Mega-Thread: Democratic 2020 Primaries

[Dextroden]

I just pointed out your lies. You're the poor guy who said heart attacks are nonsense, and then couldn't remember his own posts, even after linking them. It's not our fault you're a liar and a reactionary. Next time just ask a clarifying question - really not difficult.

Bernie should have dropped out immediately after his heat attack. That was my initial point, and I've never deviated from it. Your links of my posts only confirm it. Thanks. I guess?

Once again. You call me a list but keep saying you said what I quoted.

Good Lord. Your sodium levels have made you delirious.

[cubby]

Nope. They're are patently useless to the party.

Besides. If people can win without Bernie voters, like claimed last year, why do we need Republicans lying about their support?

Or. Why are we listening to people against M4A?

So votes against Trump aren't welcome? Are patently useless to the Democratic party? Gonna die on two hills in one day?

[Skroe]

A former Republican turned Democratic supporter is a leftover from a bygone era?

Holy fuck you are REALLY out of touch with today's political climate. Someone like Skroe is precisely what the Democrats need to fix the country. A conservative turning to the Democrat's side because the GOP is replete with party-over-country sycophants is a game changer, every time it happens.

You know what's hilarious to me? Our local Trumphadis used to love, just LOVE the old military / tech posts I used to do. They loved the shit out of them. It hit them in their American-fuck-yea pride gspot.

They entirely missed the point of them and I regret doing them. They were not and are not intellectual on the ball enough to treat the topics I broached with the seriousness they deserve.

I used to go into tremendous detail in them because we were dealing with esoteric, interdisciplinary things. It was a mixture of defence needs/technology, governmental policy, strategy, geopolitics, budgeting. They all inform each other. It's all connected. But to get it... to really get it... I had to explain the shape of all the parts.

A lot of people mistook explaining for advocacy. The America fuck-yeah contingent got their war boners off. The anti-war crowd thinks I want to bomb everyone to oblivion. This despite me being against involvement in Syria for years (and only changing my mind, reluctantly, after Assad used chemical weapons and Obama drew his red line).

This despite me calling the War on ISIS a deeply illegal war.
Or saying we should have left Afghanistan in 2005.
Or calling the War on Terror an act of imperial overreach on the level of Napoleon marching on Russia or the Byzantines attacking Persia... a historic disaster for America.
Or saying the single stupidest thing the US can do is attack ran.
Or saying Americans don't remotely appreciate what the Drone War has done to our moral authority around the world.


Me saying the US should hold Russia accountable for its nuclear treaty violations. it's illegal annexation of foreign soil, and China's many offensive actions, is treated as advocacy for war. It's absolutely insane. Take the Russia example: the entire point of a treaty is to resolve differences and reach an understanding WITHOUT war, so when one side cheats that's a big fucking deal that can't be swept under the rug. There MUST be accountability or the entire concept is undermined. NewSTART is likely to fail now BECAUSE INF Failed. That's not a war mongering position. That's a fact of international relations.

Before Trump i used to intentionally avoid making any statements on domestic politics. I stayed in the geopolitics / technology lane. I started talking about domestic politics soley because Trump's Russia entanglements dove tailed in to the then-recent focus on Russia due to Ukraine. It was a natural extension of my foreign policy focus.

But now though, I don't even like talking about the foreign policy/defense topics I used to anymore. I think that it's been instructive as to why foreign policy is only indirectly democratic. Lot of people, as we've seen here, aren't cut out to digest the issue. It's the same thing with Brexit. Putting Brexit to a referendum was insane. The entire point of representative democracy is to elect people whose JOB it is to make the best decision by being fully informed. All explaining how hypersonic cruise missiles with 6000km range would have important and historically meaningful effects on nuclear deterrence, the nuclear weapons budget, US-EU relations, Russia's owns trategic defense, the nuclear weapons establishment, etc. etc.... it's all very interesting but it's almost too much for laymen here. The radical right will see "superfast missile, America fuck yeah!". The radical left will see superfast death machine, not something that would in theory allow the US to retire large amounts of its nuclear arsenal (a GOOD thing!) while still maintaining deterrence in a non-nuclear way, once the technology matures.

One of my favorite ones was this time I attacked Obama's handling of the Iran Deal... which was a disgrace (and got called a war monger for it), but I did so principally by drawing contrast to the absolutely perfect job he and his team did in negotiating NewSTART, which is a gold standard for diplomacy of that type. It's like... what the shit? You can't contrast good against the bad, done by the same guy now? The hell?

We're really living Idiocracy. I think that's my take away from the Trump era. A legitimate appreciation in that lots of people don't care about facts and just want to feel like they are in the right.

[Dextroden]

So votes against Trump aren't welcome? Are patently useless to the Democratic party? Gonna die on two hills in one day?

They must be since the popular vote, right?

[Skroe]

Yet you support every other single time the US did this to Latin America, nobody is buying it, buddy.

I have never supported US intervention in Latin America. I'm especially sensitive to this considering my family is from Colombia, and were, for the record, on the Liberal side during La Violencia (they were prominent politicians who fled to the US during it).

In fact, this was just a few months ago with Venezuela.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post51139629

Of course the irony is that Trump was the one warning about warhawk Hillary.

But in truth, this is just empty threats and everyone knows it. If the US were seriously contemplating any kind of military action in Venezuela, it would have had to be moving assets around for a few weeks now. And none of that is happening.

I'll just repeat what I wrote last year: a US military intervention in Venezeula would be an epochal disaster for at the worst possible time for the US, and House Democrats must block any AUMF and funding for it. But the probability of that actually happening is practically non-existent. It would take Maduro going the full "Assad" and trying to kill everyone in his country opposed to him, for the US to seriously consider something. And we're not close to being there yet.

Unless the US is ready to militarily enforce it's will on this issue, we should not unilaterally be taking a position on this. What happens if the desperate Maduro regime takes hostages when American government personnel stay in the country past the deadline. Do we send in the military? Do be bomb Caracas?

Our statement and our activities in the region must be done through the OAS, or if there is not a consensus there, then with anyone in the OAS-minus the "Bolivarian" countries who could be brought into a consensus. Having Columbia, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina and Chile on the same message with us, would be a foundation of it.

But us picking the winner in Venezuela without being willing to enforce that pick? Risky and stupid. It puts the ball in Maduro's court now. Either he ignores his words, and doesn't do anything to the Americans who stay. Or he does, and a foreign crisis turns into a potentially military affair. Either way, we'll have successfully maneuvered ourselves into a position where Maduro's regime picks the next move, which is completely stupid.

Stability in Latin America is a core interest of the United States, no doubt about it. However it's not yet at the point we should even be thinking about committing major military forces to enforcing that interest. Which means multilateral, not unilateral approaches.

Sorry, you were lying?

[cubby]

They must be since the popular vote, right?

What...? Are you answering a different post?

- - - Updated - - -

Once again. You call me a list but keep saying you said what I quoted.

Good Lord. Your sodium levels have made you delirious.

Calling you out for your lies is an honest reporting of what you did. You referring to my...sodium levels...shows what a classy poster you always are. Well done.

Like I said, next time don't jump to conclusions, and ask a clarifying question.

[Dextroden]

I have never supported US intervention in Latin America. I'm especially sensitive to this considering my family is from Colombia, and were, for the record, on the Liberal side during La Violencia (they were prominent politicians who fled to the US during it).

In fact, this was just a few months ago with Venezuela.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post51139629






Sorry, you were lying?

It must have torn you to ribbons to vote for South America hating Republicans.

- - - Updated - - -

What...? Are you answering a different post?

- - - Updated - - -



Calling you out for your lies is an honest reporting of what you did. You referring to my...sodium levels...shows what a classy poster you always are. Well done.

Like I said, next time don't jump to conclusions, and ask a clarifying question.

What lie? You keep mumbling about something.

[JohnBrown1917]

It must have torn you to ribbons to vote for South America hating Republicans.

For his entire life, but suddenly decided against only when trump came to power.

[Edge-]

It's what it sounds like...

Where does it sound like this?

and we do know that they have speech writers and focus groups... so do the Republicans...

Thank you, neither point is remotely relevant.

but Trump does not seem to stick to script. And the Republicans do not focus on being polite.

Literally not sure what any of this has to do with anything, unless you're arguing that Americans want a colossal asshole in the White House which is sure an interesting position to take.

Ask the people that have twitter wars over it. I do not care either way. I will call a person what they look like to me.

We're talking about the candidates, not shitposting on Twitter. This isn't a thing outside of the far-left for the most part, most progressives don't want you to be a dick and it's simple as that. I've yet to see any of this come up in any campaign, or really outside of Twitter echo chambers.

You can call a person what they look like, but I'd hope that if you corrected you that you'd use their preferred pronouns. It costs you nothing and it makes them feel respected as a fellow human being.

One of the first things that Trump supporters say about Trump is that he is "real"... or "honest" Personally, I disagree, but I did not vote for Trump...

Then they're lying. Objectively, Trump is probably one of the least honest presidents we've ever had. They can feel that way, but that doesn't mean that their feelings are based on anything or that I should accept or respect them because they choose to remain ignorant and wrong.

You can like the guy, but like him for what he is. And he isn't, and never has been, a straight shooter.

[Draco-Onis]

But there is no chance Biden could ever beat Trump.
Bernie has a lot of support. And for his supporters it doesn't matter if Biden or Trump wins.
They won't support the DNC candidate if the DNC screws over Bernie, and I am fine with that.

My preference is basically: Bernie > Trump > any other DNC candidate.

But you don't know that for a fact the election is a year away and who knows what will happen between now and then anyone could win or lose to Trump at this point. In 2016 people were so assured that Hillary will win not sure why they anger voted for Trump, I am sure some Bernie Bros will vote for Trump out of spite but I doubt the vast majority will.

[Shadowferal]

Warren on the ticket is a win imo.

[Draco-Onis]

Depends...

