Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee

used2b

By used2b
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13216

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, G650 said:

There's not much to explain. He posses the most abhorrent qualities a man can possibly have. 

If there was an actual analysis there would be a lot to explain. But if it's just about a gut feeling then cool, I guess.

2 minutes ago, conVINCEd said:

Obligated?  No.  He’s trying to win an election.  You do that by getting more votes than the other guy.  To not talk to or listen to people who can help you get more votes is idiotic if your goal is to win.  And if his goal is not to win by any means necessary, including compromise, he has no business whatsoever being the nominee in this particular election.

He has a strategy that you don't like, which is to build support up for his set of values over time by activating those values within people and getting them out to vote. If it doesn't work he'll lose.

Are you upset because you want him to win and you think you have a good faith critique of his strategy? Or are you upset because his determination and (relative) success make you feel guilty about having inferior values?

2 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

But he has far worse intentions and values than anyone who has held the office in my lifetime.  

Ah, so magic.

Awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 23.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bad_teammate

    3638

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    2212

  • Hank Kingsley

    1252

  • Js1

    1230

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Huckleberry
Huckleberry

No it doesn't, this is absurd selfishness on a grand scale. Nobody is getting punished. My wife and I paid off our student loans, and you know what I think about younger people or even those in our ge

henrygandorf
henrygandorf

i’ve really enjoyed the 900 posts from bt explaining how bernie people aren’t aggressive, obsessive, and very-online.  truly a learning experience. 

Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton

3rd or 4th thread but whos counting.  Name recognition and ability to collect money is most important to the Democratic Party. They aren't trying to win 2020, they are trying to rebuild and colle

Posted Images

Zombie

Zombie 284

Posted
Posted
Trump is so terribly flawed and incompetent (and too much of a coward) to ultimately accomplish much, which puts a big governor on how much damage he can do (so far anyway ... hopefully it continues).   But he has far worse intentions and values than anyone who has held the office in my lifetime.  
That's fair. But if hundreds of thousands and potentially millions of Americans die from the Carona virus due to Trump's incompetence, then I think he over takes GW for worst President and worst person in the office ever.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 20967

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

"The point is that any analytic commentary on the institutional structure of the country is so threatening to the commisar class they can't even hear the words."

"How many of them would be cynical? ... because most of them completely believe because that's how systems work."

You are not even trying to argue with the content of what Sanders says because you're reflexively defensive of the system you believe in. You can't even hear his words.

Some questions for you:
- When Sanders says "the power of the establishment" "force(d)" people out of the race, what do you think he is saying?
- How do you think the three-headed endorsement the night before Super Tuesday came to be? Were their a lot of behind-the-scenes conversations between power players or was it just a weird concidence?

You can dismiss those who speak some unpopular truth as conspiracy theorists, but there is QAnon and Pizzagate and Alex Jones out there. You will make the centrists here who hate me personally very excited by lumping me in with other people they hate, but it's logically unsound and doesn't actually explain or help anything.

I didn’t ready a single word of this, but nobody “forced” Buttigieg out of the race.  Contrary to public opinion, he’s not an egomaniac and realized his path was officially dead.

Pete had been talking for weeks/months about his concern with Bernie being the nominee and the need to unite the party heading into the GE vs. Trump and to win down ballot races. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13216

Posted
Posted
Just now, Zombie said:

That's fair. But if hundreds of thousands and potentially millions of Americans die from the Carona virus due to Trump's incompetence, then I think he over takes GW for worst President and worst person in the office ever.

See that, people? THIS is someone who is actually using his brain.

Good post. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
conVINCEd

conVINCEd 21469

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

If there was an actual analysis there would be a lot to explain. But if it's just about a gut feeling then cool, I guess.

He has a strategy that you don't like, which is to build support up for his set of values over time by activating those values within people and getting them out to vote. If it doesn't work he'll lose.

Are you upset because you want him to win and you think you have a good faith critique of his strategy? Or are you upset because his determination and (relative) success make you feel guilty about having inferior values?

Ah, so magic.

Awesome.

