• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why do people support Warren over Bernie?

Craig234 said:
The problem is your writing comprehension.

You think that when you say 'Bernie's supporters and the poster above' that you didn't mention Bernie's supporters, only the poster above. I'm done with this and do not plan to read or reply to you again on this.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I'm tired of red herrings, dishonest editing of my posts and you ignoring entire arguments to split hairs. It's best if you don't engage with other voters, because you're trying like heck to drive sympathetic voters away from Bernie, who is your preferred candidate. You're an advertisement of the offensive Bernie Bros or Bust contingent that's divisive and unproductive, and why I'm not voting for the guy in the primary bit will in the general.

:peace
 
Two fewer posters to read.
 
Amelia said:
Can't know what would have happened without the superdelegates.

They affected media coverage. They affected the inevitability/electability factor.

They steered the course of the bandwagon phenomenon.




Also, they affected other more viable people not named Bernie getting into the race.



We can't know how much material effect they had in addition to being a self-inflicted wound on the tone-deaf Democratic party in a populist election cycle.




I don't say that without the superdelegates, Bernie would have run ... because for one thing, I think without the superdelegates there's a good chance Biden or someone else would have gotten into the race.

But I still strongly disagree with claims that say that because in the end Hillary had more primary votes she would still have won even if the superdelegates hadn't put her 20% of the way toward the nomination before any primary votes were cast. There were too many other variables on the way to the convention, and we can't know how the superdelegates impacted those variables.




And that's the only post I'll make about that in this thread. Because I feel bad enough for jumping in now on this old dead horse beating contest.
Click to expand...

Amelia, thank you for applying some wisdom to this thread. There are absolutely adverse effects associated with the super delegates.

I will also tell you that the media is not helping the DEM party. Does anyone really think their polling information helped at all? Do we think telling everyone voting that HC is the president of the US before the voting ever started helping to drive people to the polls? Do we think telling the nation that HC is the president didn't drive some moderates to vote for Trump as a statement to her that she is not as popular as she is perceived?

Does the liberal media and the radical left constantly castrating a trump supporter really going to effect their decision or is it going to mask their support until the 2020 vote?
 
Craig234 said:
Two fewer posters to read.
Click to expand...

There is value in reading what people who don't think like you or see things quite the way you do write. There is more value in attempting to substantively rebut them, if only as a personal intellectual exercise.
 
Winston said:
I understand where you're coming from but, we have opposite views of the world. To me, the establishment Democrats are 75% insane, the GOP is 200% insane and Bernie, AOC, and the like are the only ones with their head on straight.
Click to expand...

That's a truly amazing view. What flavor kool aid were you sipping when you came up with it? Bernie, AOC and the like will bankrupt the country, dismantle the military, take away most of your rights, kill the energy industry and tax you into poverty. The democrats will do that too but it will take them much longer.
 
Greenbeard said:
There is value in reading what people who don't think like you or see things quite the way you do write. There is more value in attempting to substantively rebut them, if only as a personal intellectual exercise.
Click to expand...

That's essentially why I like posting here. I've never blocked anyone because it's entertaining and I learn things debating with the conservatives on here. The debate also forces me to defend positions that I'd otherwise just think were obvious, because they are to me but others see the world entirely differently. I joined a 'liberal' board at Thom Hartmann's site a few years ago and it was just awful. I don't know if they purged conservatives or they just didn't post but a series of threads where everyone agrees Thom is brilliant and always right and liberals are always right, etc. is deadly boring.
 
charliebrown said:
Amelia, thank you for applying some wisdom to this thread. There are absolutely adverse effects associated with the super delegates.

I will also tell you that the media is not helping the DEM party. Does anyone really think their polling information helped at all? Do we think telling everyone voting that HC is the president of the US before the voting ever started helping to drive people to the polls? Do we think telling the nation that HC is the president didn't drive some moderates to vote for Trump as a statement to her that she is not as popular as she is perceived?

Does the liberal media and the radical left constantly castrating a trump supporter really going to effect their decision or is it going to mask their support until the 2020 vote?
Click to expand...

Most of the media is owned and operated by extreme left leaning rich folks. Their tie to the democrats is in ideology and years of teaching young people that they have somehow been mistreated because they are expected to earn their own way instead of someone else paying for it for them. Those on the right, those who are walking away from the democrats are going to remain silent for the most part until voting day. At that point the polls which most predict a democrat win, just like 2016, will turn up short again and he left wing media will have another breakdown on public television. The polls which overwhelmingly predicted a Hillary win were wrong then and what makes them more accurate today?
 
Integrityrespec said:
That's a truly amazing view. What flavor kool aid were you sipping when you came up with it? Bernie, AOC and the like will bankrupt the country, dismantle the military, take away most of your rights, kill the energy industry and tax you into poverty. The democrats will do that too but it will take them much longer.
Click to expand...

Yeah? What color panties do you wear when the GOP bends you over backwards?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Winston said:
Just curious, polls have them about tied for second place.

Curious what Warren is offering that Bernie isn't? To me Warren has a blind spot on foreign policy, where Bernie does not. And she's willing to play ball with the corporate interests that Bernie has vowed to fight.
Click to expand...

She is better and more organized.
 
Integrityrespec said:
Most of the media is owned and operated by extreme left leaning rich folks. Their tie to the democrats is in ideology and years of teaching young people that they have somehow been mistreated because they are expected to earn their own way instead of someone else paying for it for them. Those on the right, those who are walking away from the democrats are going to remain silent for the most part until voting day. At that point the polls which most predict a democrat win, just like 2016, will turn up short again and he left wing media will have another breakdown on public television. The polls which overwhelmingly predicted a Hillary win were wrong then and what makes them more accurate today?
Click to expand...

Simple answer? The electorate knows what they are dealing with this time around.
 
RAMOSS said:
I think Bernie does have the blind spot on foreign policy. She is also younger. Bernie has some good ideas, but he tends to see everything through the lens of 'economic inequality'. It's important, but he has one hammer, and everything is a nail.
Click to expand...

Bernie Sanders is a one-trick pony with unrealistic and extreme ideas. He is also a hypocrite and an opportunist.
Elizabeth Warren is not much better, but she is indeed a bit better.
Biden is demented.
So, I'll vote for Elizabeth Warren, the lesser evil.
 
Greenbeard said:
There is value in reading what people who don't think like you or see things quite the way you do write. There is more value in attempting to substantively rebut them, if only as a personal intellectual exercise.
Click to expand...

This isn't about that.Why don't you go tell someone who gets a restraining order against an attempted racist that meeting different people is nice.
 
Craig234 said:
This isn't about that.Why don't you go tell someone who gets a restraining order against an attempted racist that meeting different people is nice.
Click to expand...

Driving away natural allies one voter at a time! Go Bernie!! :roll:
 
gulfman said:
I wonder if Warren will be endorsed by the Cleveland Indians and the Washington Redskins or the Atlanta Braves.
Click to expand...
the cleveland browns is my guess
 
Winston said:
I agree securing those levers in the Senate is important. However, polling shows the country is pretty "far left" if being far left is supporting Medicare-for-all like the radical Canadians, etc. You get it, I don't have to explain it.

However, we are talking 10 years ago now, and the Democrats HAVE moved left since then.

As for twisting arms like Lieberman, my point is they should have made the negotiation start farther left, so that Lieberman had to back them up into the public option. But, rather they served the interests of the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. Those industries shouldn't have had any seat at the table.
Click to expand...

I missed this before, but although I agree in principle it wasn't just Lieberman. Just for example, in the Senate the bill was essentially drafted in Sen. Caucus' office by Elizabeth Fowler, who was first a high powered Congressional aide, then a lobbyist for Wellpoint, then rejoined the Congress on the staff of Sen. Baucus. And look, Sen. Bayh's wife was a board member for Wellpoint and made $millions and he was a big hurdle to a public option! And you had right leaning Democrats like Ben Nelson from Nebraska who was a huge hurdle. No wonder - his vote for cloture to get over the 60 vote hurdle collapsed his support in a state that overwhelmingly opposed the ACA. And then Lieberman had his own ties to the healthcare industry through his wife who worked directly or was a paid lobbyist the industry for a couple decades, ending only in 2005.

Bottom line is to get to 60 with what they had took huge amounts of arm twisting. No one can replay it with a different strategy, but the law was deeply unpopular when the votes were taken and that was with the basic support of the multi-$billion insurance lobby, and the healthcare industry as a whole. We can all agree that the money is corrupting but it's just the way it works up there, and it's a massive hurdle. It's why I doubt if there are more than maybe 30-40 Senators who would, if their vote was the deciding one, support MFA. Maybe less. It would effectively kill off several of those multi-$billion companies, and they'll fight like hell, and dirty as hell, to preserve themselves, and it will have a huge impact. Anthem alone is worth $65 billion. UnitedHealth over $200 billion. What do you think they'll do to prevent their core business from going to $0?
 
JasperL said:
I missed this before, but although I agree in principle it wasn't just Lieberman. Just for example, in the Senate the bill was essentially drafted in Sen. Caucus' office by Elizabeth Fowler, who was first a high powered Congressional aide, then a lobbyist for Wellpoint, then rejoined the Congress on the staff of Sen. Baucus. And look, Sen. Bayh's wife was a board member for Wellpoint and made $millions and he was a big hurdle to a public option! And you had right leaning Democrats like Ben Nelson from Nebraska who was a huge hurdle. No wonder - his vote for cloture to get over the 60 vote hurdle collapsed his support in a state that overwhelmingly opposed the ACA. And then Lieberman had his own ties to the healthcare industry through his wife who worked directly or was a paid lobbyist the industry for a couple decades, ending only in 2005.

Bottom line is to get to 60 with what they had took huge amounts of arm twisting. No one can replay it with a different strategy, but the law was deeply unpopular when the votes were taken and that was with the basic support of the multi-$billion insurance lobby, and the healthcare industry as a whole. We can all agree that the money is corrupting but it's just the way it works up there, and it's a massive hurdle. It's why I doubt if there are more than maybe 30-40 Senators who would, if their vote was the deciding one, support MFA. Maybe less. It would effectively kill off several of those multi-$billion companies, and they'll fight like hell, and dirty as hell, to preserve themselves, and it will have a huge impact. Anthem alone is worth $65 billion. UnitedHealth over $200 billion. What do you think they'll do to prevent their core business from going to $0?
Click to expand...

Will respond more in depth later but one question..

How many of those blue dogs lost their seats to Republicans anyway even tho they left the left hanging?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Why does it matter? Both are the same on virtually every single issue
 
Winston said:
Just curious, polls have them about tied for second place.

Curious what Warren is offering that Bernie isn't? To me Warren has a blind spot on foreign policy, where Bernie does not. And she's willing to play ball with the corporate interests that Bernie has vowed to fight.
Click to expand...

People are getting tired of Bernie's yelling and bad hair days
 
Winston said:
I understand where you're coming from but, we have opposite views of the world. To me, the establishment Democrats are 75% insane, the GOP is 200% insane and Bernie, AOC, and the like are the only ones with their head on straight.
Click to expand...

Wow. I'm sure glad that most of America does not agree with you.
 
Moderate Right said:
Wow. I'm sure glad that most of America does not agree with you.
Click to expand...

Polls indicate they do. Name a position that Bernie holds that's minority support in polling


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Winston said:
Polls indicate they do. Name a position that Bernie holds that's minority support in polling


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Polls show Biden quite a bit ahead of Bernie. And that's just Democrats. Biden has approximately 25% of of the Democratic vote, added to the 50% of Americans who would vote Republican, that means your opinions are with about 25% of the total electorate, with 75% disagreeing with your ideology.
 
Moderate Right said:
Polls show Biden quite a bit ahead of Bernie. And that's just Democrats. Biden has approximately 25% of of the Democratic vote, added to the 50% of Americans who would vote Republican, that means your opinions are with about 25% of the total electorate, with 75% disagreeing with your ideology.
Click to expand...

Polls showed Jeb Bush ahead of Trump in the GOP primary too.

Your analysis is biased and flawed. If you look at polling issue by issue you'll see majority support and even Super majority support for many of Bernies key issues


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Winston said:
Polls showed Jeb Bush ahead of Trump in the GOP primary too.

Your analysis is biased and flawed. If you look at polling issue by issue you'll see majority support and even Super majority support for many of Bernies key issues


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It's amazing to me how you guys can look in the mirror and believe you have majority support. It's like when your candidate draws 10,000 groupies at a rally and you naively believe that means that 130 million people are going to vote for you when, in the end, it is only going to be those 10,000 groupies.
 
Moderate Right said:
It's amazing to me how you guys can look in the mirror and believe you have majority support. It's like when your candidate draws 10,000 groupies at a rally and you naively believe that means that 130 million people are going to vote for you when, in the end, it is only going to be those 10,000 groupies.
Click to expand...

Why are you scared of looking at issues based polling and insist that we pay attention to early horse race polling that showed JEB BUSH ahead in the horse race in 2015


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Moderate Right said:
It's amazing to me how you guys can look in the mirror and believe you have majority support. It's like when your candidate draws 10,000 groupies at a rally and you naively believe that means that 130 million people are going to vote for you when, in the end, it is only going to be those 10,000 groupies.
Click to expand...

What's with the red herrings? No one is making any claims about rally support = 100% of voter support. Why are you addressing claims not made, and ignoring the claims being made?

If you think his positions are fringe, not popular, don't have public support, show us the polls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom