Mega-Thread: Democratic 2020 Primaries

[Fugus]

<SNIP for length>

You misunderstand, I didn't say I would only vote for Sanders or Warren, I said I would not vote for Biden. There is a difference.

I would vote for someone who won't touch social security and medicare while trying to fix stuff, I won't vote for someone trying to cut them.

And you try to blame the Bernie or Bust crowd and not the actions of the DNC and Clinton that created them to begin with. I wasn't even a member of them and was fully willing to back her Clinton till who actions with DWS where she hired her directly into her campaign after being forced to resign from the DNC chair for her actions. Don't blame the bernie crowd for that, blame Clinton.

The DNC in action in 2016 created that mess and cost them the entire thing because of it.

Now, I will gladly support a candidate who isn't Sanders or Warren if they actually try and fix stuff, but I will not vote to make sure worse and go for a big bad just because I have a bigger bad at the other side. And that isn't saying I am waiting for the perfect candidate either. Just not one who actively fights against the will of the their own voters thinking they have it on lock down.

The DNC needs to learn to actually listen to its voters and not trying to think they are owed the votes and largely ignoring and placating them in favor of donors. Then maybe they can actually get donations largely for their voters who actually support them instead. Or turn to public funding and cut all donations out outright.

[Theodarzna]

*shrugs*
I'm not willing to condemn Gabbard for shaking hands with Kissinger. I think she can be an asset for an upcoming admin. People condemning her for what exactly? Not being liberal on foreign policies?

As long as she washed her hands after touching that thing, I am sure no evil spirit will have attached itself to her.

[Shadowferal]

You don't understand. The solution to every problem in America is violence. Black people getting uppity? More violence. Poor people complaining? Violence? Foreign countries not giving up their assets? Violence? School shooters? Even MORE FUCKING VIOLENCE.

Don't you have a Brexit to worry about?

[Khaza-R]

Will you fuck off Skroe, you are always cheerleading for some stupid fucking pointless war somewhere. Blah blah blah war this war that. Do the world a fucking favour and annex yourself with a blunt object.

- - - Updated - - -



You don't understand. The solution to every problem in America is violence. Black people getting uppity? More violence. Poor people complaining? Violence? Foreign countries not giving up their assets? Violence? School shooters? Even MORE FUCKING VIOLENCE.

If you aren't a deranged sociopath crazed with bloodlust then you are the dangerous one in the US.

Gabbard's ultimate sin is approaching that of a normal human being who is reluctant to use violence. She must be made an example of.

I like you.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, constant appearances on Fox and RT is another bad look for her. Rupert Murdoch and Putin are among the worst of the Establishment in the world order. Taking "free appearances" from the the establishment, is a bad look for an "anti-establishment" candidate.

She's totally beholden to Assad, Putin, Murdoch, and Tucker Gorton Carlson the III.

The only thing more pathetic than a neo-con is a liberal who defends the US genocidal military policies in the Middle East. Fucking vile scum if there ever was such a thing

[Masark]

The only thing more pathetic than a neo-con is a liberal who defends the US genocidal military policies in the Middle East.

Yes, genocidal policies like "Let's go home* so the Turks can commit genocide unopposed" policy.

[Khaza-R]

Yes, genocidal policies like "Let's go home* so the Turks can commit genocide unopposed" policy.

That's cute you think the US ever cared about genocide or human rights when the previous administration was complicit in promoting an Alawite genocide in Syria.

[Theodarzna]

That's cute you think the US ever cared about genocide or human rights when the previous administration was complicit in promoting an Alawite genocide in Syria.

If we are for stopping the Turks from committing genocide than a forever war in Syria seems like a bonkers answer. So, rather than invade Turkey on some righteous crusade to stop their genocide lust that no amount of Armenians could sate; we are now hostages forever stuck in Syria in a perpetual war without end unwilling to just help Assad rebuild his country and unable to leave because our "ally" will do something super evil, but not evil enough to justify a direct war against them.... so I guess its not that big of a deal. Only big enough of a deal to justify an eternal occupation force in Syria, but not enough of one to you know drop troops into Istanbul and Ankara and and defeat the evil genociders.

[Skroe]

I like you.

I honestly don't know why burners even bother. It says clearly in my sig I ignore them auotomatically. The only way I see it is if people like yourself quote them.

The only thing more pathetic than a neo-con is a liberal who defends the US genocidal military policies in the Middle East. Fucking vile scum if there ever was such a thing

Did you fall through a time portal from the year 2003? Because utilizing Neocon when we're 3.5 months out from entering the 3rd decade of the 21st century is bizarre. Actual Neocon's havent been a thing for a very long time. John Bolton was like the last one.

Your point, as a whole though, is of course complete rubbish. Before the US had deep engagement in the region, they slaughtered each other. After the US is disengaged, as it focuses on Europe and the Indo-Pacific, they'll still slaughter each other.

The US is not the problem. The regional fundamentals are. You think you've seen blood letting? You have no idea. Iran will get a nuclear weapon in the next 20 years. Saudi Arabia will as well. And Erdogan said just last week that Turkey needs one of its own. A statement doesn't imply much immediately, but it does show his thinking. The entire middle east, with three muslim countries that all want to be hegenomic... all with a taste for nuclear weapons.

That's the likely future.

Gabbard's Assad hugging is in no small part due to her thought that he would best fight ISIS and restore control to the hinterlands that his government lost control of (about 1/3rd the country). But ISIS and terrorism is yesterday's problem. Which is why comments like yours about the Middle East and Neocons are so... well... premodern.

It is now about China, and the New Cold War. And to a lesser degree keeping Russia contained. But largely China. That is the US's national security threat now. And it blows a hole in the false "US bombs only brown people" narrative.

[Elegiac]

So, let's see...

The Ghost of Democrats Past essentially vagueposted that Tulsi Gabbard's campaign was being groomed as a vector for foreign electoral interference which Gabbard then proceeded to basically confirm that it was her by blowing up on social media and then...being late to her own campaign rally to appear on Tucker Carlson for which she is now being shit on by her opponent in her district's primary.

...'Kay. Anyway.

Realistically the last debate hasn't done anything but confirm external trends; Warren is now the Democrat frontrunner, Biden's campaign is running hard to stand still, and the DNC does not know how the fuck to run an election in the year of our lord twenty nineteen.

The two things which have changed, however:

- Three fourths of The Squad™ have or are set to endorse Bernie Sanders and he appears to be trying hard to beat back the health question with more campaign appearances. I'm not sure if this is going to be enough to rescue his campaign given that recent polling in some early primary states still doesn't look good for him versus Warren or Biden, but I think the lasting impact here will be cementing AOC and Co. as formal leaders of the progressive wing of the party.

- Buttigieg's recent swing to the right in an attempt to capture some of the centrist votes Biden was haemorrhaging which, to some extent, appears to have worked given his surge. Let me be clear; in no way is Pete Buttigieg going to be the Democratic candidate, and it isn't because he's gay - it's because he has a terrible relationship with black voters. What this may actually end up doing is cleaving into Biden's support since he is cozying up to the centrist and donor lobby and is a fresher, younger, and clearly more cynical candidate.

Given Biden's campaign is running hard to stand still, a centrist contender is the last thing it can afford given Warren's surge.

[Skroe]

- Three fourths of The Squad™ have or are set to endorse Bernie Sanders and he appears to be trying hard to beat back the health question with more campaign appearances. I'm not sure if this is going to be enough to rescue his campaign given that recent polling in some early primary states still doesn't look good for him versus Warren or Biden, but I think the lasting impact here will be cementing AOC and Co. as formal leaders of the progressive wing of the party.

I think it's just more simple than that.

I believe most of the squad was involved in the Bernie 2016 campaign in some capacity, and all road their way to the House on the back of carrying his progressive standard forward. It helped turn obscure candidates into elected name recognition power-brokers (of a sort, let's not get too carried away).