I don’t agree with Bernie on everything.  That is probably clear.  I don’t dislike him either.  I  have a great deal of admiration for people who stand by what they believe in come hell or high water.  But this ain’t the year to put up a democratic candidate who is more devoted to his ideals than to winning.  Stubborn is not a quality I am looking for this cycle.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13216

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I didn’t ready a single word of this, but nobody “forced” Buttigieg out of the race.  Contrary to public opinion, he’s not an egomaniac and realized his path was officially dead.

Pete had been talking for weeks/months about his concern with Bernie being the nominee and the need to unite the party heading into the GE vs. Trump and to win down ballot races. 

It's a handy way to never have to challenge your own beliefs and prejudices! Bravo!

This "concern" that Buttigieg has, where does it come from? Did he develop it in a lab, isolated? Or did he, say, attend meetings and dinners with donors, fundraisers, and Democratic officials and politicians where this "concern" was discussed and reinforced?

The functioning of systems isn't sexy and secretive, it's banal and open. A power establishment isn't obscure or occult, it is right in front of your face and so common and accepted that we stop even noticing it.

How did it come to be that Amy, Beto, and Pete all decided to endorse Joe at the exact same time in the same place?
It's not complicated or sexily secretive. A massive network of people has coordinated and worked together for a long time to make that happen.

1 minute ago, conVINCEd said:

I  have a great deal of admiration for people who stand by what they believe in come hell or high water.  But this ain’t the year to put up a democratic candidate who is more devoted to his ideals than to winning.  Stubborn is not a quality I am looking for this cycle.

So just be happy that Joe is winning.

You're winning! Congratulations!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GW Hayduke

GW Hayduke 1953

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Let the Gravel teens onto the debate stage. 
 

 

 

12 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Exactly. Imagine how many hypothetical brown people he has killed. Way more than the real ones Bush did. 

Why are there so many fake lefties here touting trumpkin talking points?

This shit is straight out of Fox News and breitbart.

Close your twitter account. Read a newspaper. Go talk to a person in your community.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13216

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Common sense? Living in a red state and speaking to constituents and voters across America? Not living in a Brooklyn Bernie bubble? 

Answering in terms of Young Pete, the answers there are no, no, and no.

---------------------------------------------
(NYTimes) ‘Stop Sanders’ Democrats Are Agonizing Over His Momentum (04/16/2020)

Howard Wolfson, who spent months immersed in Democratic polling and focus groups on behalf of former Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York, had a blunt message for Sanders skeptics: “People underestimate the possibility of him becoming the nominee at their own peril.”

The discussion about Mr. Sanders has to date been largely confined to private settings because — like establishment Republicans in 2016 — Democrats are uneasy about elevating him or alienating his supporters.

The matter of What To Do About Bernie and the larger imperative of party unity has, for example, hovered over a series of previously undisclosed Democratic dinners in New York and Washington organized by the longtime party financier Bernard Schwartz. The gatherings have included scores from the moderate or center-left wing of the party, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California; Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader; former Gov. Terry McAuliffe of Virginia; Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., himself a presidential candidate; and the president of the Center for American Progress, Neera Tanden.
---------------------------------------------

And that's OK.

Pete is allowed by law to build power this way and rub elbows with financiers and think tankers and officials and politicians. It's very normal and common to do this.

But let's not lie, Hank, let's be truthful! :)

The reality of the situation we have is that the establishment power of Democratic politics really really really does not want Bernie Sanders to become president, and when it seemed like Bernie wouldn't be able to be stopped, they did an impressive job of coordinating powerful opposition to him. How on earth would anyone who is not dishonest call that a controversial statement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29192

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Answering in terms of Young Pete, the answers there are no, no, and no.

---------------------------------------------
(NYTimes) ‘Stop Sanders’ Democrats Are Agonizing Over His Momentum (04/16/2020)

Howard Wolfson, who spent months immersed in Democratic polling and focus groups on behalf of former Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York, had a blunt message for Sanders skeptics: “People underestimate the possibility of him becoming the nominee at their own peril.”

The discussion about Mr. Sanders has to date been largely confined to private settings because — like establishment Republicans in 2016 — Democrats are uneasy about elevating him or alienating his supporters.

The matter of What To Do About Bernie and the larger imperative of party unity has, for example, hovered over a series of previously undisclosed Democratic dinners in New York and Washington organized by the longtime party financier Bernard Schwartz. The gatherings have included scores from the moderate or center-left wing of the party, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California; Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader; former Gov. Terry McAuliffe of Virginia; Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., himself a presidential candidate; and the president of the Center for American Progress, Neera Tanden.
---------------------------------------------

And that's OK.

Pete is allowed by law to build power this way and rub elbows with financiers and think tankers and officials and politicians. It's very normal and common to do this.

But let's not lie, Hank, let's be truthful! :)

The reality of the situation we have is that the establishment power of Democratic politics really really really does not want Bernie Sanders to become president, and when it seemed like Bernie wouldn't be able to be stopped, they did an impressive job of coordinating powerful opposition to him. How on earth would anyone who is not dishonest call that a controversial statement?

are you from the future, or is this the same article you were bringing up 12 months ago about one dinner that took place in 2018?

so let's say obama (and others) courted pete and made their pitch on what he should do and why.  and let's say they did the same with amy, beto, whomever.  bernie and his many surrogates were free to make that pitch and court whomever they liked on the exact same timetable.  most knew pete's path was blocked.  there was discussion about potential soft-landing timing with his announcement.

so i guess the question is - are you mad that for once the establishment had their ducks in a row?  and that bernie didn't come up with it first and made what could've surely been a better pitch?

this isn't a conspiracy.  the timing wasn't a coincidence, it was pressured by super tuesday.  that's how negotiations and deals work - they often come together right before the deadline, which is, after all, the entire point of a deadline.

for months, it looked like a clusterfuck for the democratic establishment, with nobody to rally behind.  bernie's numbers counted on that, as it favored him to enter the convention with a plurality.  reading the gigantic sharpie writing on the wall, the dems did something.  this is politics, and bernie got beat.  nobody blames you for being sore about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FWD

FWD 297

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Message Board User said:

Beto fell victim to this overestimation, IMO, last summer.

So did Harris, Castro, Booker...

Do you think Harris would still be in this if she hadn't misread the room and jumped on board the "ban private health insurance" train?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Message Board User

Message Board User 12395

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, FWD said:

So did Harris, Castro, Booker...

Do you think Harris would still be in this if she hadn't misread the room and jumped on board the "ban private health insurance" train?

Possible.  Beto also could have been the young "moderate" to fight it out with Biden.  The Blacks were never, ever, ever going to support Mayor Pete or Amy, but that wasn't the case with Beto.

Kind of a shame, really, as he would have been the strongest candidate IMO to go against Trump.

I expect @Bama Chick to pos rep this post with reckless abandon.

Edited by Message Board User
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13216

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

so i guess the question is - are you mad that for once the establishment had their ducks in a row?

Nope, my beautiful and smooth grandfather Bernard are merely saying it happened.

Bernie says he's not surprised by it. I am not surprised by it, either.

This is how the machine works. And it's doing its work.

Quote

and that bernie didn't come up with it first and made what could've surely been a better pitch?

Bernie's been making his pitch. They don't like his pitch. C'est la vie

Quote

this isn't a conspiracy.  the timing wasn't a coincidence, it was pressured by super tuesday.  that's how negotiations and deals work - they often come together right before the deadline, which is, after all, the entire point of a deadline.

Yes, it was a deal. They have all been working towards something like this for a very long time and this is the way that planning played out. It's fine. It's not a conspiracy, I'm actively saying it's not a conspiracy, it is the normal and predictable functioning of the establishment machine.

You're right and Bernie's right, it wasn't a coincidence. They worked together with officials and politicians and donors and fundraisers to engineer an outcome they desired. Pete and Beto and Amy did not simply decide their races were over and then jump in with the candidate who most reflected their values in a coincidental move.

There is no smoke-filled room. There is no secretive cabal. It is functionaries in a machine doing exactly what the machine has been built to do.

