Mega-Thread: Democratic 2020 Primaries

[draynay]

This is great.... You were on a tangent because some of Bernie supporters wouldn't blindly vote for another candidate if they won the primaries.... Yet here you are saying why you won't vote for Bernie if he wins the primary.


The hypocrisy on these boards is fucking amazing sometimes.....

Its people saying they wouldn't vote for Tulsi, they won't have to so it doesn't matter and I don't know why they bother with the exercise.

[eschatological]

Its people saying they wouldn't vote for Tulsi, they won't have to so it doesn't matter and I don't know why they bother with the exercise.

I wouldn't vote for Tulsi as VP. That's for damn sure. Especially considering Bernie's age. It would be a Sarah Palin-esque pick, imo.

We wouldn't know his cabinet picks until/unless he won the Presidency, so that doesn't come into play, but Tulsi as SecState is a fucking joke of an idea.

[Orange Joe]

Its people saying they wouldn't vote for Tulsi, they won't have to so it doesn't matter and I don't know why they bother with the exercise.

Point being he was ripping on Bernie bros that would not support another candidate no matter what. Mind you that group was not much larger than what any other candidate has. Now here he is talking about reasons he won't support him if he wins.


In short... hipocrisy...

[eschatological]

Point being he was ripping on Bernie bros that would not support another candidate no matter what. Mind you that group was not much larger than what any other candidate has. Now here he is talking about reasons he won't support him if he wins.


In short... hipocrisy...

Tulsi is goddamn unacceptable though, and it's not a reflection on whether any of would or would not vote for Bernie. I would definitely vote for Bernie. But like I said, Tulsi is a Sarah Palin-esque disqualifying VP. McCain would have won 2008 pretty easily, imo, if he had picked nearly anyone else to be VP.

[Orange Joe]

Tulsi is goddamn unacceptable though, and it's not a reflection on whether any of would or would not vote for Bernie. I would definitely vote for Bernie. But like I said, Tulsi is a Sarah Palin-esque disqualifying VP. McCain would have won 2008 pretty easily, imo, if he had picked nearly anyone else to be VP.

As long as you aren't ripping on people for not voting for whoever wins the primary no matter what. I'm not calling you a hypocrite.

I understand if you don't like Tulsi. I'm not saying you have to vote Bernie if he wins the primary. I'm just saying don't be a hypocrit (wasn't even directed at you either)

[beanman12345]

Point being he was ripping on Bernie bros that would not support another candidate no matter what. Mind you that group was not much larger than what any other candidate has. Now here he is talking about reasons he won't support him if he wins.


In short... hipocrisy...

The no vote wasn't much larger, the "depends vote" was larger, and that looks like where that guy stands firmly in the depends category which he had a conniption about. many here did.

[Orange Joe]

The no vote wasn't much larger, the "depends vote" was larger, and that looks like where that guy stands firmly in the depends category which he had a conniption about.

It's great when someone comes out to be just as "toxic" as those they bitch about.

[beanman12345]

Genuine question, since you're more and more likely to get Bernie as the nominee; what do people actually expect him to achieve within 4/8 years?

I don't see him getting M4A or anything of that nature done, personally. What else is he running on that may be realistic?

Depends on what happens in the senate and if they what they do with the filibuster. He could however do a lot with the environment and fix a lot of trumps fuck ups there.

[Grapemask]

Genuine question, since you're more and more likely to get Bernie as the nominee; what do people actually expect him to achieve within 4/8 years?

I don't see him getting M4A or anything of that nature done, personally. What else is he running on that may be realistic?

Shifting the conversation.

Trump shouldn't be able to get any of what he wants done, especially with the House in democrat control. And he does fail more than he succeeds. But he has bit by bit hammered out a small list of things he can deliver to his voters, and he has moved the conversation on a lot of issues. Presidential power is meaningful when wielded.

Largely, though, I think a lot of these things have the potential to grow into achievable goals if approached correctly. Despite Skroe's data-twisting, virtually all voters report that they want changes in healthcare - something like 90% in a Fox News poll supported either some or total overhaul of the entire thing. When you have a guy sitting in the chair who wants to overhaul it, the people will push for something to happen. Now, whether it amounts to the full Medicare For All that's promised, who knows - but if we can get Congress to do anything on healthcare, we've won something.

[Orange Joe]

Genuine question, since you're more and more likely to get Bernie as the nominee; what do people actually expect him to achieve within 4/8 years?

I don't see him getting M4A or anything of that nature done, personally. What else is he running on that may be realistic?

There is still plenty he can do and undo from Trump with EO's

[Themius]

Warren's skill set, background and interests would kinda be wasted on the VP position (unless she'd be the sort of shadow President Dick Cheney was) as under normal circumstances the VP doesn't have an active role in governance.

Something like Treasury would suit her (make Wall Street shit itself) and she could actually make sweeping and transformative changes to the workings of the Treasury, it's relationship to the Federal Reserve, the runnings of the IRS etc.

Instead of having buffoons hell bent on breaking government we could have someone who strengthens it and makes it work for the people.

In my perfect La La Land, I'd want Sanders president, someone a bit more centrist (but still committed to M4A) something like Cory Booker for VP, then Warren as an attack dog in the Treasury and someone stubborn as a brick but committed to diplomacy liken Gabbard as Secretary of State.

- - - Updated - - -



You really need to stop comparing progressives with fucking Nazis. It is really not fucking helping.

This "brocialism" thing is something completely made up. It doesn't exist. Are you Chris Matthews or something?

You spent weeks shouting at progressives that if they don't support "insert centrist" when Sanders loses they are supporting FASCISTS.

Now suddenly you'd be okay with 4 more years of fascists.

Dude. Like for real.

What about Bernie is not centrist?

I feel Americans have little clue of what centrist means... their idea of centrist is a solid conservative for the rest of the world.

[starlord]

Shifting the conversation.

Trump shouldn't be able to get any of what he wants done, especially with the House in democrat control. And he does fail more than he succeeds. But he has bit by bit hammered out a small list of things he can deliver to his voters, and he has moved the conversation on a lot of issues. Presidential power is meaningful when wielded.

Largely, though, I think a lot of these things have the potential to grow into achievable goals if approached correctly. Despite Skroe's data-twisting, virtually all voters report that they want changes in healthcare - something like 90% in a Fox News poll supported either some or total overhaul of the entire thing. When you have a guy sitting in the chair who wants to overhaul it, the people will push for something to happen. Now, whether it amounts to the full Medicare For All that's promised, who knows - but if we can get Congress to do anything on healthcare, we've won something.

so what alternatives has bernie put forth besides M4A?

[alexw]

Genuine question, since you're more and more likely to get Bernie as the nominee; what do people actually expect him to achieve within 4/8 years?

I don't see him getting M4A or anything of that nature done, personally. What else is he running on that may be realistic?

More than anything else he will shift the national conversation and the direction of travel politics is taking. There's a large and growing cohort of younger voters who are politically left wing and who aren't scared of the reds under the bed scaremongering of the republicans and Fox news. These people are the voters of the future and are in the process of demographically replacing the conservatively orientated boomers. A Sanders win will hasten that shift. So I don't think Sanders will be able to accomplish much (unless we are very lucky), but he will lay the fertile ground for his successor in 4 to 8 years to bring in a longer term shift away from oligarch dominated capitalism. After 4 years of Sanders left wing progressive politics will be normalized and much harder to resist, just as Trump's repugnant degenerate brand of racist ethno-nationalist politics has unfortunately now become normalized for far too many people. In essence we get a chance at an FDR as opposed to a Mussolini type figure.

[I Push Buttons]

What else is he running on that may be realistic?

Supreme Court nominations. RBG is 86 and Breyer is 81.

Otherwise literally nothing he runs on is realistic.

[mvaliz]

Genuine question, since you're more and more likely to get Bernie as the nominee; what do people actually expect him to achieve within 4/8 years?

I don't see him getting M4A or anything of that nature done, personally. What else is he running on that may be realistic?

I'm keeping things realistic and have always stated that I'm only expecting Medicare for all. Even THAT is a glorious win in my book.

Here's the thing for what you're saying: "What may be done realistically" doesn't mean we shouldn't fight for the things.

How many women "realistically" expected woman's suffrage to happen? How many slaves "realistically" expected slavery to end?

It's not about getting everything we want right now... it's about continuing to try for those things until it DOES happen, and that means even after Bernie's tenure should it happen.

[Alakallanar]

Since we are again on the topic of Supreme Court justices again. @Rochana: I'm still waiting for an answer regarding my last post.

Could you please tell me a couple of those atrocities committed on the bench by these "neoliberal" judges, that were so horrendous, that the difference between 4 more years of Trump, including all the awful things he's done and will do (and he would feel emboldened by being reelected), including likely locking in the supreme court and large parts of the judical branch for multiple decades, including stuff like increased gerrymandering, increased voter suppression, potentially reduced abortions rights and reduced LGTBQ and more... and a moderate democratic president appointing "neoliberal" judges becomes negligible?

[bmjclark]

New primary polls today show Bernie up 9% in michigan, 5% in Pennsylvania and 17% in Wisconsin. Democrats certainly seem to prefer him in some pretty key states. Also, interestingly Warren is polling in second nationally in a poll released today (I'm kind of taking this one with a grain of salt considering how poorly she's polling in most state specific polls). Could mean that progressive lane may be a lot wider than a lot of moderates wanted to believe.

[mvaliz]

Since we are again on the topic of Supreme Court justices again. @Rochana: I'm still waiting for an answer regarding my last post.

Ooh, good point on that one as well! RBG retiring and Dem-nominated justice to potentially happen.

- - - Updated - - -

New primary polls today show Bernie up 9% in michigan, 5% in Pennsylvania and 17% in Wisconsin. Democrats certainly seem to prefer him in some pretty key states. Also, interestingly Warren is polling in second nationally in a poll released today. Apparently that progressive lane is wider than a lot of moderates wanted to believe.

As much as I'm not trusting polls anymore, I know a couple doinks in another thread who do where that's gotta sting! ;P

[bmjclark]

As much as I'm not trusting polls anymore, I know a couple doinks in another thread who do where that's gotta sting! ;P

Certainly take it with a grain of salt, but he does seem to be trending upwards. Super tuesday looks promising as well for him. He even stands a reasonable chance in south carolina this week

[Drutt]

Tulsi is goddamn unacceptable though

Only if you believe the bullshit.