|
AlexanderCA posted:Seriously please do everything to not elect Trump. Just to be clear, does this extend beyond just shaming people on the internet for not voting for Biden? Are you going to contribute money to his campaign? Are you ready to canvas and phonebank for Biden? Are you ready to tell people irl that they need to vote for him even if they think he's extremely lovely? Getting a candidate elected takes a whole lot more than just voting. Because I just don't see that happening. The rallying cry for the Biden campaign seems to begin and end at "well I don't really like him but we gotta get Trump out". A lot of people are going to say we need to do everything we can to get Trump out, but won't actually do "everything".
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 21:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 09:17 |
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Are you going to contribute money to his campaign? Are you ready to canvas and phonebank for Biden? Are you ready to tell people irl that they need to vote for him even if they think he's extremely lovely? No, because I've never set foot in the western hemisphere. Complaining and shaming is the extent of influence the other 6.7 billion of us have.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 21:50
|
|
|
Godholio posted:I also don't think anyone to the right of this thread thinks Bernie has/had a loving chance in the general. Bernie consistently beat Trump in polls during the primary. Trump himself has said that Bernie would have been a tougher opponent in 2016 due to Sanders' views on trade.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 22:27
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Bernie consistently beat Trump in polls during the primary. Trump himself has said that Bernie would have been a tougher opponent in 2016 due to Sanders' views on trade. Yeah, but almost anyone would've been a tougher opponent for Trump than Hillary in 2016. Even Biden.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 22:36
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Bernie consistently beat Trump in polls during the primary. Trump himself has said that Bernie would have been a tougher opponent in 2016 due to Sanders' views on trade. Which means precisely dick when 3/4 of the voting population grew up in an era when socialists=communists=the mortal nuclear war enemy. Political nuance is lost on most people, and "most people" is who you need to vote for your guy. They don't care about socialism being different from democratic socialism being different from communism, etc. Hillary consistently beat Trump in polls too, and she actually had most of her voting bloc show up...Bernie wouldn't bring the same turnout. You'd see a demographic shift in voters who DO show up, but fewer are going to show up for a "Castro sympathizer" and "socialist," because that's what he's known for outside of the left. I'd have voted for Bernie. I don't think he would've won.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
imo Trump is a weak enough candidate that pretty much any of the Democratic candidates would have won, but I do think Sanders would have had a much tougher job in taking back the Senate.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 22:57
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Yeah, but almost anyone would've been a tougher opponent for Trump than Hillary in 2016. Even Biden. Biden didn't run in 2016, Sanders did.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 23:13
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Biden didn't run in 2016, Sanders did. No poo poo. I was speaking hypothetically. Biden, if he had run in 2016 (which as you so needlessly pointed out, he didn't), would've been a stronger candidate than Hilldawg. To remove any possible doubt of my thesis, here's one last hypothetical: A bag of rat poo poo painted blue would have been a stronger 2016 Democratic presidential candidate than Hillary Clinton. Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 23:17 on May 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 23:15
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:No poo poo. I was speaking hypothetically. Biden, if he had run in 2016 (which as you so needlessly pointed out, he didn't), would've been a stronger candidate than Hilldawg. You think Lincoln Chafee would have been Trump? LoL.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 23:21
|
|
|
EDIT: Fingat slipped, will post gooder latr
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 23:24
|
|
|
AlexanderCA posted:No, because I've never set foot in the western hemisphere. Complaining and shaming is the extent of influence the other 6.7 billion of us have. While you keep sitting on your high horse remember you're asking 30-60 million sexual assault survivors to reckon with voting for a rapist to save the world. I don't think you fully appreciate how hosed up it is for these people to be shamed into voting for the type of person who has irrevocably damaged their lives.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 23:34
|
|
|
I think, looking back at it, that calling Obama a progressive is a bit of a stretch. His administration got work done with the ACA, but the vast majority of his policy was moderate liberal Democratic business as usual with a few nightmare decisions. That's what he's pushing now, opposition to the 'activist wing' of the party. Biden's a conservative Dem. That's not an attack, it's what a glance at his history in the legislature will demonstrate. He was the safe choice for VP to counterbalance Obama having the illusion of progressive thought in his campaign without scaring the donors. AlexanderCA posted:There's some of "electing biden will just lead to a worse trump winning in 2024" argument I've seen around the forums. And I just wonder how anyone in the year 2020 and a global once in a century pandemic can feel they can predict politics 4 years out to inform their vote today. It's easy to predict because the setup is already here. The damage Trump's done on top of the pandemic isn't going to be cleaned up in four years, and historically if the opposing party can field anything remotely like a strong candidate, an incumbent won't live through not having been able to fix it immediately. A populist authoritarian repub without Trump's flaws will walk over the shitshow that is the Democrats. Hell, one could give Trump a hard run, which is part of why the party is pushing to minimize primaries.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2020 23:46
|
|
|
AlexanderCA posted:There's some of "electing biden will just lead to a worse trump winning in 2024" argument I've seen around the forums. And I just wonder how anyone in the year 2020 and a global once in a century pandemic can feel they can predict politics 4 years out to inform their vote today. A Democratic president hasn't connected to another Democratic president through elections since the [b]19th Century[b]. Any time we had two Democrats in a row it was because the first one died or was killed. Yes, I feel pretty loving confident Biden's successor will be a Republican.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 01:28
|
|
|
Eej posted:While you keep sitting on your high horse remember you're asking 30-60 million sexual assault survivors to reckon with voting for a rapist to save the world. I don't think you fully appreciate how hosed up it is for these people to be shamed into voting for the type of person who has irrevocably damaged their lives. Who should they vote for? What is the option that is not horrible?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 01:46
|
|
|
It's really simple. People are suffering from very real problems right now. Biden is promising to do very little to help them, and will end up doing next to nothing while in power, for one reason or another. Hell, he could probably make things worse with austerity measures. Whoever the Republican candidate is in 2024 will promise to "fix" these problems by pinning them on a scapegoat - probably immigrants again, maybe China, but who knows in four years. And he will win. This is why it's imperative for Biden to do more than the anemic proposals he's made so far. This is why people are ringing the alarm bell. Weak liberalism inevitably leads to fascism.
Fister Roboto fucked around with this message at 02:06 on May 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:02
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:It's really simple. People are suffering from very real problems right now. Biden is promising to do very little to help them, and will end up doing next to nothing while in power, for one reason or another. Hell, he could probably make things worse with austerity measures. Whoever the Republican candidate is in 2024 will promise to "fix" these problems by pinning them on a scapegoat - probably immigrants again, maybe China, but who knows in four years. And he will win. This is why it's imperative for Biden to do more than the anemic proposals he's made so far. This is why people are ringing the alarm bell. Weak liberalism inevitably leads to fascism. Hypothetically, if Biden made a good faith effort in that direction, would the C-SPAM demographic even believe him about it? And no, I don't have a weird hate boner goon grudge against C-SPAM, I loving post in it and have since it was opened, I'm just using it as a kind of shorthand because I'm too lazy to think of a better one.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:13
|
|
|
You're going to have to ask CSPAM that then, because I don't post there and I certainly don't represent them. And besides, we're talking about a hypothetical scenario where he has already won. He's going to have to do some drat legendary progressive work to get people to vote for the next Democrat rather than a fascist Republican. Given his track record of both lying and supporting conservative policies, I wouldn't hold my breath.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:37
|
|
|
The only remotely convincing play for the left would be Vice President Nina Turner
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:58
|
|
|
"if Biden did stuff he's absolutely not going to do, Cspam would still dislike him! They're the real hypocrites!" -a normal series of thoughts
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 05:39
|
|
|
Patware posted:A Democratic president hasn't connected to another Democratic president through elections since the [b]19th Century[b]. Any time we had two Democrats in a row it was because the first one died or was killed. Edit: I read this wrong. Nevermind.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 06:26
|
|
|
McNally posted:Edit: I read this wrong. Nevermind. is this why i felt animal fear a few hours ago or was it just everything else
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 07:20
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Who should they vote for? What is the option that is not horrible? They're both horrible, that's the point. You can have a hypothetical situation where you change one letter and both candidates are outright racists. As a minority you're being asked to vote for someone who fundamentally does not see you as a human being in a country that ostensibly believes you should be. You can hold your nose and vote for the lesser of two evils but either way you're still picking a leader that outright does not respect you down to the core of your being. That's a hard pill for a lot of people to swallow and it's understandable that people would just opt out entirely.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 13:21
|
|
|
Eej posted:They're both horrible, that's the point. You can have a hypothetical situation where you change one letter and both candidates are outright racists. As a minority you're being asked to vote for someone who fundamentally does not see you as a human being in a country that ostensibly believes you should be. And there's the big part... you're not obligated to vote for either evil. Hell, nearly half of the voting eligible populace doesn't vote at all. Write in Bernie, or vote for Vermin Supreme, or go with whoever the Greens come up with like CSPAM is pushing for, doesn't loving matter. End of the day the point is to vote your conscience, and if that means not voting for any flavor of rapist, then so be it.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 13:34
|
|
|
Eej posted:They're both horrible, that's the point. You can have a hypothetical situation where you change one letter and both candidates are outright racists. As a minority you're being asked to vote for someone who fundamentally does not see you as a human being in a country that ostensibly believes you should be. I get that. But if you're going to spend years railing about the current evils, then sit home because you don't like the other guy knowing it means the evil continues...well. I guess it wasn't that important. Edit: Actually I'd say it's accelerationist. Seems like people don't like Biden because he won't do enough to roll back Trump's damage, or because he's probably a sexpest, or both. Being willing to accept Trump to spite Trump-lite is loving stupid.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 20:02
|
|
|
You're creating a false dichotomy, and it's the exact one that lets the DNC push a terrible candidate with the assurance that "at least he's not trump" will overcome his massive downsides. That campaign strategy didn't work for Clinton either. Not being as bad as trump demonstrably doesn't drive turnout the way enthusasim for a good candidate does.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 20:55
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:You're creating a false dichotomy, and it's the exact one that lets the DNC push a terrible candidate with the assurance that "at least he's not trump" will overcome his massive downsides. That's...not a false dichotomy. You can argue that only saying Trump is worse than Biden is a bad electoral strategy for the Democrats to pursue, but that doesn't make the underlying point wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 21:11
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:That's...not a false dichotomy. You can argue that only saying Trump is worse than Biden is a bad electoral strategy for the Democrats to pursue, but that doesn't make the underlying point wrong. The false dichotomy is 'if you don't vote for Biden you're voting for Trump, and thus responsible for their evil'.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 21:51
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:The false dichotomy is 'if you don't vote for Biden you're voting for Trump, and thus responsible for their evil'. This is true, mathematically speaking it's only a half vote for Trump  Seriously though, obviously this is a democracy, and everyone is well within their rights to vote for the person who they feel best represents their interests, and I'm certainly not going to tell you that you're a bad person if you don't vote the way I want you to (Unless it is for trump, in which case you're bad and you should feel bad). Honestly, where I get frustrated is the equivocation. Like, we all know Biden isn't a perfect candidate, and hell he's certainly not the one I wanted. And if you believe he's a rapist and can't bring yourself to vote for him because of that, I understand completely. But when it gets into "They're equally or nearly equally bad on policy and administration," that is where I get frustrated, because it is so demonstrably not true. Patware posted:A Democratic president hasn't connected to another Democratic president through elections since the [b]19th Century[b]. Any time we had two Democrats in a row it was because the first one died or was killed. Eh, these kinds of historical comparisons aren't great. The sample size of presidential elections isn't great to begin with, and things can change very quickly. You could make the same kind of comparison in 2004 for instance and say with confidence that Bush's successor would be white, or in 1964 that Arkansas would vote Democratic. It is certainly possible that Biden's successor will be a Republican, but it is by no means a sure thing, and honestly that is going to depend much more on the state of the economy and Biden's administration than anything else.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 22:08
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:The false dichotomy is 'if you don't vote for Biden you're voting for Trump, and thus responsible for their evil'. Ok, technically we're not there yet because Biden is still like 500 delegates short of the nomination. So my point is based on the assumption that he'll get it. At that point, we have trolley problem and we're on the Trump track by default.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 22:15
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:The false dichotomy is 'if you don't vote for Biden you're voting for Trump, and thus responsible for their evil'. Well, to make you feel better if you're not voting for Trump you're voting for Biden.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:This is true, mathematically speaking it's only a half vote for Trump I think a lot of the equivocation comes from the belief that even if Biden wins, there's no chance he actually pursues the party's legislative platform, much less has any success without God turning Mitch McConnell to a pillar of salt. Who knows, that is why despite any opinion I have on Biden I'm still going to be helping however I can in the local senate race to get my terrible GOP senator ousted. Dems need to keep all their current seats and pick up 4 to have control of the Senate.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 23:24
|
|
|
A court document from Tara Reade's divorce states that the husband knew that something traumatic had occurred at Joe Biden's office. https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/politics-government/article242527331.html
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2020 03:09
|
|
|
There is literally no good outcome for the Tara Reade allegations. If her allegations are true then Biden is a disgusting human being unfit to be president (although still somehow less unfit than Trump). If her allegations are not true or she is a vulnerable woman being manipulated by a third party, then that means that awareness of sexual assault has been irreversibly weaponized by either the far right or their fellow travelers, and that they successfully co-opted the legitimate concerns of progressives and socialists to an enormous degree. Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 14:21 on May 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2020 14:00
|
|
|
Remember, whenever you talk about Tara Reade you need to remind the viewer that there are serious doubts about the veracity of her claims. If you do this every time you mention her name, you plant the seed of doubt in the reader's mind and they will give the the Rapist Joe Biden a pass.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2020 15:57
|
|
|
sexual assault has already been weaponized. Just look at how the political parties treat the accuser/accused depending on which political sphere they belong to. Hillary Clinton is married to Bill who used his position as president to get blowjobs from a loving intern and yet no one in the democratic party cares. Al Franken pantomimed sexually assaulting a soldier AS A SENATOR and I defended him at first. and yeah I'm afraid of this poo poo being really weaponized by someone competent that setup multiple accusers, some really good fake videos etc. PookBear fucked around with this message at 16:52 on May 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2020 16:06
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:There is literally no good outcome for the Tara Reade allegations. He could drop out and endorse literally anyone other than Bloomberg
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2020 16:08
|
|
|
PookBear posted:He could drop out and endorse literally anyone other than Bloomberg That's what gets me. This taints Biden's whole campaign, and the fact that he's going to bull through it and dare anyone to make it matter says everything that needs to be said.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2020 02:00
|
|
|
PookBear posted:He could drop out and endorse literally anyone other than Bloomberg Does that do anything? I don't know how delegates work.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2020 07:00
|
|
|
Full Tara Reade interview with Megyn Kelly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HeZiKvOA0o
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2020 14:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 09:17 |
|
|
Godholio posted:Does that do anything? I don't know how delegates work. Honestly I don't loving know I tried looking into how it all works and its stupidly byzantine
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2020 16:19
|
|