Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee

used2b

By used2b
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

He might win the primary

I don’t see him winning the primary.  He needs both Bernie and Liz to tank or he needs them to split the progressive vote just perfectly enough to eek it out.  

It would have helped Biden if Pete stayed in the progressive lane to siphon from Bernie/Liz but the shape shifting robot decided to go full Delaney. 

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

Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Hugo what you and BT struggle with is the same thing that Buchananites struggled with in 1996- you can’t seem to believe that a very large and crucial block in your party doesn’t seem to actually agree with you about what do after the election. You may eventually get a plurality, and it might even be 2020, but Warren would have to find a way to bring in some of those those who want something else.

That’s what Trump did, by the way- he eventually found an appeal that brought just enough mainstream Republicans into the Buchananist coalition.

The ingredient Trump had that has yet to be seen in the Democratic Party is the leadership position.  Who is the perceived leader of the Democratic Party right now?  It’s kind of up for debate. 

Once Trump took over the GOP, the entire party fell in line almost over night, at least rhetorically.  I’m not saying that’s what would happen under President Warren but the change in the Democratic Party would be transformative.  I’m not sure how it would go with Bernie though, because of the bad blood. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

And, ironically, what Trump did to bring them in was convince them (absurdly) that he was the return to normalcy and the way things used to be.  His slogan wasn’t Sweeping Revolutionary Change Now!   It was Make America Great Again!

Trump was a disruptive insurgent, he still is, and Republicans love him for it.  

I never interpreted “Make America Great Again!” as a pitch to return to some normal status quo.  I took it as a radical change to move the United States towards an era long gone.  

Ironically, this is similar to Warren’s current pitch of creating an America where the opportunities she was afforded are reinstalled and funded via the wealth tax.  

“2 CENTS! 2 CENTS! 2 CENTS!”

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Hugo what you and BT struggle with is the same thing that Buchananites struggled with in 1996- you can’t seem to believe that a very large and crucial block in your party doesn’t seem to actually agree with you about what do after the election.

Bozo out here teaching grandma to suck eggs.

If the 2020 Democratic voting bloc is just old people (white and black) and professional class post-grads, Bernie and his movement are doomed. The only way forward for Bernie is the activation of populations that have been alienated (either by circumstance or legislation/districting) from the voting process. Also, there is a huge swath of the existing bloc that will simply follow where they are led.

I already know that conservative Dems will go to Trump. They went to McCain after the '08 primary at up to a 25% clip.

If you think you're breaking news to me that Ski-Doo dealership owners won't like or vote for Bernie, that's not news to me. If I can't get them, I want the employees they steal wages from.

I know 87-year-old Maude hates everyone to the left of Joe Manchin, I get it. If I can't get her, I'll take her homecare workers and the guy who delivers her groceries.

-----------

Listen to AOC's speech...

It's about a(n electoral) working class revolution. It's about telling people that their lives are worth more than what capital tells them their lives are worth, which is as close to nothing as can be gotten away with.

"Last February I was working as a waitress in Downtown Manhattan at a taqueria. I worked shoulder to shoulder with undocumented workers who often worked harder and hardest for the least amount of money. I was on my feet working 12-hour days with no structured breaks. I didn't have healthcare. I wasn't being paid a living wage. And I didn't think I deserved any of those things, because that is the script we tell working people here and all over this country, that your inherent worth and value as a human being is dependent on an income that another person decided to underpay us. But what we're here to do is turn around that very basic logic. It wasn't until I heard of a man by the name of Bernie Sanders that I began to question and assert and recognizing my inherent value as a human being that deserves healthcare, housing, education, and a living wage."

No one has this message. No one.

You have to turn it up, but when she says "I didn't think I deserved any of those things", different people erupt. That's a line that millions and millions of Americans identify with and NEVER hear.

She didn't think she was worth a living wage or good benefits or fair treatment in labor until she heard Bernie's message. He inspired her to run against the 3rd most powerful Democrat in Congress in the primary and beat him. Then she won a seat in Congress. And now she's a superstar who is passing that inspiration forward to young people and women and people of color across the nation.