In short, they kind of "owe" Bernie. I don't mean actually owe him, in terms of goods exchanged. "Owe" in the sense of appreciation. In all liklihood this Bernie's last bow. With Biden and Warren looking to probably clean up on Super Tuesday if things don't move too much - and Warren having clearly pulled away from a virtual tie with Bernie 2 months ago or so - Bernie is probably out in March, though I suspect he's going to be that guy and drag it to the Convention because he's kind of a shitty dude and not a team player.

Their endorsement is really more so them showing appreciation of Bernie for getting them where they are indirectly. I mean, wouldn't the odd thing have been for AOC, who worked for Bernie, to endorse Warren? Or Biden? I think that would have been a pretty scummy thing to happen.

There is an analog of sort in 2016. There were many African-American progressives who were ideologically more in keeping with Bernie Sanders. But they endorsed Hillary Clinton because, frankly, the Clinton's made their lives. The Clinton's building up of the once emaciated Democratic Party in the 1990s countless people's careers and opened many, many door. That was kind of the farce regarding the whole outrage about super-delegates at the time. What were these people going to do (even though HRC won an absolute delegate majority already)? Turn against the woman who in the 1990s with her Husband, helped start their career? Of course that was never going to happen.

I don't think in any cases here, the loyalty exhibited is anything to be ashamed of. I think it speaks well of everyone's character. We shouldn't simply use people and then not help them when they need it, right?

Bernie needed help to rebound after a potential (and still likely) candidacy ending medical episode. AOC and co very clearly recognized that. So they do the right thing and offered to help.

Not a fan of their politics at all. But it's a stand up thing to do. I'm sure if Warren is the nominee, all the squad will make sure progressives are rallied when Warren pretends to be a centrist for a few months.

[Elegiac]

I think it's just more simple than that.

I believe most of the squad was involved in the Bernie 2016 campaign in some capacity, and all road their way to the House on the back of carrying his progressive standard forward. It helped turn obscure candidates into elected name recognition power-brokers (of a sort, let's not get too carried away).

In short, they kind of "owe" Bernie. I don't mean actually owe him, in terms of goods exchanged. "Owe" in the sense of appreciation. In all liklihood this Bernie's last bow. With Biden and Warren looking to probably clean up on Super Tuesday if things don't move too much - and Warren having clearly pulled away from a virtual tie with Bernie 2 months ago or so - Bernie is probably out in March, though I suspect he's going to be that guy and drag it to the Convention because he's kind of a shitty dude and not a team player.

Their endorsement is really more so them showing appreciation of Bernie for getting them where they are indirectly. I mean, wouldn't the odd thing have been for AOC, who worked for Bernie, to endorse Warren? Or Biden? I think that would have been a pretty scummy thing to happen.

There is an analog of sort in 2016. There were many African-American progressives who were ideologically more in keeping with Bernie Sanders. But they endorsed Hillary Clinton because, frankly, the Clinton's made their lives. The Clinton's building up of the once emaciated Democratic Party in the 1990s countless people's careers and opened many, many door. That was kind of the farce regarding the whole outrage about super-delegates at the time. What were these people going to do (even though HRC won an absolute delegate majority already)? Turn against the woman who in the 1990s with her Husband, helped start their career? Of course that was never going to happen.

I don't think in any cases here, the loyalty exhibited is anything to be ashamed of. I think it speaks well of everyone's character. We shouldn't simply use people and then not help them when they need it, right?

Bernie needed help to rebound after a potential (and still likely) candidacy ending medical episode. AOC and co very clearly recognized that. So they do the right thing and offered to help.

Not a fan of their politics at all. But it's a stand up thing to do. I'm sure if Warren is the nominee, all the squad will make sure progressives are rallied when Warren pretends to be a centrist for a few months.

I definitely think that's also part of it - especially considering the notable exception is Ayanna Pressley for obvious reasons.

