Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 116

Thread: Warren vs Sanders

  1. #41
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,677
    Amen (Given)
    271
    Amen (Received)
    1088
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    I doubt that very much, sean. They are nearly mirror images of each other ideologically, both loved by the progressives, and they are friends to boot. Progressives would be happy with either one of them as the nominee. And so would they.
    That's not the impression I got from TYT's analysis of it. And I believe WarrenIsASnake was trending on twitter.

    And you're also assuming either of those candidates will be nominated. There's an impeachment thing going on, remember? This will probably hinder both Sanders and Warren's campaign efforts during the Iowa caucus. I believe it'll be bad enough for the DNC if either of those two are chosen over the other, but if someone like Biden or Pete is chosen instead... whoa nelly.
    "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

  2. #42
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    615
    Amen (Given)
    76
    Amen (Received)
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by Terraceth View Post
    Huh? If anything it seemed like Bernie Sanders was bending over backwards to support Hillary even after it was public that the DNC screwed him over. What exactly are your examples of Bernie "doing the opposite" of being gracious at the Convention?
    Yes, the DNC screwed over Sanders. I agree 100% on that. If that hadn't happened I assume she likely would have won the election since even a tiny fraction of his followers, who either didn't vote or voted for Trump or that other Russian candidate (Green Party), would have been enough to win things in the key states.

    This article covers what a disaster his supporters turned the convention into. He bears responsibility for their behavior for various reasons.

    He insisted on not conceding after Super Tuesday when it became (effectively) impossible for him to win. This probably contributed to his supporters out of control behavior at the convention.

    He spent most of August working on his book instead of campaigning for Clinton.

    He turned on Clinton in the final week of the election. (opinion piece)

    Last, he either knew or should have known that he was getting online support from Russia and did nothing about it.
    Last edited by DivineOb; 01-16-2020 at 07:21 PM.

  3. #43
    tWebber demi-conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,661
    Amen (Given)
    147
    Amen (Received)
    520
    Quote Originally Posted by seanD View Post
    Or the fact that CNN clearly showed its bias against Sanders for all the world to see during the debates, which could spark suspicion among his supporters that the DNC establishment is once again conspiring against his nomination.
    They should already know that from the first time. Sanders has zero chance at winning and will sell out again, Warren can only win if she sells out.
    Trump is basically "Bruce Wayne pretending to be a foppish retarded billionaire" tier genius, in case nerds need a simpler metaphor.

  4. #44
    tWebber demi-conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,661
    Amen (Given)
    147
    Amen (Received)
    520
    Quote Originally Posted by DivineOb View Post
    Yes, the DNC screwed over Sanders. I agree 100% on that. If that hadn't happened I assume she likely would have won the election since even a tiny fraction of his followers, who either didn't vote or voted for Trump or that other Russian candidate (Green Party), would have been enough to win things in the key states.

    This article covers what a disaster his supporters turned the convention into.
    Something to look forward.
    Trump is basically "Bruce Wayne pretending to be a foppish retarded billionaire" tier genius, in case nerds need a simpler metaphor.

  5. #45
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,925
    Amen (Given)
    1955
    Amen (Received)
    1603
    Quote Originally Posted by DivineOb View Post
    Yes, the DNC screwed over Sanders. I agree 100% on that. If that hadn't happened I assume she likely would have won the election since even a tiny fraction of his followers, who either didn't vote or voted for Trump or that other Russian candidate (Green Party), would have been enough to win things in the key states.

    This article covers what a disaster his supporters turned the convention into. He bears responsibility for their behavior for various reasons.

    He insisted on not conceding after Super Tuesday when it became (effectively) impossible for him to win. This probably contributed to his supporters out of control behavior at the convention.

    He spent most of August working on his book instead of campaigning for Clinton.

    He turned on Clinton in the final week of the election. (opinion piece)

    Last, he either knew or should have known that he was getting online support from Russia and did nothing about it.
    That's not turning on Clinton, Divo, Bernie was actually campaigning for her in Wisconsin at the time he was quoted. He was just stressing the point "not to take his supporters for granted." Bernie is to the left of Clinton, and has a lot of support behind him, but Clinton is far left of Trump and the conservative ideology. To think that he turned against Clinton, you'd have to think that he was supporting Trump.
    Last edited by JimL; 01-16-2020 at 09:10 PM.

  6. #46
    tWebber Starlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,221
    Amen (Given)
    2795
    Amen (Received)
    1769
    Quote Originally Posted by DivineOb View Post
    Let me ask this. When Obama chose Biden as his VP it was clear what Biden was bringing to the table. In a Warren / Sanders pairing what votes will that VP selection actually bring that a person of color (Harris / Abrams), or a young voice (Buttigieg / Beto) wouldn't capture more of (sucky sentence but I think you get it).
    I don't think putting a person of color or a young person in a VP slot would actually attract many votes. I think there's almost no votes in rounding out the ticket demographically, and thus no importance to do so.

    What does matter, is that the team works well together and can together produce more enthusiasm in their support base than either could also. Also if people think the President is old and quite likely to die in office, they want to see someone in the VP slot that they are okay with being President. So, that's Warren and Sanders. They were (are?) friends, who campaign for roughly the same policies, and if one were to die in office the other would carry on their legacy of roughly the same policies.

    There's an adage about why Republicans win despite there being fewer of them and their policies sucking: "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line."
    I dunno how true that is.

    More generally, I would just say Republicans win because they cheat.