You should watch that Chomsky clip I posted, it's not long and he explains it very very plainly.

Edited by bad_teammate
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9939

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

Possible.  Beto also could have been the young "moderate" to fight it out with Biden.  The Blacks were never, ever, ever going to support Mayor Pete or Amy, but that wasn't the case with Beto.

Kind of a shame, really.

Beto took a big swipe at Biden. It cost him.

As much of a horror show as Trump has been—his racism, the disaster of his foreign policy, his punishment of farmers and workers here in this country,” he continued, “we had real problems before Donald Trump became president.” When asked whether the ex-V.P. represented a “return to the past,” O’Rourke responded with an emphatic “he is.”

O’Rourke didn’t mean it as a compliment. “Look, you’ve got to ask yourself where Joe Biden is on the issues that are most important to you,” he said to a startled-sounding Mika Brzezinski. “Did he support the war in Iraq that forever destabilized the Middle East? Does he really believe that women of lower income should be able to make their own decisions about their own body and be able to afford health care in order to do that? . . . On China, he says China is no threat—nothing to worry about. And now seems to be changing his message on that. So I’m not exactly sure what he believes.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/06/beto-orourke-attacks-joe-biden

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 20967

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Answering in terms of Young Pete, the answers there are no, no, and no.

---------------------------------------------
(NYTimes) ‘Stop Sanders’ Democrats Are Agonizing Over His Momentum (04/16/2020)

Howard Wolfson, who spent months immersed in Democratic polling and focus groups on behalf of former Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York, had a blunt message for Sanders skeptics: “People underestimate the possibility of him becoming the nominee at their own peril.”

The discussion about Mr. Sanders has to date been largely confined to private settings because — like establishment Republicans in 2016 — Democrats are uneasy about elevating him or alienating his supporters.

The matter of What To Do About Bernie and the larger imperative of party unity has, for example, hovered over a series of previously undisclosed Democratic dinners in New York and Washington organized by the longtime party financier Bernard Schwartz. The gatherings have included scores from the moderate or center-left wing of the party, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California; Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader; former Gov. Terry McAuliffe of Virginia; Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., himself a presidential candidate; and the president of the Center for American Progress, Neera Tanden.
---------------------------------------------

And that's OK.

Pete is allowed by law to build power this way and rub elbows with financiers and think tankers and officials and politicians. It's very normal and common to do this.

But let's not lie, Hank, let's be truthful! :)

The reality of the situation we have is that the establishment power of Democratic politics really really really does not want Bernie Sanders to become president, and when it seemed like Bernie wouldn't be able to be stopped, they did an impressive job of coordinating powerful opposition to him. How on earth would anyone who is not dishonest call that a controversial statement?

 

Edited by Hank Kingsley
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13216

Posted
Posted

Oh boy here comes David with the "FAKE NEWS!" defense straight out of the Trump Playbook a little Russian Disinformation against the Free Press. #Resist

But seriously folks...

The article talks about "a series of previously undisclosed Democratic dinners in New York and Washington organized by the longtime party financier Bernard Schwartz".

What singular "meeting" is this guy talking about?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9939

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Oh boy here comes David with the "FAKE NEWS!" defense straight out of the Trump Playbook a little Russian Disinformation against the Free Press. #Resist

But seriously folks...

The article talks about "a series of previously undisclosed Democratic dinners in New York and Washington organized by the longtime party financier Bernard Schwartz".

What singular "meeting" is this guy talking about?

 

Bernard Schwartz  - the guy whose company sold the Chinese sensitive technology so their ICBM's could fly and hit the US. What a patriot. Gotta love the Elites backing Biden. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MaybeACoordinator

MaybeACoordinator 8349

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Imagine thinking black folks aren’t going to show up to fire Donald Trump in November. 

It's easy if you try. I don't think hatred of Trump is as strong in the black community as it is in the Latino or white liberal/centrist community, and the relatively low turnout on Super Tuesday tends to support that. I think it tops out at Hillary levels. Now if we see huge black turnout for Biden in the Rust Belt I'll admit I'm wrong...

