Jump to content

2020 US Election (vote biden pls ffs)


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, darreichungsform said:

I heard they said it was a very good heart attack

Yeah, Good. OK.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I don't know what you're all complaining about . Under Trump we have had ten hours of studio releases from Ae and something like 30 hours of soundboards, as well as the best aphex music since the

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted Images

1 hour ago, very honest said:

if only there were a younger, sharper, savvier, more accomplished, more energetic version of bernie running for president, who isn't trying to redeem socialism, the exact ideology of public spending that makes republican voters be republican voters.

Is that another Obama?

Frankly, I haven't got a clue about what kind of candidate would be ideal at this point. My more naive self tends to go for someone who can restore US politics. If that's even possible. That should imply someone with the ability and savviness to reach across the isle. If that's even possible, that would imply - i'm afraid to say - an old white male. As I don't expect the GOP to play politics with anything else really. So the female candidates fall off. The GOP won't play ball. Bernie is the socialist the GOP can stonewall and ignore his entire time in the office. Doing so will score them bonus points with their supporters. Buttigieg doesn't have the gravitas and wouldn't be taken seriously. And that's ignoring the gay vs. evangelical issue. Biden is considered Obama's appendix. So, that leaves Bloomberg?

Apart from winning the 2020 election, I'm actually more worried about what happens next. After the dems taking back the white house. I'm afraid the current chaos will stay for a long while.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nebraska said:

for them, a lot of his policies (such as medicare for all) are unrealistic because they require senate approval. they also seem too radical (or progressive) for those that either see them as causing a further divide between the two parties (eg. eliminating student debt). a lot of pete's core support is coming from moderate progressives who want to bridge the gap between republican and democrat as they see this as not just a strategy in beating trump and winning the country back- but as a realistic approach i.e. let's get trump out of office and get some policies reversed. and while doing that, let's win some right leaning support and unify the country

here's a great example of my above point in regards to pete. pete knows bernie's medicare for all is a radical policy- so he takes a more conservative alternative. how about medicare for all-that-want-it?

towards the end of that clip, buttigieg admits they have the same goals just different ways to approach them. he's right. bernie is trying to change the status quo; pete wants to work with it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, very honest said:

medical professionals express concern about bernie's age. mental decline with sudden onset in the 80s is common, so the difference of early 70s vs late 70s actually is significant. medical professionals also say that the recent heart attack is not good. furthermore, his own staff had remarked that he seemed to be slowing. and, my own perception is that bernie appears to have slowed a bit in the last few years.

if you compare warren's govtrack to bernie's govtrack you will see that she has 9 enacted bills, where bernie has 7 and she's only been in the congress for a quarter of the time. furthermore, she has accomplishments from before her time in the senate, such as building an entire government agency, the CFPB, and teaching at harvard.

Sure, but other studies also show that stress impacts women two to three times more than men, especially as age increases (and being pres of the US is almost as stressful as being a moderator here). I don't think the difference is that significant.

Per the enacted bills - both of them have enacted no bills of real substance - but I'm impressed by Bernie's ability to get it done as an independent. The CFPB is a good initiative - but Warren didn't build it by herself, lets be clear.

I like these articles on the differences between the two.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/10/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-differences-2020-presidential-campaign

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/23/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-democratic-party-2020-differences

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/18/18678000/elizabeth-warren-bernie-sanders-2020-similarities-differences

Also, as many others have pointed out - Warren is, at heart, still a proponent of laissez faire capitalism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

Sure, but other studies also show that stress impacts women two to three times more than men, especially as age increases (and being pres of the US is almost as stressful as being a moderator here). I don't think the difference is that significant.

Per the enacted bills - both of them have enacted no bills of real substance - but I'm impressed by Bernie's ability to get it done as an independent. The CFPB is a good initiative - but Warren didn't build it by herself, lets be clear.

I like these articles on the differences between the two.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/10/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-differences-2020-presidential-campaign

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/23/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-democratic-party-2020-differences

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/18/18678000/elizabeth-warren-bernie-sanders-2020-similarities-differences

Also, as many others have pointed out - Warren is, at heart, still a proponent of laissez faire capitalism.

tell some veteran victims of fraud that her veteran fraud prevention legislation is not substantial.