    That's unfair to Biden. Trump clearly has the signs of dementia and they are accelerating. Nothing on par with Biden.
    They appear to me to be about the same. Biden's people have done a good job of keeping him out of the media, but when he's forced to speak in public it's usually pretty noticeable. He did get through the most recent debate okay, but that was unusual for him. Behind the scenes, his big donors who spend time with him in private appear to have panicked and run away as have Obama's people, I presume because what they saw worried them.

    To be selfish for a moment it doesn't even really sell to me because I have very good insurance through my employer.
    Which means you can't leave your current job if you wanted to, without losing that insurance. It also means that your employer can change your insurance from one year to the next, if they feel like it.

    I live in a country where the government provides the healthcare (equivalent to VA for all, or NHS in Britain), and it works well. I was flabbergasted when I heard that in the US that a really common reason people stayed doing jobs they didn't like when they would prefer to change job was health insurance, and even more when I heard that medical treatment is the most common cause of bankruptcy in the US.

    I was hoping for something more like this after having a bleeding heart attack.
    That seems excessive and unreasonable. He's given 3 doctors reports describing the surgery and medication and evaluating future risks. It boils down to that he's got a chance of another heart attack just like anyone in the world does, but that he's been carefully checked out and a recurrence isn't all that likely. So he might die in office, as any president might, but the odds of that aren't over the top. No amount of medical records can meaningfully change that vague uncertainty to any sort of firm prediction. Turning 3 doctors reports into 300 pages of records doesn't resolve that uncertainty.

    This article covers what a disaster his supporters turned the convention into.
    I tend to view enthusiasm in politics as a plus not a minus. My takeaway from that would be that it's wonderful such passionate people are in the base of the Dem party, and that the Dems can channel their passion in future and will benefit from it.

    I'm not into 'tone policing'. So what if their tone wasn't 'nice'? Bernie had been unfairly treated by the DNC, as pretty much everyone now agrees. It reminds me of when conservatives on this forum whine about the lack of decorum in the Occupy Wall St protests. They'll talk as if the global movement of hundreds of thousands of people protesting inequality was irrelevant and pretend that the one relevant thing that happened was that one guy defecated on a car in public. It's a pretty extreme way to miss the basic point.

    He insisted on not conceding after Super Tuesday when it became (effectively) impossible for him to win.
    Not at all. It was still perfectly possible for a Sanders victory after Super Tuesday at the beginning of March. It in fact went down to the wire and it wasn't until about mid-April at pretty much the end of the primary when it became clear who had won.

    When Hillary ran against Obama in the 08 primaries, she stayed on to the end despite being in clearly a losing position. Personally I think that's an acceptable choice if that's what she wanted to do / thought was best. If the DNC is concerned about candidates hanging on too long in the primaries, they can change the rules to declare the end of a primary if they want, but it's not a serious problem, so they haven't.

    He spent most of August working on his book instead of campaigning for Clinton
    Sanders did more rallies for Clinton between the primary and the general, than Clinton did for Clinton.

    Clinton's team asked him to stop because they decided he was costing them too much money for all his travel to do rallies for them. So he said ok, and went away and busied himself writing a book instead.

    He turned on Clinton in the final week of the election. (opinion piece)
    Asking her to support a policy isn't exactly turning on her.

    Last, he either knew or should have known that he was getting online support from Russia and did nothing about it.
    What was he supposed to do about it? Invade Russia? Shut down the internet?

  7. #47
    tWebber Starlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,221
    Amen (Given)
    2795
    Amen (Received)
    1769
    I saw an interesting poll today of Senators' approval ratings in their home states in Q4 2019.

    Of the top 10 most disliked senators, 8 are Republicans, with Susan Collins of Maine and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky winning first and second place prize for the their-people-hate-them award.

    But one of the two Dems in that top ten most disliked by people in their own state list, is Elizabeth Warren. That's... not great. When you're the 9th most disliked person of 100 in the Senate, maybe running for President isn't the right choice?

    Bernie, as per usual, polls as the most liked Senator.

  8. #48
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,677
    Amen (Given)
    271
    Amen (Received)
    1088
    Warren gets heckled at a rally and she literally... just.... freezes, like a deer in the headlights. The clip they show is right in front, but WARNING: strong graphic language in the video.




    Does anyone believe this frail woman could handle a debate with someone like Trump?
    "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

  9. #49
    tWebber Starlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    9,221
    Amen (Given)
    2795
    Amen (Received)
    1769
    Quote Originally Posted by seanD View Post
    Warren gets heckled at a rally and she literally... just.... freezes, like a deer in the headlights.
    Meh. It's not really a problem. She'll learn over time. She's pretty new to politics and is still learning how to respond in new situations. She's aware enough of the situation to know that trying to shout down female black activists doesn't play well with the identity-politics-liberal-elite who write snobby opinion pieces in the NYT and appear as panelists on media shows, so she's strategically avoiding upsetting them. I do think that her newness to politics is a reason she shouldn't be the Dem nominee for President until 2024 though. She's still a bit unsure how to handle herself politically.

    Does anyone believe this frail woman could handle a debate with someone like Trump?
    I think she would run intellectual circles around Trump. Trump can barely get a coherent sentence out. She's a professor.

    It might be depressingly true that a large proportion of the US electorate is only concerned with who acts like the most alpha male on stage and doesn't really hear the words spoken, and has a "me beta, me support alpha, he alpha" level of response. But it would be nice to think a lot of US voters actually listen to the words spoken and would realize she's competent and Trump's a blithering lunatic.
    Last edited by Starlight; 01-17-2020 at 02:00 AM.

  10. #50
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,677
    Amen (Given)
    271
    Amen (Received)
    1088
    So we're going to pretend that much of the US general debates aren't about optics. Okay.
    "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •