Page 7 of 24 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 240

Thread: Will Elizabeth Warren's candidancy hurt Sanders in the primaries?

  1. #61
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-19 @ 07:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    3,611

    Re: Will Elizabeth Warren's candidancy hurt Sanders in the primaries?

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    First the hyperbolic language and now shouting. Wow, yourself.
    I posted the links because 3leftsdoo said he didn't believe or know a Bernie supporter who would vote for Trump.
    Bernie Sanders Voters Helped Trump Win and Here's Proof
    From your link:
    "What's more, 12 percent of those who backed Sanders actually cast a vote for Trump"
    "25 percent of those who voted for Clinton in the Democratic primary ended up voting for Republican John McCain, rather than Barack Obama, in the general election."

    "Another factor, however, was that of those who switched their allegiance from Sanders to Trump less than 10 percent considered themselves strong Democrats, while less than 50 percent even leaned Democrat."


    Three key takeaways from that Article that somewhat refute the article title itself.
    Men do what they have to when they want to, Great men do what they have to, even when they don't want to.

  2. #62
    WE'LL DO IT LIVE!
    MovingPictures's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,350
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Will Elizabeth Warren's candidancy hurt Sanders in the primaries?

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Do you think Jill Stein is going to run again?

    Everyone I know and talk to say they are going to vote for the democrat no matter how bad or terrible the candidate is. So it's starting to shape up into an anyone but Trump kind of election for most democrats.
    It depends. These vanity candidates have egos that crave the attention, but then again, they might not want to be known as the person that helped get Trump another term.

  3. #63
    Sage
    JasperL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,066

    Re: Will Elizabeth Warren's candidancy hurt Sanders in the primaries?

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Obamacare was a huge change. Saving the economy inspite of republican obstacles was a major thing. But still, Obama was too much of a pragmatist on most issues and lame on foreign policy and could've done more for the left that voted him into office.
    I'll just say that the focus for the Left really shouldn't be on President at all, IMO. The big problem with Obama is he had a 60 vote Senate for a few MONTHS, and then Democrats lost the house in 2010. Give Obama FDR majorities, or LBJ majorities, and if he doesn't get anything done, that's fair criticism, but he didn't have that.

    So sure, let's worry about the President, but more important is getting voters out in those key states to flip the Senate, and flip it with liberal Senators and if that happens, I don't really think it matters a whole lot which Democrat is President. Their big 'constraint' is what can get through Congress. ACA is a good example - the reality is people like Joe Lieberman with huge personal ties to the health insurance industry and a bunch of other conservative democrats all had veto power as the 60th vote over ACA. So the possible is what some Democrat with deep financial ties to insurance and healthcare providers would agree to.

    It's one criticism that I find pretty accurate about Democrats. They just are stupid when it comes to the day to day, raw power politics, that the GOP big donors have worked at for decades now, and the results are coming in. Fact is if the GOP controls the states, that helps control the Congress, so the GOP spends enormous resources at the state level on races no one hears about, but that $100k or $500k can win legislatures and state Supreme Court races. Not to mention that lots of big time policy gets made at the state level - see Medicaid expansion, union busting, etc. The Democrats have 87 people running for President and that will all be worthless even if a Democrat wins unless the Democrats flip the Senate in a big way and keep the House, and some of those 87 would presumably be excellent candidates for Senate or House.

  4. #64
    It's the Despair Quotient
    Checkerboard Strangler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,752
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Will Elizabeth Warren's candidancy hurt Sanders in the primaries?

    Quote Originally Posted by BrotherFease View Post
    Think about it: Both agree on policy issues. Both are running as hard-lefties. The difference here is that Warren is younger and female.
    To the mainstream there are also other differences, chief among them being that Warren BRANDS herself as a Democrat while Bernie insists on still BRANDING himself as something that ordinary mainstream Americans have been trained to fear since 1947:

    SOCIALIST

    Now, between you, me and that lamppost over there, Bernie isn't actually a socialist.
    He can claim to be one all day long, which he does, but he's actually an East Coast New Deal-FDR style liberal Democrat.
    He hasn't been an actual socialist since the day he first set foot on Capitol Hill.

    But it doesn't matter.
    Ever since the start of the Cold War, Americans have been conditioned to view socialism as being a soft form of COMMUNISM.
    POTUS elections are no time for academic arguments.
    POTUS elections are the Super Bowl.

    America went through a ten year period where socialists, communists and even former socialists and communists were rounded up, interrogated, fired from their livelihoods, IMPRISONED, threatened, shot, and generally branded as traitors.
    And ordinary Democrats and other liberals were herded into the same pen.
    Even chickenhawk cowboy John Wayne enjoyed more credibility as a patriot as he, in the words of director John Ford, "grew rich while men died".
    All he had to do was demonize liberals and slap around actors who portrayed commies on the silver screen.

    Partisans and partisan hacks love a good fight. Most partisan hacks live a very comfortable and protected life, or they're just born lucky.
    That's why they're so willing to play fast and loose and bet the farm or take hostages, or sit out an election to punish anyone who isn't willing to be partisan enough to make them happy.

    And they usually wind up punishing the people who can afford it the least, and that's the very same vulnerable, poor, disabled and elderly, and the remaining folks many of whom had played by the rules, worked hard and honestly, and just got dealt a very lousy hand of cards by fate.

    Bernie needed to care about his branding in 2016 and ignored that caution.
    He needs to care about it now, and still doesn't.
    He believes deep down in his very heart and soul that ideology can beat perception and presentation, also known as BRANDING.

    It never has.
    And the folks who have to live with the outcome of that failing gamble wind up under the thumb of a would be dictator, an incompetent, sanity-deprived authoritarian hack with the attitude of a bully.

    Elizabeth Warren cares about branding and presentation.
    I love Bernie, don't get me wrong. He speaks to me very well, but I understand the realities of sales and advertising, and candidates are supposed to be good at that.
    The only people pushing the Athenian Straw Man Nonexistent Threat of Slippery Slope Windyfoggery (ASMNSSW) RE DEMOCRACY are people who have a misunderstanding/problem or hatred of democracy. (See AUTHORITARIANS)

  5. #65
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,705

    Re: Will Elizabeth Warren's candidancy hurt Sanders in the primaries?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chomsky View Post
    I think after Trump's rise in 2016, and with Warren being so close in ideology, Bernie would throw everything he could at her to help - should she take the lead.
    At this point, why would he? If Kamala Harris moves out front, for example, Bernie will keep fighting. Only if he thinks Warren is the only chance to be beat the Donald would he throw a bone.

    After the convention is another story.

  6. #66
    WE'LL DO IT LIVE!
    MovingPictures's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,350
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Will Elizabeth Warren's candidancy hurt Sanders in the primaries?

    Quote Originally Posted by Checkerboard Strangler View Post
    To the mainstream there are also other differences, chief among them being that Warren BRANDS herself as a Democrat while Bernie insists on still BRANDING himself as something that ordinary mainstream Americans have been trained to fear since 1947:

    SOCIALIST

    Now, between you, me and that lamppost over there, Bernie isn't actually a socialist.
    He can claim to be one all day long, which he does, but he's actually an East Coast New Deal-FDR style liberal Democrat.
    He hasn't been an actual socialist since the day he first set foot on Capitol Hill.

    But it doesn't matter.
    Ever since the start of the Cold War, Americans have been conditioned to view socialism as being a soft form of COMMUNISM.
    POTUS elections are no time for academic arguments.
    POTUS elections are the Super Bowl.

    America went through a ten year period where socialists, communists and even former socialists and communists were rounded up, interrogated, fired from their livelihoods, IMPRISONED, threatened, shot, and generally branded as traitors.
    And ordinary Democrats and other liberals were herded into the same pen.
    Even chickenhawk cowboy John Wayne enjoyed more credibility as a patriot as he, in the words of director John Ford, "grew rich while men died".
    All he had to do was demonize liberals and slap around actors who portrayed commies on the silver screen.

    Partisans and partisan hacks love a good fight. Most partisan hacks live a very comfortable and protected life, or they're just born lucky.
    That's why they're so willing to play fast and loose and bet the farm or take hostages, or sit out an election to punish anyone who isn't willing to be partisan enough to make them happy.

    And they usually wind up punishing the people who can afford it the least, and that's the very same vulnerable, poor, disabled and elderly, and the remaining folks many of whom had played by the rules, worked hard and honestly, and just got dealt a very lousy hand of cards by fate.

    Bernie needed to care about his branding in 2016 and ignored that caution.
    He needs to care about it now, and still doesn't.
    He believes deep down in his very heart and soul that ideology can beat perception and presentation, also known as BRANDING.

    It never has.
    And the folks who have to live with the outcome of that failing gamble wind up under the thumb of a would be dictator, an incompetent, sanity-deprived authoritarian hack with the attitude of a bully.

    Elizabeth Warren cares about branding and presentation.
    I love Bernie, don't get me wrong. He speaks to me very well, but I understand the realities of sales and advertising, and candidates are supposed to be good at that.
    Two points.

    1. You are absolutely right. While the Sanders supporters don't want to hear it, his embracing of the word "socialism" is campaign suicide. He isn't a socialist, but by using the label as a substitute for a "mixed economy", he's given the rightwing rocket fuel to campaign against him with.

    2. Isn't amaing that McConnell was able to keep all of his 41 senators in check, while Schumer and Pelosi have waves of members in both houses constantly crossing the party line? It goes to show how uneffective they are as leaders.

  7. #67
    pleb nekrodev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,161

    Re: Will Elizabeth Warren's candidancy hurt Sanders in the primaries?

    Quote Originally Posted by MovingPictures View Post
    Two points.

    1. You are absolutely right. While the Sanders supporters don't want to hear it, his embracing of the word "socialism" is campaign suicide. He isn't a socialist, but by using the label as a substitute for a "mixed economy", he's given the rightwing rocket fuel to campaign against him with.

    2. Isn't amaing that McConnell was able to keep all of his 41 senators in check, while Schumer and Pelosi have waves of members in both houses constantly crossing the party line? It goes to show how uneffective they are as leaders.

    He definitely ****ed up using the word "socialist" or "socialism", because it's wrong, and because it's just a bad idea. Bernie is my main man, but he goofed.

    The reason the Dems aren't as united is because it's such a large party. It encompasses everything from the center-left to the center-right. That's not a coherent party.

  8. #68
    Educator
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,243

    Re: Will Elizabeth Warren's candidancy hurt Sanders in the primaries?

    Quote Originally Posted by MovingPictures View Post
    Two points.

    1. You are absolutely right. While the Sanders supporters don't want to hear it, his embracing of the word "socialism" is campaign suicide. He isn't a socialist, but by using the label as a substitute for a "mixed economy", he's given the rightwing rocket fuel to campaign against him with.

    2. Isn't amaing that McConnell was able to keep all of his 41 senators in check, while Schumer and Pelosi have waves of members in both houses constantly crossing the party line? It goes to show how uneffective they are as leaders.
    What do you mean? McConnell doesn't have to keep anyone in check if nothing makes it to the floor for a vote. Its part of why he does what he does.....if they don't have to go on record, then nobody can get hurt by breaking ranks and making a rational vote.

  9. #69
    WE'LL DO IT LIVE!
    MovingPictures's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,350
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Will Elizabeth Warren's candidancy hurt Sanders in the primaries?

    Quote Originally Posted by bullseyelqcs View Post
    What do you mean? McConnell doesn't have to keep anyone in check if nothing makes it to the floor for a vote. Its part of why he does what he does.....if they don't have to go on record, then nobody can get hurt by breaking ranks and making a rational vote.
    I'm talking about 2009-2014, when he was the minority leader.

  10. #70
    Educator
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,243

    Re: Will Elizabeth Warren's candidancy hurt Sanders in the primaries?

    Quote Originally Posted by MovingPictures View Post
    I'm talking about 2009-2014, when he was the minority leader.
    Even then, the job was pretty easy, since anyone with an R behind thier name was committed to not letting Obama get ANYTHING passed.

    Plus, it was pretty easy to be the Party of No when they have basically no power in the first place.

Page 7 of 24 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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