That is a movement of the masses of people.

It's not a Koch-brothers-funded astroturf movement like the Tea Party. It's not a racist, bigoted Christian white supremacist movement (which has its own natural demographic limitations) like Buchanan's various runs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89447

Posted
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

So it sounds like we need a social media platform that is big enough to handle a bunch of social sharing and features but also doesn't need to sell out its userbase to generate billions in revenue every quarter, right?

Almost like a ... nationalized Facebook?

LOL, yeah, that sounds like a good idea when you get people like Donald Trump in the White House.  Or the Republicans in general.   Remember when George W.'s administration was wanting their Total Information Awareness database, compiling all sorts of very private information on every American citizen?  Everybody flipped the fuck out about it (except some Republicans), but here we are in 2019 and you want to just hand that over to the government.  

Quote

You have to invent theoretical scary government demons in an attempt to distract from the actual corporate demons I can point you to right now. Thus is the libertarian mindset; completely disconnected from actual reality and 100% existing in a theoretical fear-space.

See above: Donald Trump is in the White House.

So no, we don't need a nationalized social media platform, because it will be abused to hell and back by the government, with far bigger implications than being abused by a private company.  If you don't understand that, go read up on the Chinese government and how they view social media and what their citizens post on it, and how they plan on scoring the loyalty of their citizens.

23 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

I don't want the platforms to exist at that size at all. But, if for some stupid reason they HAVE to be that massive, I want them under as much public scrutiny and accountability as possible.

They don't work as well unless they are at that scale/size though - that's the whole point.  I have relatives in Scotland, Canada, and Germany, and friends in another dozen countries.  I don't want to deal with the hassle of a bunch of nationalized social media platforms to easily communicate with them, and therefore I'm fine with giving up the data I do to a private company.

Like I said, nationalize that shit, and you'll have a Stephen Miller making sure that the government is sifting through that data, looking to arrest people, bar them from traveling to or from the country, etc..  This isn't some kind of pie-in-the-sky notion either - we know how this administration works and the kinds of people within it.

And this after all of the Snowden revelations.

And by the way: travel internationally, and you'll find your computers/devices can and will be gone through by US officials when you return, including your social media profiles.  Nationalizing those platforms makes that even easier for them.

Edited by atomheartbevo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89447

Posted
Posted

I'm curious BT, if your hatred of social media is tied to how these platforms were used to spread fake news/ads/etc.

If so, it's good to take a look back at how we got to that point.  Let’s talk about the elephants in the room, through a series of communications with our Dear Aunt Edna:

Spoiler

Aunt Edna, 2004: There’s this Alec Jones guy talking about how 9/11 was done by the Bush administration.

Surly Users:  Alex Jones thinks we didn’t land on the moon, among other things.

Aunt Edna: Oh, well, you know your Uncle Frank worked on the Apollo project, did I tell you about how we got to see a launch from the VIP area?

 

Aunt Edna, 2005: This Alec Jones guy is saying that FEMA is building death camps

Surly Users: FEMA put together some stuff for people displaced by Katrina, and Alex Jones is the guy I told you about, who thinks we didn’t land on the moon.

Aunt Edna: Oh right, you know your Uncle Frank worked on the Apollo project, did I tell you about how we got to see a launch from the VIP area?

 

Aunt Edna, 2009: Don’t you find this Obama birth certificate weird?  What if he wasn’t born in America?

Surly Users: It doesn’t matter, his mom was American

Aunt Edna: Yes, but on Fox News, they are talking about how maybe he wasn’t born here.

Surly Users: Don’t believe everything you hear on Fox News.  His mother was an American, that's all that matters, your casserole is probably burning.

 

Aunt Edna, 2011:  You know, there’s still questions about where Obama was born.

Surly Users: No, they are just fake rumors

Aunt Edna: But this billionaire and TV star, Donald Trump is talking about it on Good Morning America

Surly Users: What the fuck?

Aunt Edna: I’m sorry dear, you want me to make some fudge?

