Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[Levelfive]

So much for goalposts, huh?
@jonnysensible This is what happens when you brilliantly and in good faith engage a sealion's deliberately dumb, bad faith questions: they just move the goal posts because they already know better. Here, it went from "name any policy differences!" to "well, it won't get passed anyway." This totally brand new poster's job here is solely to muddy, obfuscate, and demoralize, with the intent--just as I said--to inflict maximal harm for personal amusement.

[Lenonis]

The real question is why are people engaging with an account that will be banned any second now instead of just reporting the posts and moving on?

[Felya]

Oh, no worries, we get it. The dems can put up whatever scumbag they want(war criminal/rapist/senile) because the GoP will always be worse.

Must be easy.

Why did you say “always” instead of “Trump”? We never had a president tell his constituents that injecting cleaner and flashlights up your ass, might be a cure. If not to distract from how unusually incompetent Trump is, why say always?

I can link the GOP platform from 2000, where they called Clinton’s economy a “remarkable time in history”, while disagreeing on how to use the fortunes created during Clinton’s terms. The only reason to say “always” is either to distract from how Trump is unique, or being too young to have seen the alternative.

It only became this way, after GOP was in charge during dot.com bubble burst, 9/11, starting 2 wars, where in 2004 they launched “Swift boat” which was an intentional lie against Kerry, due to lack of supported policy... then the global recession of 2008 hit and the GOP of prior to 2000 died. They had no policy outside of war and making the rich, richer... Not only was Obama black, but by 2008, the last 8 years showed every GOP policy fail in grand fashion. Trump is just the result of what happened, when GOP can’t push their policy and have to stick to rhetoric. This is not always... no need to normalize a a clueless oligarch... perhaps try discussing how hiring an oligarch as president is a disaster, instead of the lazy always.

- - - Updated - - -

The real question is why are people engaging with an account that will be banned any second now instead of just reporting the posts and moving on?

Because most voices of disagreement, either got deleted during the GDPR update, got banned for threatening people or have disappeared during my forum absence.

- - - Updated - - -

*Sigh* You really don't seem to understand what a policy proposal is. It is not saying you are "against private prisons". That means nothing.

Could you explain? I probably missed something... but, does Biden need to say he will not kill kittens, for you to believe he won’t have policy to kill kittens?

[Felya]

Perhaps it is just because not everyone cares what a group of creepy anal hall monitor interns think.

Obviously some do... why else would you be here? I’ve never created a second account to avoid bans... I have never cared about a forum to that extent. While, I wouldn’t be so harsh in describing our “posse”... Our, to remind you that every insult to forum as a whole, includes you.

But... could you explain, as I asked above? Thanks!!!

- - - Updated - - -

Clinton and Obama spoke a lot in vague terms about social inequality and a better lot for the average American, those things got worse under their leadership. You'd have to be very naive to take statements like that at face value. I trusted them more than I do Biden.

No, right wing media claimed they did... but, rational people went to their campaign sites and saw extensive policy details. Rational people saw Hilary deliver policy details during the debate, while Trump jabbed and rambled little more than “lock her up”. This wasn’t like Trump’s policy site, where pages would literally disappear, after a Trump brain fart on stage.

How many times do you think Trump injected him self with cleaner, before farting it out as a good idea? It might help explain a few things...

[Theodarzna]

I find this sentence a bit contradictory within the context of the rest of the post.

Don't you think it's a bit biased to throw out insults like that against someone? It comes across to me as if you aren't willing to acknowledge or let her do her story without being biased about it to begin with.

Why go the extra mile to try and be hyperbolic about a few minor things that don't make her a picture-perfect accuser? That doesn't seem right to me.

I am amazed that the same person who had this to say about people claiming Christine Blaisy Ford must be a partisan hit job...

And you are part of the problem why women don't report their rapes.

So, you can just dismiss them just like that? Typical Trump supporter.

would suddenly turn around to "She's schizophrenic" and the classic of "Its all a Russian Psyop!"

Much like Themius, I guess a few years radically changes their views on rape accusations.

- - - Updated - - -

The issue that I can observe is mostly that this progressive wing seems like, or feels like, they're not treated all that properly within the Democratic Party.

This nomination run was particularly nasty. You could argue that the Bernie supporters were a bit aggressive, but that behavior was mirrored by Biden / Warren supporters.

What even is a "Progressive"? I mean if its Intersectional Reaganomics which @johnnysensible; seems fine with, then yes there are Progressives. But I am not talking about Progressives, I'm talking about Socialists, I'm talking about Leftists.

Besides I recall back in the day on Dailykos when basic garden variety Liberals whom were the same Market-Oriented shysters and basic Neo-Liberals decided to adopt the word "Progressive" because the word Liberal had been so thoroughly made toxic and vile by Rush Limbaugh who managed to make the whole country hate the word and make it dirty.

Progressive as an actual label doesn't mean socialist, or leftists either. So Johnnysensible is being very deceptive with wording.

[Felya]

I was talking about the moderators...mainly because they let a whole load of far right shit slide on here for far too long. There was one particular incident where someone was literally advertising a far right terrorist group...the thread went on for a month and never got locked.

You bet... you meant no one cares about hall monitors that no longer exist. The people I was talking about, were not mods and posted here, while Trump was still an idiot TV celebrity, known for stupid comments and failed business.

Somehow, despite everything being the same, something changed with Trump winning. This was people who for years before Trump, were calm and collected in their disagreement. Then... poof... you can now act like an ignorant jack ass and feel like you succeeding. Logic and reason took a back seat to demagogues and reactionism. Suddenly, people on YouTube, screaming about greatness of Trump and the evil democrats, as rational. Suddenly, these same rational conservatives started calling them selfs real liberals (see complete failure of conservative policy 2000-2008), by doing a ‘no true Scotsman’ routine, where the only solution to impure liberals, is Trump.

Don’t think that’s getting unnoticed... not everyone is stupid enough to fall for “Biden bad, don’t look at Trump”. Considering Trump is saying to do it... you know, like asking Russia for help during a rally, it’s one of those things you don’t say out loud.

- - - Updated - - -

The issue that I can observe is mostly that this progressive wing seems like, or feels like, they're not treated all that properly within the Democratic Party.

This nomination run was particularly nasty. You could argue that the Bernie supporters were a bit aggressive, but that behavior was mirrored by Biden / Warren supporters.

Not treated properly versus political opposite? Right?

[Theodarzna]

I'd also observe that the reactionary wing of the party is much larger and totally hostile to progressivism.

Progressive wasn't the thing I initially touched on, I was talking specifically about Leftists/Socialists. The term 'Progressive' can mean a lot of things; heck in the early 2000's it became the go to word for Markos Moulitsas to get away from how desiccated and destroyed the word Liberal was. The word itself was nothing more than a rebranding of the party.

[Felya]

I was referring to Obama and Bill Clinton's campaign speeches. It was very flowery rhetoric, quite enjoyable to listen to, but they ended up their administration's legacy being wars and an expanded military-industrial complex, increased social inequality, wall st enriched, really very little positive.

That’s what speeches are... the policy was extensively detailed on their sites. Military complex by drawing down troops from Bush era? Increased social inequality with consumer protection agency and ACA? Wall Street had to pay back their bail outs. It’s true that most of that doesn’t exist, with direct bail outs to banks and even small business bail out being funneled through banks. There was a 15% corporate tax cut, while middle class lost all policy from clean water act to ACA to fucking deductibles.

If you don’t want Wallstreet enriched, shouldn’t have listened to an oligarch, about how a charity is an evil corporation stealing children for their underground pizza dungeons...

[Machismo]

I was referring to Obama and Bill Clinton's campaign speeches. It was very flowery rhetoric, quite enjoyable to listen to, but they ended up their administration's legacy being wars and an expanded military-industrial complex, increased social inequality, wall st enriched, really very little positive.

- - - Updated - - -



I'd also observe that the reactionary wing of the party is much larger and totally hostile to progressivism.

I'm still waiting on your evidence to back up your claim.

[Felya]

Progressive wasn't the thing I initially touched on, I was talking specifically about Leftists/Socialists. The term 'Progressive' can mean a lot of things; heck in the early 2000's it became the go to word for Markos Moulitsas to get away from how desiccated and destroyed the word Liberal was. The word itself was nothing more than a rebranding of the party.

Trying to change progressive’s meaning, is newspeak. Without newspeak, progressives has a singular meaning in politics. So... stop doing it and excusing by using examples of others doing it with ill intent? Kind of gives away your game...

Edit:

This is progressive from dictionary: (of a group, person, or idea) favoring or implementing social reform or new, liberal ideas.

It’s in the definition of the word... anyone telling you otherwise, thinks you are a moron...

Here is newspeak: ambiguous euphemistic language used chiefly in political propaganda.

Now, what exactly is Theo doing, by making the word ambiguous?

@Rochana I am interested in this as well. Is progressive as defined by the dictionary or is it ambiguous, as Theo claims? Just in case:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak

[Theodarzna]

Presented here is a comment from former Obama econ guy and now Biden's econ advisor:



Oh, here is another Larry Summers quote from Adults in the Room: My Battle With Europe's Deep Establishment, so said to Yanis Varoufakis.



This guy is Biden's goto guy on economics, this is what you are being asked to vote for. This is what johnnysensible describes as "progressive choice".

[Telogrus]

The way that Biden Bros have been responding to the Tara Reade allegation has been absolutely deplorable. I’ve even heard some of them say that she’s obviously lying because she’s poor. They’re literally the exact same as Trumpists

[Theodarzna]

The way that Biden Bros have been responding to the Tara Reade allegation has been absolutely deplorable. I’ve even heard some of them say that she’s obviously lying because she’s poor

I think its hilarious personally. Especially given most of the people who push that are literally contradicting past statements they made when it was Christine Blaisy Ford.

I have this as a teachable moment to show some special reply-guys how you show receipts, since sadly they need the free lesson.

[Lenonis]

The way that Biden Bros have been responding to the Tara Reade allegation has been absolutely deplorable. I’ve even heard some of them say that she’s obviously lying because she’s poor. They’re literally the exact same as Trumpists

Is twitter real life or not?

[Machismo]

The way that Biden Bros have been responding to the Tara Reade allegation has been absolutely deplorable. I’ve even heard some of them say that she’s obviously lying because she’s poor. They’re literally the exact same as Trumpists

Evidence, please.

- - - Updated - - -

I think its hilarious personally. Especially given most of the people who push that are literally contradicting past statements they made when it was Christine Blaisy Ford.

I have this as a teachable moment to show some special reply-guys how you show receipts, since sadly they need the free lesson.

And yet, you trashed Ford just a week ago... so what does that say about you?

- - - Updated - - -

Well, the only solace we have is that social democrats are growing as a movement within the Democratic Party as time goes on, but there is a lot of internal resistance. Liberals (including the neoliberals and capitalists) are not entirely comfortable with a new 'faction' slowly getting more traction and influence within the party. Billions being pumped into attack ads and media (news articles and items) that try to discredit any such movement every year by Democratic PACs, including the types Skroe likes to donate to, or claims to donate to.

It also seems to annoy the Democratic Party that this progressive faction within the Democratic Party manages to win over some working class republican voters. If you keep an eye on alt-right media you'll notice how careful they are with attacking Bernie. Every time Bernie comes on in a conservative talk show the hosts just get bulldozed and the audience seems to love him. There are some basic honest ideas that he states which ring true to almost everyone who listens and isn't part of some rich privileged family or family business.

Except, as we've seen... that's not really the case. Bernie lost.

The reason alt-righters don't criticize Bernie, is that they wanted him to get the nomination, so Trump would have an easier time. That is literally what Theo and Tulsi2024 are doing right now.

[Machismo]

Except that isn't the case. Ever heard of reversed psychology? Every single republican in private states or every leak we have from the GOP states that Trump would have a harder time running against Bernie.

Trump is very good at beating milque-toast politicians and centrists. He however would have a hard time running against someone with a passionate and galvanized supporter base, someone who pushes a more controversial agenda. Bernie is seen as someone who "sticks it to the man" and opposes the status quo as much as Trump does.

I'm going to want some evidence of that. Considering most of the polls showed Biden doing better in the general election, especially in battleground states (which has been covered extensively in the last two threads), I have a hard time believing moderates want to openly embrace socialism.

it's the same reason dipshit Trumpsters tried backing Tulsi Gabbard in an attempt to muddy the waters.

