Bernie Sanders 2020 Watch

[Rougarou 594]

Can't. help. it.

Reading OFA reminded me of the lulz:

['stache 21,836]

On 4/8/2020 at 5:19 PM, bad_teammate said:

What is it in Joe's history or ideology that makes you think he'll replace Thomas with someone to Thomas's left? Or even RBG? Or anyone?

Of all your trolling, this is literally the stupidest thing you've ever said. JFC.

[bad_teammate 13,224]

Bernie on PodSaveAmerica this week.

lol, what a stupid bunch of assholes American voters are

[Rougarou 594]

Bad_Teammate, I have been reading about political machines of the past/yesteryear and it struck me that you might have been in favor of those and might actually think a political machine in modern times would be awesome. Specifically learning about Tammany Hall and how it helped the Irish and Jews, etc. in NY. Generally machines typically help minorities and the middle class white folks are against it. That alone made me think of you.

I guess the question would be an ethical one: If something is fundamentally illegal and corrupt, but furthers equality or whatever else-- do the ends justify the means for you? Or are you a "law and order every time, that's us" player even if the law/order is diametrically opposed to your specific and particular ethic, moral or value?

How this pertains to Bernie is that I could see a bunch of Bernie Bros be political machine folks.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,211]

4 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Bad_Teammate, I have been reading about political machines of the past/yesteryear and it struck me that you might have been in favor of those and might actually think a political machine in modern times would be awesome. Specifically learning about Tammany Hall and how it helped the Irish and Jews, etc. in NY. Generally machines typically help minorities and the middle class white folks are against it. That alone made me think of you.

I guess the question would be an ethical one: If something is fundamentally illegal and corrupt, but furthers equality or whatever else-- do the ends justify the means for you? Or are you a "law and order every time, that's us" player even if the law/order is diametrically opposed to your specific and particular ethic, moral or value?

How this pertains to Bernie is that I could see a bunch of Bernie Bros be political machine folks.

Naaah, too much work for Bernie Bros to become a political machine.  The first sign of adversity they throw a fit and quit.

[bad_teammate 13,224]

16 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Bad_Teammate, I have been reading about political machines of the past/yesteryear and it struck me that you might have been in favor of those and might actually think a political machine in modern times would be awesome. Specifically learning about Tammany Hall and how it helped the Irish and Jews, etc. in NY. Generally machines typically help minorities and the middle class white folks are against it. That alone made me think of you.

I guess the question would be an ethical one: If something is fundamentally illegal and corrupt, but furthers equality or whatever else-- do the ends justify the means for you? Or are you a "law and order every time, that's us" player even if the law/order is diametrically opposed to your specific and particular ethic, moral or value?

How this pertains to Bernie is that I could see a bunch of Bernie Bros be political machine folks.

In terms of Tammany Hall specifically, not really, but I think there's a really interesting vein of conversation here that goes against the normal "common sense" view of "corruption" among our set of people.

Globally, "anti-corruption" is often just a political or class warfare tool used against the poor or working classes, because the poor cannot write the laws, so anything that enriches them is unlawful. Meanwhile, the rich write the laws, so anything that enriches them is legal. In those terms, "corruption" is a legal consideration, not a moral/ethical consideration. And my position always is that morality/ethics supersedes law.

So I fully support economically-corrupt populism in moral and ethical terms. Giving money to the working class and poor is great, whether it is not legally or illegally doesn't matter to me at all. (I actually think someone who is strictly legalistic in their view is either genuinely stupid or some level of sociopath.)

Now, the HUGE problem I have with machines is with democratic interference. I am pro-democracy, so anything that stands between a man and his ballot is unacceptable to me. And anything that weights one man's ballot more than another's is unacceptable to me. Boss Tweed controlling the ballot box is unacceptable, but him throwing some cash under the table to working people is awesome.

But what I hate even more than Boss Tweed are the elites who conspired against him.

It's an eternal struggle, and I think it's important to be on the side of the masses.

[bad_teammate 13,224]

The political machine I'd like to see is this:
- 100% voter participation (no blocks. everyone over 18 can vote with zero restrictions (legal troubles, prison, etc...)) (maybe even legally required voting)
- A federal jobs guarantee
- Generous universal healthcare
- Society-first economic priorities (environment, elder/child-care, etc...)
- Publicly-funded elections
- Major controls on political spending outside the process (with major enforcement teeth)

Basically, I want a political competition to see who can deliver the most for the masses. The party officials in South/Central America who secretly hand out money and food to people to bring their family to the voting booth? I want that done in the open. Campaigns should be, "Here's what we will give you, the people." instead of "Here's what we will suck out of you to give to our friends."

Our economy should exist to serve the people, not the elites. The private accrual of wealth should only be allowed in the context of promoting the greater good. Individual private wealth sufficient to buy democracy should never be allowed. Want to start a business and get rich? That's awesome. But there's a cap on how much you can have and what you can do with it, because we don't want kings.

[Rougarou 594]

5 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

The political machine I'd like to see is this:
- 100% voter participation (no blocks. everyone over 18 can vote with zero restrictions (legal troubles, prison, etc...)) (maybe even legally required voting)
- A federal jobs guarantee
- Generous universal healthcare
- Society-first economic priorities (environment, elder/child-care, etc...)
- Publicly-funded elections
- Major controls on political spending outside the process (with major enforcement teeth)

Basically, I want a political competition to see who can deliver the most for the masses. The party officials in South/Central America who secretly hand out money and food to people to bring their family to the voting booth? I want that done in the open. Campaigns should be, "Here's what we will give you, the people." instead of "Here's what we will suck out of you to give to our friends."

Our economy should exist to serve the people, not the elites. The private accrual of wealth should only be allowed in the context of promoting the greater good. Individual private wealth sufficient to buy democracy should never be allowed. Want to start a business and get rich? That's awesome. But there's a cap on how much you can have and what you can do with it, because we don't want kings.

First off, thanks for responding. Interesting viewpoint if nothing else.

Secondly, what is to stop the bolded from becoming a pay-for-votes scheme by the uber-wealthy? Can you imagine Bloomberg being able to buy the votes using $1bn? 

[bad_teammate 13,224]

Just now, Rougarou said:

Secondly, what is to stop the bolded from becoming a pay-for-votes scheme by the uber-wealthy? Can you imagine Bloomberg being able to buy the votes using $1bn? 

A couple of things here...

First, there's no perfect system. There's no set-it-and-forget-it ruleset we could institute. The best we can do is fix our eyes on the best goal and constantly shift position to maintain that focus based on what happens.

Second...

---------------------------------------------------------------
- Publicly-funded elections
- Major controls on political spending outside the process (with major enforcement teeth)
...
Individual private wealth sufficient to buy democracy should never be allowed. Want to start a business and get rich? That's awesome. But there's a cap on how much you can have and what you can do with it, because we don't want kings.
---------------------------------------------------------------

If someone is trying to buy votes with their private wealth we should either literally guillotine them or expropriate their wealth.

We would have to, by necessity, have a wealth cap to avoid this problem. There's no other way to prevent control by the elites. Bloomberg can't spend $1B buying votes if he's only got $20M to his name. He couldn't build the vast network of media and philanthropic connections he used to elevate his status as anything more than a regional joke. Money is that power, and to crib a line from the good doctor West, no one man should have all that power.

The bribery I advocate is solely in terms of using public wealth to enrich the people. It would be about saying, "Look at all this wealth you create, here is how we will use it to benefit you." That already happens here, of course, but we don't call it "corruption". We call it "earmarks" or "pork" or "economic development" or "welfare" or "entitlements".

Take this video here...

Let's do this, but for real.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,211]

Maybe just a coincidence that Bernie’s surge pretty much shit all over itself when he got Flavor Flav fired from Public Enemy.  I remember our resident ultimate progressive “Democrat” bragging about that shit.

Biden should pick a VP candidate that condones Flav coming back.

Yeeeeeeeeeeah booooooy.

 

[bad_teammate 13,224]

I'll give you attention if no one else will, Fudge.

I'm here for you.

[bad_teammate 13,224]

@hornyStalinM4A on Twitter posts a snake emoji on Twitter and CNN/MSNBC harangue Bernie constantly about what he has to say about this horrific treatment of women online.

A staffer credibly accuses Joe Biden of rape while corroborating evidence piles up and CNN/MSNBC are as silent as the grave.

[Incredulity 11,682]

Pos rep for made up twitter handle.  For some fucking reason that has me rolling.

[Message Board User 12,396]

Da fuq.

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13,050]

Give 'em hell, Bernie. The amounts of $$ are staggering when you think of what a difference it could have made in the lives of so many Americans.

 

[washparkhorn 9,939]

A comprehensive post-mortem of why Sanders lost the nomination. 

Dense read, but for some wondering why Sanders lost momentum - an interesting analysis. Nothing earth shattering. 

https://www.collidemag.com/post/how-warren-and-professional-class-left-undermined-sanders-2020

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13,050]

I didn't run across a thread for Bernie Sanders as Senator, but since this happened in 2020 it's going here. If you happened to miss it, which with the speed of certain threads is easy to do, give it a watch. It's a half an hour, so takes a little extra time, but it's worth listening to him speak eloquently about our time here in the present and what we are facing. I think the announcer said it was his first event since leaving the presidential race. Welcome back, Bernie. You're a good man.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?476214-1/senator-bernie-sanders-challenges-president-trump-voter-fraud-transfer-power-comments

[bad_teammate 13,224]

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]