Surly Users: Yeah, that would be great, we will see you at Christmas

Aunt Edna: So what about that birth certificate?

Surly Users: I think somebody is just scamming him

 

Aunt Edna, 2012: You know dear, that Donald Trump is willing to donate $5 million to charity if Obama will show his colllege and passport applications, why won’t Obama show his birth certificate?  And there’s that sheriff in Arizona who claims he wasn’t an American as well.

Surly Users:  Trump is a reality show TV star and is angry at Obama.  Even if Obama was born in Kenya, his mother was an American, so he’s America, just like John McCain was born in Panama and Ted Cruz was born in Canada

Aunt Edna: Ted Cruz was born in Canada?

Surly Users: Yep, look, I have to go, I’ll talk to you later!

 

Aunt Edna, 2015: Have you heard what that Alec Jones has been saying about all these school shootings?

Surly Users: Remember, Jones is the nut I told you about earlier.

Aunt Edna:  But Donald Trump was just on his show and said he had an amazing reputation, and Donald Trump is probably going to be the Republican candidate

Surly Users: Donald Trump is not going to win the nomination, and it doesn’t change the fact that Jones is a conspiracy nut

 

Aunt Edna, 2017:  My friends have been talking about this on Facebook, have you heard the latest about the Deep State and what their plans are for us?

Surly Users:  It’s just fake stuff ginned up by conspiracy nuts

Aunt Edna: But President Trump is talking about it, and Fox News is talking about it, and Fox News is the only news outlet that President Trump says is not fake news.

Surly Users:  But it is fake news!

Aunt Edna: But President Trump is on there a lot, and I don’t think the President of the United States would be on a fake news channel.  

Surly Users: I need to go trim my fingernails, I’ll talk to you later!

Rather than wanting these platforms destroyed, how about we talk about how the President is deliberately lying to the public, constantly, and how he is using Fox News to spread those lies (and how Fox News spreads their own conspiracy shit).

As mentioned in my maybe-not-so-hypothetical discussions with Dear Aunt Edna, we went from a point where this shit was being propagated by conspiracy nuts like Alex Jones, to the President of the United States and his official cable news outlet.

There was a point at which we could easily dissuade Aunt Edna of certain stories, simply because we could point at the batshit origins.  It becomes a lot more difficult when the President of the United States and his official mouthpiece TV network is spreading this same shit.

Break up the social platforms all you want BT, but that doesn't stop Trump and Fox News.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

Ok.  We will see if those masses become larger than the other masses.  Ted Cruz, Buchanan, Ron Paul, Bernie last time, and every other politician with ideology outside the mainstream all talk about that grassroots revolution  carrying them to victory.

Unlike previous political environments, the mainstream ideologies are now borderline invisible.  Trump has annihilated and radicalized the right so much, not putting kids in cages equals open borders in the eyes of his base.  

The democrats are in an identity crisis trying to determine how hard left they want to go with the alienated never-Trump conservatives trying their hardest to pull the Dems towards whatever remains of the center so they can eventually vote GOP anyway when they deem the democrats “too far left.”

Making historical comparisons to recent unsuccessful political movements is no longer relevant in my opinion because the Trump movement is the radical ideology that succeeded.  Determining the appropriate response to that is where we’ve been for a while. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, longhornmatt said:

Ok.  We will see if those masses become larger than the other masses. 

Yes, we will.

What you might want to think about is where your loyalties, ethics, and values lie, because they seem to be in a fairly shitty place.

4 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Like I said, nationalize that shit, and you'll have a Stephen Miller making sure that the government is sifting through that data, looking to arrest people, bar them from traveling to or from the country, etc..  

OH GOD I CAN'T IMAGINE SUCH A THING

zuckerbergmark_102319as2_lead.jpg?itok=i

The fucking guy has a Caesar haircut and you're trying to make me worried about the government. Fuck off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 20705

Posted
Posted

It's funny, I was literally talking to Gandorf yesterday about Yang supposedly supporting "Medicare For All" on his website, but I saw him propose a public option in an interview back in April. I wondered why no one had called him out on it yet.