For whatever reason and whatever one's opinions on the subject, Bernie Sanders has effectively changed the face of the modern Democratic party. I may not agree with his methods and might find the cult of personality distasteful, but I am immensely appreciative that America finally has the beginnings of an activist left wing.

Too much consensus breeds indolence. The Democrats need some fire in their blood, and centrists make for poor kindling.

[Skroe]

I definitely think that's also part of it - especially considering the notable exception is Ayanna Pressley for obvious reasons.

For whatever reason and whatever one's opinions on the subject, Bernie Sanders has effectively changed the face of the modern Democratic party. I may not agree with his methods and might find the cult of personality distasteful, but I am immensely appreciative that America finally has the beginnings of an activist left wing.

Too much consensus breeds indolence. The Democrats need some fire in their blood, and centrists make for poor kindling.

Be careful what you wish for. The right thought that, and it got the Tea Party and then Trump. Historically on the left, the saga of the left eating its own who did not display sufficient ideological purity is one of the oldest political tales there is.

And Republicans didn't think the Tea Party was what it ultimately became at the start either. And then it did.

[Ghostpanther]

Interesting.....https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hil...ashington-post

Speculation is growing that Hillary Clinton will make a last-minute entry into the 2020 presidential race after reports published Tuesday said members of the Democratic establishment doubted any of the party’s current top candidates can beat President Trump next November.

Clinton in recent weeks has privately stated she would enter the 2020 presidential race if she were certain she could win, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

[kaelleria]

Interesting.....https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hil...ashington-post

Speculation is growing that Hillary Clinton will make a last-minute entry into the 2020 presidential race after reports published Tuesday said members of the Democratic establishment doubted any of the party’s current top candidates can beat President Trump next November.

Clinton in recent weeks has privately stated she would enter the 2020 presidential race if she were certain she could win, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

Fox News: Your source for all Hillary Clinton related news.

She's not going to run again.

[Orbitus]

Interesting.....https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hil...ashington-post

Speculation is growing that Hillary Clinton will make a last-minute entry into the 2020 presidential race after reports published Tuesday said members of the Democratic establishment doubted any of the party’s current top candidates can beat President Trump next November.

Clinton in recent weeks has privately stated she would enter the 2020 presidential race if she were certain she could win, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

Yeah, no, not going to happen. They have been wanting her to run again since 2016, just so that they could have a chance to win in 2020, just about every Democratic candidate beats Trump easily, that is above 10% in the polls. So of course state TV wants Clinton to try again.

[Skroe]

Fox News: Your source for all Hillary Clinton related news.

She's not going to run again.

Trump's in trouble!

QUICK HIT THE PANIC BUTTON!




It's incredible these people think this shit still works, lol.

[Dontrike]

Interesting.....https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hil...ashington-post

Speculation is growing that Hillary Clinton will make a last-minute entry into the 2020 presidential race after reports published Tuesday said members of the Democratic establishment doubted any of the party’s current top candidates can beat President Trump next November.

Clinton in recent weeks has privately stated she would enter the 2020 presidential race if she were certain she could win, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

Hillary lost. Get over it.

By chance do you check under your bed to make sure Hillary isn't under it?

[Ghostpanther]

Fox News: Your source for all Hillary Clinton related news.

She's not going to run again.

The source was actually the New York Times.

Here is another source, reporting on the New York Times report....https://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clint...190339505.html

Hillary Clinton has told people privately that she would consider joining the 2020 Democratic primary, but only if she thought she could win. The private conversations were aired publicly in a new report from the New York Times, which spoke with several people involved with Democratic politics, many of whom are concerned that the current crop of candidates is less than ideal.

I am not saying she is going to run. But it would not surprise me at all.

[draynay]

I thought you guys hated "unnamed sources".

[Shadowferal]

By chance do you check under your bed to make sure Hillary isn't under it?

I know I did...thank the gods I saw nothing but old playboys dust bunnies.