mdmost 43,011]

Hearing an ad for Bloomberg where it's got Obama giving a speech talking up Bloomberg when he was mayor of NYC. Treating it like it's an endorsement today. Lots of balls on this billionaire. 

[Tuco 5,077]

10 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Beating Trump is not the only criteria for picking Sanders, but the polling shows Sanders will beat him among the candidates fully vetted if that is the concern. 

Bernie is not my first choice, and certainly I disagree with b_t and other Bernie supporters on a lot of things - including a failure to distinguish others from Trump.  But, this is correct.  Let's face it - I don't have much confidence that this country is going to have more issues with electing a "socialist" than they do electing a woman or a gay guy. I keep seeing the old, straight white guys beating Trump (Biden, Bernie, and Bloomberg), where Warren, Buttigieg and Klob still win, but at tighter margins.  And it's not like those three old straight guys really have that much in common, other than being old straight guys.  As far as I'm concerned, that's not a reason to selected the old straight guys because it reinforces that sexism/homophobia. But certainly "electability" is no reason to avoid Bernie.  

Someone was asking why Trump was attacking Bernie?  Because he knows if Bernie doesn't get the nomination he can get some Bernie supporters to cross the aisle or stay home.  How many depends on whether Trump's negatives are higher than Biden/Bloomberg/DNC's negatives.  To avoid negatives with Bernie supporters, you don't attack Bernie.  

[Aqua Buddha 14,599]

49 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Democrats will vote for Bernie. It's the independents and Republicans who won't.

Lot of people who voted Dem in 18 won’t vote for Bernie.

[Hank Scorpio 17,729]

Just now, Aqua Buddha said:

Lot of people who voted Dem in 18 won’t vote for Bernie.

Lot of people who voted R or didn’t vote will. Isn’t this fun? I love discourse. 

[jimmyjazz 46,001]

Trump is going to attack whichever candidate is nominated.  Frankly, it wouldn't be the worst tactic to put forth the least-attackable candidate (least progressive, least female, least gay), simply because it would make his attacks all that more transparent.  I'm not saying that's the way the DNC should go, because it kinda points to Biden, but worrying about Trump's attack angle is silly.  He'll say whatever he wants, truth be damned, and his base will fall in line.  It's the others who need to be swayed.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

More of Bloomberg's true colors, with a nice contrast:

 

[GRHorn 105]

I’m hopeful that Bernie wins nomination. It’s pretty clear that’s what people want if they’re not subjected to a Clockwork Orange like Bloomberg media blitz. Should an epic showdown in general election. 

[Guest Lobo]

This is the election, fellas?  This is the cycle you get religion?  No problem burying better candidates in order to prop up centrist, corporatist sellouts like Hillary, Kerry, Gore, Bill, and Dukakis?  In this most critical of situations to oust Captain Shitstain, now y'all wanna play progressive socialist game theory?  where the fuck were y'all years back?  Now with the stakes as high as they'll ever be since WWII or reconstruction.......this is when to decide Bloomberg has a checkered past, Amy is too moderate, Pete is too beholden to corporate interests?   Defeat the despot in the White House now.  Reshuffle your shit on your own time.  Fuck, you'll have the House to play with as well, not like you'll be on pause for a whole 4 years.  Of course you'd decide now to have your own internal civil war.  It's impossible the DNC could fuck up defeating this piece of human shit, but here we are.  

[wildcat09 29,360]

16 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Lot of people who voted Dem in 18 won’t vote for Bernie.

Who exactly are you talking about? Suburban women? College educated men? Blue collar white men?

A ton of people who's first choice is Biden like Bernie as their second choice. It's not as simple as there being voters that align with a progressive lane and voters that align with a centrist lane. People decide on who they like for a ton of different reasons and ideological opposition is not actually very high on that list for anyone who isn't already a sure Republican vote.  We all keep talking as if we actually understand American voters when the past few years have made it extremely clear that we don't and probably can't.

Here's what we DO know: In terms of the national popular vote, the election is extremely likely to be pretty close and the winner likely won't get more than 53-54% of the total popular vote (and could get way less than that, if the winner is Trump), and only 6 to 10 states will actually be in play. In which of those states will Bernie being the nominee actually harm the Dems' chances of winning? Florida is probably one. We've been looking at a ton of head to head polls though for the past three years now and I haven't seen much indication that Bernie performs worse in any of the other swing states.

[bad_teammate 13,221]

26 minutes ago, Tuco said:

To avoid negatives with Bernie supporters, you don't attack Bernie.  

"I love Bernie and am appreciative for everything he's done. I, however, see things slightly differently."

"The energy in Bernie's movement is exactly what we need to defeat Donald Trump, and I hope I can convince all of his passionate supporters that I share their goals for..."

3 minutes ago, Lobo said:

This is the election, fellas?  This is the cycle you get religion?  No problem burying better candidates in order to prop up centrist, corporatist sellouts like Hillary, Kerry, Gore, Bill, and Dukakis?  In this most critical of situations to oust Captain Shitstain, now y'all wanna play progressive socialist game theory?  where the fuck were y'all years back?  Now with the stakes as high as they'll ever be since WWII or reconstruction.......this is when to decide Bloomberg has a checkered past, Amy is too moderate, Pete is too beholden to corporate interests?   Defeat the despot in the White House now.  Reshuffle your shit on your own time.  Fuck, you'll have the House to play with as well, not like you'll be on pause for a whole 4 years.  Of course you'd decide now to have your own internal civil war.  It's impossible the DNC could fuck up defeating this piece of human shit, but here we are.  

Sure, let's choose the candidate with the highest favorables, great head-to-heads against Trump, and great head-to-heads against the other Dem candidates. The one who is a fundraising juggernaut. The one with an army of passionate devotees who will advocate day and night for his victory.

I agree.

I'm glad you're feeling the Bern, too.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

19 minutes ago, Lobo said:

where the fuck were y'all years back?  

Wondering about you?

 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,515]

1 hour ago, mdmost said:

Hearing an ad for Bloomberg where it's got Obama giving a speech talking up Bloomberg when he was mayor of NYC. Treating it like it's an endorsement today. Lots of balls on this billionaire. 

I've seen the TV version. Obama can't publicly complain even though I imagine he wished it wasn't used. I suppose he could privately ask Bloomberg to take it down.

[bad_teammate 13,221]

Absolute scum. A disgusting, disgusting piece of trash.

 

[Aqua Buddha 14,599]

What does that spending make him trash?

[staboner 4,984]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

Trump is going to atack whichever candidate is nominated.  Frankly, it wouldn't be the worst tactic to put forth the least-attackable candidate (least progressive, least female, least gay), simply because it would make his attacks all that more transparent.  I'm not saying that's the way the DNC should go, because it kinda points to Biden, but worrying about Trump's attack angle is silly.  He'll say whatever he wants, truth be damned, and his base will fall in line.  It's the others who need to be swayed.

maybe someday, in some galaxy far far away, we can have Democrats that actually go on the attack instead of whatever it is they do for the last 20 years. there are so many Republican ideologies that can be turned over into Dem talking points. But instead its the same old shit - reacting to whatever the Republicans will do first. Or whatever they think they will do first. Rinse and repeat.

the sheer size and institutionalization of the Dem party keeps it archaic and self serving as fuck. And they just don't fucking get it. Republicans, bless their selfish little hearts, can burn and turn messaging faster than a 2 dollar whore at a shore leave to do. 

sorry JJ, not at you, just seeing your post makes me something, something

 

[Lagunamadre 1,975]

1 hour ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Lot of people who voted Dem in 18 won’t vote for Bernie.

 

1 hour ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Lot of people who voted R or didn’t vote will. Isn’t this fun? I love discourse. 

Y'all are both right. The question is do the energized college kids outweigh the anti-socialist suburban whites or visa versa. Only one way to find out. 