And then tonight: 

 

I mean, it's still up as Medicare For all on his website: https://www.yang2020.com/policies/medicare-for-all/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Fucking mainstream media. They just said on Morning Joe that Uncle Joe feels safe and comfortable as opposed to going from radical (Donald) to radical (Warren). These jagoffs aren't helping for shit. 

The millionaires paid by billionaires are desperate for the working class to never have a champion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

 

Is Klobuchar a viable VP candidate? I didn't think so, but I was pretty much blown away when my dad told me the other day that he really likes her. He's a Bernie guy so that seemed weird. I know the midwest really likes her. 

She'd be a great VP for like, Booker or Castro.  I don't think she adds that much to a Biden, Warren or Bernie top of the ticket. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It's not a "Warrenism", but it's a common political trick to avoid taking a stance.

Candidates should get a limited number of qualifiers like this and should have to hand in a ticket every time they use them. You get 2 per month.

 

When it comes to Israel, the honest answer would be “I don’t know” or “whatever it takes to get to a lasting peace that is fair for everyone involved” which is a politically untenable answer because it comes off as ignorant of the situation.  

I give a lot of runway to politicians on this issue because you can’t exactly go all in on either side without doing more harm than good and alienating a large group of people.  It’s a shit issue for US politicians to be evaluated on by voters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tantric superman

tantric superman 4667

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

 

Is Klobuchar a viable VP candidate? I didn't think so, but I was pretty much blown away when my dad told me the other day that he really likes her. He's a Bernie guy so that seemed weird. I know the midwest really likes her. 

Not sure how old you dad is.  Was talking with my mom, who is middle 80s.  "I really like Klobachar.  So she's in first place.  How do you say Butt-y-geg?  He's really smart, but he's a little mean - and lots of people won't vote for him [He's gay, you know that.].  He's second.  Booker really cracks me up.  He's smart and I like the way his eyes go all over the place."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89447

Posted
Posted

Let me ask you a question @bad_teammate

Let's say you become President, and your party (whichever that is) controls Congress.  You get your wish and nationalize Facebook and put it under your control.

Out of the billion+ users, 170 million Americans use it.  You can pretty much guess that the 800 million+ non-Americans are going to be very reluctant to use it, and a pretty big chunk of that 170 million Americans are also going to bail on it.  Many join Facebook because family/friends/customers are on it, and if their family/friends/customers bail, then they will bail.

So now you have a shadow of what Facebook was.

There is obviously a need for something like Facebook - people want to talk to family/friends/customers/enthusiasts from around the world, and don't give a shit about borders.   Some company starts MyFacebook in Japan, or Costa Rica, or Canada, or wherever, and a billion people and companies flock to it, including Americans.

So the question is, what now BT?  Are you going to try and ban Americans from using the new MyFaceBook, because it's not under the control of the US government?  Are you going to ban proxies and VPNs, are you going to try the impossible and ban it by IP?    What happens when you call their representatives in to testify before Congress or have a meeting with you and they decline?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13049

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I'd rather tie them ankle-to-ankle in a canvas sack full of rocks and sink them in Lake Superior.

Now why you be polluting the boundary waters like that? It's so pretty up there.

28 minutes ago, Js1 said:

She'd be a great VP for like, Booker or Castro.  I don't think she adds that much to a Biden, Warren or Bernie top of the ticket. 

I like Klobuchar, but not as President. Can she be Ag Secretary, or another Cabinet position? I don't know what she'd bring to the table as VP for the folks currently in the lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Yes we need Klobuchar to make sure we secure the vital battleground state of Minnesota.

1984_large.png

She helps in the Midwest (Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania) if the Dem nominee isn't as strong there.  Which is probably why HRC should have chosen someone like Brown in 2016 and we'd have won.  Dude speaks Midwest.

If the nominee is Biden, Warren or Bernie, she adds nothing - they have Midwest appeal already.  She would help a Harris, Booker, Castro type candidate who might need to shore up the Midwest appeal. 

Also joke about Minnesota all you want -  HRC +1.5 in 2016.  Granted, the House candidates racked up a +11.45 margin in 2018, but Trump's campaign is going to target Minnesota, along with the rest of the former Blue Wall, to pull off another upset. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Mojo Hand said:

CNN is all about Klobuchar today because she went from 2% to 3%.

Seems like corporate media is stepping all over their dicks trying to find the fresh centrist alternative to Biden.  "Is it Pete? Is it Amy? Should we give Kamala another crack at this?  We're real sorry about Biden but we need to get someone in there fast because things are not going according to plan.  Now to the Elizabeth Warren campaign where we ask her the same question we've asked 24 times and she still refuses to give a direct yes/no answer."

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85110

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Seems like corporate media is stepping all over their dicks trying to find the fresh centrist alternative to Biden.  "Is it Pete? Is it Amy? Should we give Kamala another crack at this?  We're real sorry about Biden but we need to get someone in there fast because things are not going according to plan.  Now to the Elizabeth Warren campaign where we ask her the same question we've asked 24 times and she still refuses to give a direct yes/no answer on."

Well "Warren rising to 1st" storyline is bored.  Media needs more eyeballs - time for a "PETE SURGE? KLOBUCHAR RISING? WILL AN UNKNOWN SINGLE DIGIT CANDIDATE RISE UP AND WIN IOWA?!?!?!!?!?!" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
Just now, Js1 said:

Well "Warren rising to 1st" storyline is bored.  Media needs more eyeballs - time for a "PETE SURGE? KLOBUCHAR RISING? WILL AN UNKNOWN SINGLE DIGIT CANDIDATE RISE UP AND WIN IOWA?!?!?!!?!?!" 

Yeah, as an aside, I have yet to see an official Warren surrogate like a Nina Turner, Symone Sanders, or Kellyanne Conway go on one of the cable news shows pumping Warren.  It seems like she's not even bothering with the TV pundit game.  I don't know what to make of it either.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Seems like corporate media is stepping all over their dicks trying to find the fresh centrist alternative to Biden.  "Is it Pete? Is it Amy? Should we give Kamala another crack at this?  We're real sorry about Biden but we need to get someone in there fast because things are not going according to plan.  Now to the Elizabeth Warren campaign where we ask her the same question we've asked 24 times and she still refuses to give a direct yes/no answer on."

This is accurate because there is no mention of Sanders, a candidate who barely exists if you watch CNN/MSNBC

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Good lord Kamala in California. 

Even in a bullshit poll she should be doing better that 5th.

 

Damn, I expected her to not be first or even second, but that is abysmal. We'll see once votes start getting cast though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13132

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Out of the billion+ users, 170 million Americans use it.  You can pretty much guess that the 800 million+ non-Americans are going to be very reluctant to use it, and a pretty big chunk of that 170 million Americans are also going to bail on it.  

Why do you just assume hundreds of millions of people would abandon it? Do you think most people are angry libertarians? Do people abandon nationalized or state-run utilities? No, of course not.

As long as the features people like remain, they will remain.

Quote

There is obviously a need for something like Facebook - people want to talk to family/friends/customers/enthusiasts from around the world, and don't give a shit about borders.   Some company starts MyFacebook in Japan, or Costa Rica, or Canada, or wherever, and a billion people and companies flock to it, including Americans.

Libertarians exist 100% in fantasy worlds with internally-inconsistent logic. Would Americans happily flock to a Japanese social media site if, as you posit above, people are actually ruled by nationalistic loyalties?

Quote

So the question is, what now BT?  Are you going to try and ban Americans from using the new MyFaceBook, because it's not under the control of the US government?  Are you going to ban proxies and VPNs, are you going to try the impossible and ban it by IP?    What happens when you call their representatives in to testify before Congress or have a meeting with you and they decline?

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE GOVERNMENT'S CHEMTRAILS ARE FULL OF MERCURY AND YOUR KIDS BECOME GAY!? #INFOWARS

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...