Along with Bernie supporters voting for Trump, you also have these people to worry about:

‘Checks and Balances’ Voters Could Reelect Trump
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/...ect-trump.html

There are so many factors in play for 2020 from foreign interference, youth turn out, voter suppression, Trump scandals due to him delaying the courts until 2020, the economy possibly going into recession or slowing to a crawl. If someone says they 100% knows how things will turn out they are either lying or should buy lottery tickets to better use their psychic powers.

[cubby]

But heart attacks ARE nonsense, and I'm a freaking cardiac nurse.
There is absolutely no reason to drop out of a presidential race just because you had a heart attack once..

They seem to be more than nonsense, and given that Bernie had one during the campaign, rather than back in the past, also seems to make it at least a little serious. The chances of having another one are more than triple over those people who haven't had one.

I guess maybe, could I ask you to explain a little more? It was my understanding that people who have heart attacks need to take it easy for awhile, along with having a severely increased risk of a second one within a year.

[cubby]

But there is no chance Biden could ever beat Trump.
Bernie has a lot of support. And for his supporters it doesn't matter if Biden or Trump wins.
They won't support the DNC candidate if the DNC screws over Bernie, and I am fine with that.

My preference is basically: Bernie > Trump > any other DNC candidate.

You'd vote for Trump over Warren?

[Draco-Onis]

True... a lot can happen; we are still a year or so away from election.

This is what I hate the most about our system there's no reason for the whole thing from primary to election to be done within 1-2 months. We have 2 years worth of elections basically it's really tiring but it also leaves a lot of room for anything to happen.

[Dextroden]

This is what I hate the most about our system there's no reason for the whole thing from primary to election to be done within 1-2 months. We have 2 years worth of elections basically it's really tiring but it also leaves a lot of room for anything to happen.

Doesn't help it's being extended by late joiners. It makes me wonder if anyone else will join. We have a whole mess of celebrities who wanted to run when 2016 was a fresh wound. Maybe they realized now isn't the time for grandstanding.

[PACOX]

Biden got into a Boomer fight. It's adorable.



Context (also its hard to hear): Man asked Biden about his son, saying that Biden was involved in pay-to-play and no better than Trump. He calls Biden a Boomer (well he said Biden is too old). Biden said, "OK, Boomer, bet you can't do more push ups than me!" Frightened Zoomer takes the mic from the OG Boomer, all the other Boomers clap for Biden.

[JohnBrown1917]

Biden got into a Boomer fight. It's adorable.



Context (also its hard to hear): Man asked Biden about his son, saying that Biden was involved in pay-to-play and no better than Trump. He calls Biden a Boomer (well he said Biden is too old). Biden said, "OK, Boomer, bet you can't do more push ups than me!" Frightened Zoomer takes the mic from the OG Boomer, all the other Boomers clap for Biden.

That is one way to deflect from his corrupt son, I suppose.

[Somewhatconcerned]

Doesn't help it's being extended by late joiners. It makes me wonder if anyone else will join.

Hilary, LOL.

But we have Warren to fill her role.

[Skroe]

Hilary, LOL.

But we have Warren to fill her role.

The instrument by which you alienate more suburban women, you mean?

Have a party, my dude.

Fact of the matter is - and I say this as someone whose PAC is deeply involved in Wisconsin ATM - Donald Trump will not win, unless he can fix what he has badly broken in surburban Wisconsin. Regardless of the Democratic nominee. Trump is running against Trump. You people will not face that. But you really should.

Democrats didn't do it. He did it. He did it all by himself because he's the scum of the Earth and you people (yes, you) enabled him, rather than reigned him in.

Imagine where he would be and you would be, if you controllled this freakshow of an administration... this complete joke that shambled its way into impeachement and international isolation. Imagine where he would be if instead of "American Carnage" he opened his Presidency intent on uniting the country and being a President for all, instead of playing to the most extreme elements of the right.

But that was never going to happen, because he is a sociopath and you... people... you lovely little people with your little lives and small ambitions for this country ended up deciding you could trade away your morality and loyalty to the constitution for a minor and transient political advantage.

In the end, Democrats' revenge when they retake the Presidency and the Senate this decade will be glorious and extraordinarily painful for every Trumphadi there is. And you will all deserve it.

I will say again to all Democrats and allies here reading this, we need to donate and donate big in order to fuck these people into the dirt. I will write a big check to the DNC after they pass the Articles of Impeachment. I will donate the maximum amount (which is around $2900 or something) to the Democratic nominee next year. Whatever you can do, we need to do it.

We need to charge our political death ray up as far as it can and atomize the cult. And the fuel is money. Trump will raise at least $2 billion (probably closer to $2.5B). A Democrat that raises at least $1.4 billion will beat Trump. A Democrat that raises $700 million will lose.

Ideology is nice and all but it comes down to dollars for ad buys to sway the yokels of Wisconsin. It is not especially complicated. They are simple people. We all need to donate if we can. The nominee must accept SuperPAC money. They have to Dark Money the shit out of this. They need to charge the death ray.