I'm predicting the suburban whites would give Trump a landslide, because death, taxes and young people don't vote. 

[jimmyjazz 46,001]

2 minutes ago, staboner said:

maybe someday, in some galaxy far far away, we can have Democrats that actually go on the attack instead of whatever it is they do for the last 20 years. there are so many Republican ideologies that can be turned over into Dem talking points. But instead its the same old shit - reacting to whatever the Republicans will do first. Or whatever they think they will do first. Rinse and repeat.

the sheer size and institutionalization of the Dem party keeps it archaic and self serving as fuck. And they just don't fucking get it. Republicans, bless their selfish little hearts, can burn and turn messaging faster than a 2 dollar whore at a shore leave to do. 

sorry JJ, not at you, just seeing your post makes me something, something

 

Oh, no offense taken.  I get it.  I said 3 years ago the Dems needed to start playing dirty.  Of course, they play dirty in primary season, and then back off once the nominee is in place.

In retrospect, I'm shocked Obama took the White House.

[staboner 4,984]

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Oh, no offense taken.  I get it.  I said 3 years ago the Dems needed to start playing dirty.  Of course, they play dirty in primary season, and then back off once the nominee is in place.

In retrospect, I'm shocked Obama took the White House.

I am too, especially given his racial handicaps

I hope that with the advent of intense social media coverage that one potential side effect is a world where messaging better aligns between primaries and then the election. 

I just see opportunity everywhere for Democrats to steal Republican talking points and use them - from being pro-small business (healthcare reform), to balancing the budget (cut military spending....err modernize the military), to enabling more market based policies (higher education reform), and so on. Plenty just handed over on a platter by the Republicans but the Dems can't leave the echo chamber that is their own world, and they don't have any leader that has the ability to show them how. 

I don't know that I would call it dirty so much as calling it leadership really, just understanding that you move others by speaking in their world and using their language and ideals. Sometimes it is as easy as that but hey I guess thats just the way the world works

[bad_teammate 13,221]

31 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

What does that spending make him trash?

Yes, yes it does.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

Bloomberg - ". . . don't know how to behave in the workplace . . . " - how does he have a single supporter left?

 

[EuroHorn 3,267]

3 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Bloomberg's Billions: How the Candidate Built an Empire of Influence

Need an arts building funded in your burrough? Oh here's a $100k check from Bloomberg Philanthropies.

Need some potholes fixed? Oh here's a $20k check from Bloomberg Philanthropies.

Wants some "training" on how to be a good mayor? Here's a flight to NYC, some fancy hotels, some nice dinners, and opportunities to meet with movers and shakers in Democratic politics. Oh and some checks for projects in your city from Bloomberg Philanthropies.

 

Wants to pay for all the socialist programs, needs billionaires.  Oh, Groverat ...

Edited February 18, 2020 by EuroHorn

[washparkhorn 9,939]

Bloomberg doesn't know how to behave in the workplace.

 

[bad_teammate 13,221]

22 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Bloomberg - ". . . don't know how to behave in the workplace . . . " - how does he have a single supporter left?

White people on the center-left and the center-right have basically the exact same beliefs about minorities.

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Bloomberg has no redeeming qualities to speak of. He's a piece of shit. He's less better than Trump than any of the other candidates with the possible exception of Tulsi Gabbard. If he wins, he'll do nothing to address any of the underlying conditions that led to Trump (well, he might exacerbate them further). He will appoint centrist judges at best, he won't actually do anything serious to address global warming, he won't even fight for a public option, etc.
His presidency would cement the US as an oligarchy run by and for the insanely wealthy and from then on our best hope would be to maintain a pseudo-fascist oligarchy that isn't committed to racial genocide to avoid having a fully fascist oligarchy that is.  I truly hope a black hole swallows him tomorrow and removes him from this conversation because there's a part of me that feels like if that's where we're headed we might as well get to the inflection point sooner rather than later. But if this truly is hell and he's the nominee I'm still voting for him, because even if America is fucked even marginal policy improvements during the next 4 years would be substantially better for the rest of the world. Hell, even 4 years of absolutely no improvement on climate would be hugely preferable to another 4 years of further GOP destruction and would absolutely save lives over the long term. The GOP is an actual death cult that wants to bring about the end times. Bloomberg is a ton of awful shit, but he's not Jim Jones.
But all that's a conversation for later and one that we shouldn't have to have. Instead of normalizing the idea of Bloomberg as a nominee now, we should be telling everyone we know why he's fucking terrible and why he's not nearly the sure thing to beat Trump that so many people want to think he is. He very clearly hates everyone who isn't a multimillionaire and he's got a long history of very publicly shitting on nearly every person in this country.  Those clips will continue to be dug up and they'll be aired non-stop in every swing state. Running Donald Trump but without the racism won't appeal to anybody, meaning his only enthusiastic voters will be voters enthusiastic to vote against Trump, who would support any other nominee. 

Yep, totally agree.

And my earlier point wasn’t to not shit on Bloomberg - I’m completely fine with EVERYONE shitting all over Bloomberg because I do NOT want to be forced to vote for him.

What I’m sick and tired of is being told by people like BT and some of the Bernie Twitter Army that “we don’t care about vulnerable people” and implying we aren’t any better than Republicans if we aren’t up Bernie’s ass and have conceded that if the actual worst does happen (nomination of Bloomberg) that we’ll pull the lever anyway.

It’s fucking rude, aggressive, and demeaning to be told to fuck off because you aren’t progressive in the right way or whatever.

Please keep in mind, that these are the same people that white knighted for Joe Fucking Rogan not two weeks ago.

But those of us with actual progressive and liberal beliefs are evil because we don’t go far enough for their liking.

Can defend a racist, sexist, transphobic, homophobic podcast white guy but throw shit at actual Democrats.

I hope the Bernie Brigade eats Bloomberg’s soul and destroys his life and make sure he isn’t the Democratic nominee.

But they can continue to fuck off with their shitslinging at Democratic voters who aren’t pure enough.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

1 minute ago, Bama Chick said:

 

Yep, totally agree.

And my earlier point wasn’t to not shit on Bloomberg - I’m completely fine with EVERYONE shitting all over Bloomberg because I do NOT want to be forced to vote for him.

What I’m sick and tired of is being told by people like BT and some of the Bernie Twitter Army that “we don’t care about vulnerable people” and implying we aren’t any better than Republicans if we aren’t up Bernie’s ass and have conceded that if the actual worst does happen (nomination of Bloomberg) that we’ll pull the lever anyway.

It’s fucking rude, aggressive, and demeaning to be told to fuck off because you aren’t progressive in the right way or whatever.

Please keep in mind, that these are the same people that white knighted for Joe Fucking Rogan not two weeks ago.

But those of us with actual progressive and liberal beliefs are evil because we don’t go far enough for their liking.

Can defend a racist, sexist, transphobic, homophobic podcast white guy but throw shit at actual Democrats.

I hope the Bernie Brigade eats Bloomberg’s soul and destroys his life and make sure he isn’t the Democratic nominee.

But they can continue to fuck off with their shitslinging at Democratic voters who aren’t pure enough.

 

I have zero doubts about you doing the right thing. 

This too shall pass and then we all focus on the problem child in the White House.

[bad_teammate 13,221]

Here's what I said that you got mad about: "This is the "vetting" that the centrists have been foretelling for years. This is what they have. Decorum and aesthetics. They don't care about poor people, vulnerable people, they care about their Thanksgiving dinners being nicer."

If you're not a centrist, why would an insult against centrists offend you personally?

[GSU&UT 1,798]

nm

Edited February 18, 2020 by GSU&UT

[jimmyjazz 46,001]

51 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

White people on the center-left and the center-right have basically the exact same beliefs about minorities.

Well, that deserves a hearty "fuck you".  

This is how you build a coalition?