It's the same reason there's so darned many foreign "Bernie supporters" shilling for Trump in this very thread.

[Machismo]

Why conservatives think Bernie is Trump's biggest threat: https://www.vox.com/2020/2/3/2108383...tism-iowa-2020

Leaked Audio Confirms Trump is Scared of Bernie: https://freespeech.org/stories/leake...red-of-bernie/

- - - Updated - - -



I think you, and you're not alone, are misunderstanding what is going on here.

Many West-Europeans are very strongly social-democratic. My own wealthy european nation has a very strong foundation of socialist revolts that shaped the modern day thinking of the working class. It's why our unions and worker rights are so strong and have considerable political influence.

The kind of things american employees have to endure would see employers locked up in prison over here in bloodied and sophisticated Europe.

The european support for Bernie is very organic and natural. He's the first prominent american politician who has seen the light from a eurocentric point of view.

And yet, you have two Trumpsters shilling for Bernie... right in this thread, today.

And yet, the polls show Biden doing better against Trump... I'll stick with statistical data, thanks.

You do realize Europeans and Americans are very different when it comes to politics, right? We don't even have the same definitions for liberal and conservative over here.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean they were ready to stick us with Bloomberg before he imploding on stage along with a billion dollars in self-funding. At least the DNC showed their true colors willing to change the establish rules ahead of the game. I'm sure it isn't indicative of them willing to bend or break the rules in other ways.

Bloomberg was never polling that well. People didn't really trust him, and he focused everything in a few states.

[segara82]

And yet, you have two Trumpsters shilling for Bernie... right in this thread, today.

And yet, the polls show Biden doing better against Trump... I'll stick with statistical data, thanks.

You do realize Europeans and Americans are very different when it comes to politics, right? We don't even have the same definitions for liberal and conservative over here.

Bolded the important part. According to that Hillary should be the sitting president, which she is not.
Trump and the GOP have shown that they know how the system works and how it can be used (and abused). That includes gerrymandering, voter supression, and driving people away from voting by negative ads.
Their 'Pelosi and her love for icecream' anti-Democrats clip is, from an outsiders perspective, pure gold. Not only will their loyal base show up, but democrats and swingvoters will, again, stay home and not show up to vote for whoever the DNC sends forward if the 'good guys' have such people as leaders.

[Machismo]

Bolded the important part. According to that Hillary should be the sitting president, which she is not.
Trump and the GOP have shown that they know how the system works and how it can be used (and abused). That includes gerrymandering, voter supression, and driving people away from voting by negative ads.
Their 'Pelosi and her love for icecream' anti-Democrats clip is, from an outsiders perspective, pure gold. Not only will their loyal base show up, but democrats and swingvoters will, again, stay home and not show up to vote for whoever the DNC sends forward if the 'good guys' have such people as leaders.

And part of that is concern trolling, and pretending to be Democrats and/or Bernie supporters. We've seen it in this very thread.

Of course, this is also a narrative that foreigners love to push, for one reason or another. I cannot count how many times a foreigner has pretended to be an American, shilling for Trump, or "lamenting" that the DNC is robbing Bernie.

[Theodarzna]

Bolded the important part. According to that Hillary should be the sitting president, which she is not.
Trump and the GOP have shown that they know how the system works and how it can be used (and abused). That includes gerrymandering, voter supression, and driving people away from voting by negative ads.
Their 'Pelosi and her love for icecream' anti-Democrats clip is, from an outsiders perspective, pure gold. Not only will their loyal base show up, but democrats and swingvoters will, again, stay home and not show up to vote for whoever the DNC sends forward if the 'good guys' have such people as leaders.

This take however has the unfortunate implication of "We'd be winning if people just never said anything negative about our guys!" which is true, if nobody could ever say anything but positivity about Joe Biden, or no information that might cast doubt on the goodness of a Democrats could be shared, then yes that would make elections super easy.

But, unless you labour under the delusion that Democrats are uniquely angelic beings with some inherent goodness; than its essentially "We have to stop news of the bad stuff from coming out because then people won't like our candidate", its either the bonkers belief that its impossible that there could be a flaw with a candidate, or the depraved belief that the public shouldn't be allowed to know anything negative about a candidate.