Trump is going to try to depress their vote via negative ads/tweets/speeches tying the Democrats to immigrants taking their jobs and shining a light on Biden's tuff on crime past. It won't flip the black vote but it will tamp it down.

The message Biden's selling -- "I gladly played second fiddle to a black man for eight years" -- is strong, but not "Get off the couch and get to the polls" compelling, even with Trump in office.

Maybe a black running mate will get him there, but I am not sure if Kamala is the right call. He's already got California and she's got the cop past. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted
Beto fell victim to this overestimation, IMO, last summer.

Y’all say this but the only super left position he took was his stance on assault rifles in the wake of the El Paso Walmart massacre.

Every other plan he had was in line with the same plans Biden is running on. He wasn’t a Medicare For All proponent, he wasn’t a free college proponent etc.

He was absolutely savaged by Sanders supporters for being a Republican in Democratic clothing, for being friends with Will Hurd, for being “owned by oil and gas”, for voting too often with Republicans, for having a wealthy wife, for having a childhood nickname, etc.

Hell, the last thing David Sirota did before being hired by Sanders was write an article that accused him of being everything wrong with moderate Democrats.

Go back and read the Beto thread from the beginning - it’s all there.

Overestimating how liberal Democratic voters are isn’t why he didn’t gain traction.

He got branded as another entitled empty suit white guy because of a stupid Vanity Fair quote taken out of context and tarred and feathered for being too moderate by the left wing and when he didn’t play the usual game of jumping in front of every television camera the media either ignored him or snarked on him for standing on tables or waving his arms too much.

The field was too crowded for him to shake those early impressions so he was fighting from behind.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:


Y’all say this but the only super left position he took was his stance on assault rifles in the wake of the El Paso Walmart massacre.

Every other plan he had was in line with the same plans Biden is running on. He wasn’t a Medicare For All proponent, he wasn’t a free college proponent etc.

He was absolutely savaged by Sanders supporters for being a Republican in Democratic clothing, for being friends with Will Hurd, for being “owned by oil and gas”, for voting too often with Republicans, for having a wealthy wife, for having a childhood nickname, etc.

Hell, the last thing David Sirota did before being hired by Sanders was write an article that accused him of being everything wrong with moderate Democrats.

Go back and read the Beto thread from the beginning - it’s all there.

Overestimating how liberal Democratic voters are isn’t why he didn’t gain traction.

He got branded as another entitled empty suit white guy because of a stupid Vanity Fair quote taken out of context and tarred and feathered for being too moderate by the left wing and when he didn’t play the usual game of jumping in front of every television camera the media either ignored him or snarked on him for standing on tables or waving his arms too much.

The field was too crowded for him to shake those early impressions so he was fighting from behind.

IMO, in the early days he was also targeted by the GOP/Trump as someone potentially dangerous because he is a charismatic speaker that engages groups that do not always turn up at the polls in great numbers. That is not unlike Bernie, but Beto had a pretty good showing in Texas so he was definitely on their radar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost of LL

Ghost of LL 15539

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Seems bad... Is this bad?

I failed arithmetic plz help
 

Actually, not really.  I don't think anybody really expected Sanders to do well in either of those two states.  That they're noncompetitive is no surprise.

Here's my question for you: if Sanders doesn't win any states tomorrow--i.e., he loses in Michigan and Washington--does he drop out?  I can see both arguments.  On the one hand, if he loses in those states, he has no path to the nomination.  And he's liable to get really embarrassed the following week in Florida.

But on the other hand, isn't Sanders more about advancing the agenda than advancing his own candidacy?  And for that reason, I could see him staying in to the Convention, even knowing that he has no chance of getting the actual nomination.

What say you?

18 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Ah yes, wonderful.
 

I don't know about Bloomberg at the World Bank.  I think I would prefer a banker.  But I like Dimon at Treasury.  

Those are jobs at which we need people who know what they're doing as we go into a recession.  Say what you will about them as people, but Hank Paulson and Tim Geithner saved the world in 2008.  We're going to need people like that who know what the fuck they're doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...