 

as for your comment about gender, not touching that with a stick.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, very honest said:

tell some veteran victims of fraud that her veteran fraud prevention legislation is not substantial.

 

as for your comment about gender, not touching that with a stick.

What comment about gender? Do you want the actual studies (they deal with biological sex, not gender)? I'll get them for you when I get home from work.

Her veteran fraud prevention legislation is not substantial. Look at the summary:
 

Quote

 

This bill requires the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to work with federal agencies, states, and experts to develop and implement federal and state standards that protect individuals who are eligible for increased pension for a non-service-connected disability or death or for service on the basis of need for regular aid and attendance from dishonest, predatory, or otherwise unlawful practices.

The Government Accountability Office must: (1) report standards that would be effective in protecting such individuals if the VA fails to submit such standards as required, and (2) complete a study on standards implemented under this bill.

 

So essentially, she's telling DVA to work with various bodies to create standards to prevent fraud. Fraud is already a criminal offence, all this act does is add a layer of bureaucracy. Then the GAO has to tell these bodies what standards are acceptable, and do a study. Wheeee such prevention!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, goDel said:

Frankly, I haven't got a clue about what kind of candidate would be ideal at this point. My more naive self tends to go for someone who can restore US politics. If that's even possible. That should imply someone with the ability and savviness to reach across the isle. If that's even possible, that would imply - i'm afraid to say - an old white male. As I don't expect the GOP to play politics with anything else really. So the female candidates fall off. The GOP won't play ball. Bernie is the socialist the GOP can stonewall and ignore his entire time in the office. Doing so will score them bonus points with their supporters. Buttigieg doesn't have the gravitas and wouldn't be taken seriously. And that's ignoring the gay vs. evangelical issue. Biden is considered Obama's appendix. So, that leaves Bloomberg?

I think the best shot at getting any remaining swing voters to vote dem is to have a candidate who's a white, middle aged male with an honorable military background. There's of course a ton of military support in trump country, and having an ex-marine go toe-to-toe with bonespurs donnie and out "man" the great orange deceiver, I think would make some in the maga base think twice. I guess Mayor Pete would be the closest fit for this, but unfortunately there's too many folks out there that also can't get past the fact that he's gay...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, zero said:

I think the best shot at getting any remaining swing voters to vote dem is to have a candidate who's a white, middle aged male with an honorable military background. There's of course a ton of military support in trump country, and having an ex-marine go toe-to-toe with bonespurs donnie and out "man" the great orange deceiver, I think would make some in the maga base think twice. I guess Mayor Pete would be the closest fit for this, but unfortunately there's too many folks out there that also can't get past the fact that he's gay...

gay cancels out military background for a lot of those people. 

i'll be surprised if trump agrees to any debates. 

bernie can hold his own on a debate stage especially if it's against trump. biden i don't think would do well. he's so off kilter even for a dog faced pony soldier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Amy Klobuchar, tbqh. Feels good to say it out loud. "Bernie or bust" people are out of their fucking minds. I saw one smarmy youtube pundit guy, Michael Brooks say if Bernie doesn't win the primary, he's not voting. LOL, so you're progressive, but Trump is your second favorite candidate? WTF?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having seen the Majority Report discussion I think you're talking about, it's pretty funny how much you misrepresented it.  I find Michael Brooks pretty annoying but he's pretty outspoken about how irresponsible "vote your conscience" type rhetoric is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really want Sanders to win, but at the moment the votes are split between multiple candidates for both types of democrats. It's simply unclear to me what that may mean. With New Hampshire for instance, if Pete or Amy wasn't running Bernie may well have gotten second instead of first. It just depends on how many people in the Pete/Amy camp would have chosen Sanders as their second best candidate. And of course also for Elizabeth Warren.

I'm sure now the centrist democrats are being pressured to end their campaigns due to the splitting, and Pete, Amy, and Biden will quickly whittle down to just Pete (or Amy?)
 

Edited by Brisbot
Link to post
Share on other sites

What's irresponsible is not realizing that getting Trump out of office is infinitely more important than just Bernie being president, and people should have realized that a long time ago. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, zero said:

I guess Mayor Pete would be the closest fit for this, but unfortunately there's too many folks out there that also can't get past the fact that he's gay...

EHb7w7QXYAAXSj8.jpg

9 minutes ago, Candiru said:

I like Amy Klobuchar, tbqh. Feels good to say it out loud. "Bernie or bust" people are out of their fucking minds. I saw one smarmy youtube pundit guy, Michael Brooks say if Bernie doesn't win the primary, he's not voting. LOL, so you're progressive, but Trump is your second favorite candidate? WTF?

i kind of understand michael brooks' position. the thing is that the DNC doesn't seem to listen to voters. they want to eat their cake and have it too in that, they want to end the corruption in washington without sacrificing corruption within the party. this is why hillary was their front runner in 2016, and why they backed biden in the beginning. both of these candidates weren't who their voters wanted, yet when it comes time for the election, they suddenly need voters to play along-

in the words of mark zuckerberg: that really salts my meat

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll worry about that if and when Democrats win the next election. Until then, the rest is noise. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, TubularCorporation said:

Having seen the Majority Report discussion I think you're talking about, it's pretty funny how much you misrepresented it.  I find Michael Brooks pretty annoying but he's pretty outspoken about how irresponsible "vote your conscience" type rhetoric is.

Chapo Trap House is def getting more flack for pushing their fans to abstain from the general if Bernie doesn't get it. I can't commit to it. I get the sentiment to some degree but it's pretty reckless and extreme. Being a red state I'm still going to pinch my nose and vote for whatever Dem it is. If it's a hypothetically a truly off-putting candidate (a shamelessly pandering Bloomberg or Biden) I'll vote for a third party POTUS I guess - but I really think it'll be Bernie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of Bernie Bros are just really, really sick of corrupt Dems in their local elections and their state and it's a perspective I can't relate to. There's a term some far-leftists use as a criticism for vote abstaining...harm reduction. It's debated but it's a well-established concept that fleshes out the broader "vote the lesser evil" idea. https://baseandsuperstructure.com/harm-reduction-voting/

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, zero said:

I think the best shot at getting any remaining swing voters to vote dem is to have a candidate who's a white, middle aged male with an honorable military background. There's of course a ton of military support in trump country, and having an ex-marine go toe-to-toe with bonespurs donnie and out "man" the great orange deceiver, I think would make some in the maga base think twice. I guess Mayor Pete would be the closest fit for this, but unfortunately there's too many folks out there that also can't get past the fact that he's gay...

Nah, these are the same people who completely shit on John McCain. This is the same base that Swift-Boating worked wonders on. They only like veterans who are overtly nationalist and right-wing and will not even blink before totally bashing not just veterans but combat veterans who are liberal. They literally worship a draft-dodging rich kid.

Ironically the gay thing would likely be a moot point in 2020, the the alt right loves tokenism and Milo is a good example of someone who was tolerated among right-wingers. 

The million dollar question is what Dems might sway "anti-Trump" conservatives who will otherwise skip the election or shrug and vote for Trump. Bloomberg seems the most likely to sway a few, since he's literally an ex-GOP moderate, but I'm very skeptical that there are significant numbers to switch from Trump to a centrist Dem. I feel like Sanders could tap into the same surge Obama brought out, even more so since Trump is a far more dire threat than 2008 era McCain. He's still polling the best against Trump. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Candiru said:

I like Amy Klobuchar, tbqh. Feels good to say it out loud. "Bernie or bust" people are out of their fucking minds. I saw one smarmy youtube pundit guy, Michael Brooks say if Bernie doesn't win the primary, he's not voting. LOL, so you're progressive, but Trump is your second favorite candidate? WTF?

if bernie wins i hope he picks her as a running mate. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Nebraska said:

here's a great example of my above point in regards to pete. pete knows bernie's medicare for all is a radical policy- so he takes a more conservative alternative. how about medicare for all-that-want-it?

towards the end of that clip, buttigieg admits they have the same goals just different ways to approach them. he's right. bernie is trying to change the status quo; pete wants to work with it. 

 

7 hours ago, goDel said:

I hope you're right. And he sounds like a sensible guy.

I find him really frustrating - when I break off from my intake of Chapo and other leftist bubbles I skim that relentlessly and effectively rip on him and his campaign, I do find him to be one of the stronger and more articulate candidates. There's just a lot of hang-ups...

First and foremost, he's got baggage. His tenure at McKinsey & Company is ripe with overly expensive and inefficient corporate and government contract consulting work, he literally helped a Canadian grocery price fix milk, and without putting too much validity into other iffy aspects, here's a good rundown on his very establishment career there. South Bend is a like a parallel to much of the baggage Bloomberg had as NY mayor. Police in his town killed a black citizen and others beat a wrongly suspected teen and shot with a stun gun. He was awared only $18 in damages after a federal jury found the department violated his rights.  He not just tried to sweep it under the carpet for the most part, instead of putting pressure on the well-documented corruption and abuses he doubled down and literally supported "police lives matter" PR from the local police, including this. That's just police brutality, South Bend's black population has been ignored or flat out pressured to leave via gentrification efforts, city contracts to developers, and various code changes to push low income renters and owners out. He's polling very low with people of color for legitimate reasons.

If foreign policy is an issue he's got a lot of red flags that point to him being both more cryptic and hawkish than Obama. There's a conspiracy that he's a straight up CIA shrill - it's not as outlandish as it sounds but I don't think  he's some CIA plant. I do think it's all but a fact he's worked on CIA and state department missions. What he has disclosed about his service points to straight-up intel, pysch-op, and local power liason work that is core to special operations and espionage work. McKinsey & Company has historically been tied to civillian shell companies and stuff like US Aid contracts which have been essential to brokering alliances in countries the U.S. operates military forces and intel ops out of. He literally visited the Horn of Africa breakaway state Somaliland in 2008 for an extended vacation - the same year the US was scrambling for proxy bases and agreements for war on terror ops in that region. 

Then there's his persona and vibe. He's a bit stiff and aloof and let's be frank, his rhetoric is often cringe-y in it's vagueness. Off the cuff he sounds like an AI speech generator using Obama speeches. I really think he's a well-meaning guy but, and this fucking sucks to acknowledge, that fact is why he'd be decimated by Trump and his supporters. He'll endlessly make fun of his appearance and tone, def give him various nicknames, he'll  belittle his military service, he'll hypocritically but effectively point out his financial backing from billionaire donors and relish in the conspiracy theories about his CIA ties via "deep state" buzzwords. He'll gladly "debate him" and give him the "Jeb is a mess treatment." It'll be really, really disheartening and brutal. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ignatius said:

if bernie wins i hope he picks her as a running mate. 

She's got BDE and experience. There's documented claims she's shitty toward staffers but I have no idea how many are true versus vs exaggeratef or false. Also pragmatically a lot of effective leaders are hard ass managers. I honestly find the salad comb story hilarious, like something out of an Curb episode.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ignatius said:

if bernie wins i hope he picks her as a running mate. 

makes me think of something i haven’t before: who would his running mate even be, assuming he got the nomination? AOC??!?!? :cat: lol but really tho, not really sure, he’s sorta an island to himself (ya know since he’s not even a fuckin Democrat)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, auxien said:

makes me think of something i haven’t before: who would his running mate even be, assuming he got the nomination? AOC??!?!? :cat: lol but really tho, not really sure, he’s sorta an island to himself (ya know since he’s not even a fuckin Democrat)

i'm not very familiar with hw the process goes for picking a running mate. seems like often they find someone who will round out the qualifications and provide a touch of diversity of ideas too. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, auxien said:

makes me think of something i haven’t before: who would his running mate even be, assuming he got the nomination? AOC??!?!? :cat: lol but really tho, not really sure, he’s sorta an island to himself (ya know since he’s not even a fuckin Democrat)

Nah, she's got way too many years ahead of her and an election coming up with a lot of ire and money being thrown behind some pawns to get her out of office. She's younger than me and many others here. 

Good question though, pre-fallout from the debate many expected him to float Warren as either a VP or major cabinet slot. He urged her to run in 2016 after all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh hey, it just coincidentally happened that I was listening to today's M.R. news recap adn Michael Brooks explicitly called the possibility of a real "Bernie or bust" movement in the general election "disastrous."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • chenGOD changed the title to 2020 US Election
  • Squee changed the title to 2020 US Election (vote biden pls ffs)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...