To avoid writing another long paragraph, and as someone who is also in this age range(I'm 24), ^What BellisarioFaith said
American Politics: A Brand New Day
-
-
@Cyan:
"Why should we contribute to getting kids out of cages, replacing RGB, Thomas, and Breyer with people who aren't 35 year old neo-fascists, expanding Medicare and Medicaid, and in general have the government run by someone who isn't a imbecilic narcissist if WE don't get anything out of it?" and other hits by the Not Me, Us camp.
You realize when I say "we" I mean all Americans, right? Do you…do actually think I'm only speaking about benefits for young people? Or are you just pretending not to understand in order to argue? Honestly it could be either one.
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
I don't normally speak up in here because politics is truthfully something I don't find enjoyable to discuss, but I have kind of strong feelings about this one. And this is speaking as a fellow young person (26, will be 27 at the time of the election). So for why progressive young people, or even non-young people, should participate…
Honestly, I think a problem that a lot of young people have these days is wanting too much instant gratification. In the political sense, that manifests as, they want things to get better now, want a President who will start enacting changes that directly benefit them and their own right now. Certainly, I at least do agree that sooner is better, and that it's a shame we couldn't get a more progressive candidate this time around. In terms of their views and policies, Bernie or Warren definitely would have been my preference over Biden, too.
But as things worked out, Biden is our candidate, and just flipping the table, yelling "FUCK THE ESTABLISHMENT!", and refusing to vote on principle of not getting one of the candidates who most shares our views is the wrong approach. Refusing to vote for the candidate who has the best chance of beating Trump on some so-called "principled stand"–either by voting Green Party or, more commonly, refusing to go out and vote at all--is just going to make it that much easier for Trump to win again. In fact, refusing to go out and vote at all is harmful in more ways than one, because if you're not voting for your Senators and Representatives either, that also makes it easier for conservative candidates to win more seats in Congress, and thus easier for Trump to enact more of his godawful policies.
Liberals and progressives--young and older alike--need to move on from such disappointment, be pragmatic about this, and see the bigger picture. While Biden's probably not going to enact many of the changes we'd really like to see, he, at least, will be a step in the right direction, and create a better foundation for a hopefully-more-progressive candidate who succeeds him to build on. Therefore, yes, we might not get those changes yet, but if Biden is President, they're a whole lot less out of reach than with Trump, who, with four more years, will take us many steps in the wrong direction, and it'll take a lot longer to try to fix it. Repeatedly taking the all-or-nothing attitude of "Nope, the candidate we got this time isn't good enough for me, so I'm staying home…nope, still not good enough, not voting...nope, still not satisfied" makes those who do so complacent in far worse candidates winning instead, and will make it that much harder to actually get this country going in the direction we want it to.
So that's why progressives should participate: to increase the chances of getting what we want, if not now, then at least sometime in the foreseeable future.
And Bernie, Warren, and other progressive candidates who dropped out and now endorse Biden know this. Unlike some of their more hard-core supporters who refuse to back anyone else who isn't them, they themselves know that Trump winning again is the worst possible option for positive progress in this country, and are willing to throw in with whoever has the best chance of defeating him in the election. I hope their aforementioned supporters come to realize this, too.
TL;DR: Young progressives (or any other age) shouldn't treat this like a "now or not at all situation" where we refuse to vote if we can't have the candidate we want right this minute; we need to be willing to play "the long game", understand that a gradual process is far more likely to breed long-term success than someone who actively undoes progress already made, and be willing to settle for the former for the time being in order to stop the latter at all costs. We don't have to love Biden, but we have to realize that stopping Trump comes first and foremost.
Don't need to convince me, I'm voting for biden. I'll bitch about it all the way to the voting booth, and probably after that as well, but I'll do it. Biden is that shit sandwich you sometimes need to take a bite out of in order to just move on and not have to eat something somehow worse.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
People's willingness to accept absolutely nothing of what they want rather than any progress is baffling to me. Putting aside the fact that they're actually likely to lose more through inaction thanks to SCOTUS, "Sure, that would help some people but good does it do me?" is a hell of a position for people who call themselves progressives to take.
That's a ouroborous of self-defeatism.
For starters getting a progressive scotus under biden is far from guaranteed. I'll refer you to merrick garland on that one. And it's not that "it helps some but not me, so whatevs" it's that it doesn't help enough. We'll never get anywhere by constantly giving in and showing our bellies at every sign of resistance. If we keep giving concessions we'll never get what we want. If by some miracle biden does defeat trumpy I'll be done with the democrats until they put forward someone who offers real, comprehensive change. Baby steps and false promises ain't gonna cut it for me anymore.
-
See if you're not even going to believe Biden is progressive or will do progressive things to help enough and want to sit out afterwards, then the party really does not need to win you over. Nothing will.
Baby step, compromise and sacrifices are the only ways to make good progress in this country. Meanwhile sitting out proves that young progressives don't really care about anything that they say they do.
-
@The:
For starters getting a progressive scotus under biden is far from guaranteed. I'll refer you to merrick garland on that one.
I realize there's a full-court press lately on the Bernie left to pretend Obama was just a relentlessly awful President that isn't still overwhelmingly popular in the Democratic Party but Garland would have been better than Drinky Crow and Gorsuch who prioritize appeasing Trump over almost every other consideration.
Plus Biden has already said he'll appoint a black woman to SCOTUS, which is infinitely better than any of the Federalist Society clowns currently auditioning for the spot by making hilarious awful rulings to try and suck up to Trump.
And it's not that "it helps some but not me, so whatevs" it's that it doesn't help enough. We'll never get anywhere by constantly giving in and showing our bellies at every sign of resistance. If we keep giving concessions we'll never get what we want. If by some miracle biden does defeat trumpy I'll be done with the democrats until they put forward someone who offers real, comprehensive change. Baby steps and false promises ain't gonna cut it for me anymore.
Just getting Democrats in there will make a big difference; look at Virginia and how far it's come just in the last few years when it comes to checking things off the progressive wishlist. That only happens if you get other Democrats elected and Bernie's entire message about the Democratic Party hinders his ability to do that.
-
I referred to merrick because his seat was stolen by republicans, not because I hate Obama. When did I ever say I hate or even dislike Obama? And just being a democrat doesn't automatically make one good. Better than a republican, but not good enough. Look at all the shit biden doesn't support. Look at the things he has(doma). We can do better. I just hope by the next election young people stop being so fucking lazy, or we'll never get that better option.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
@Dorobō:
See if you're not even going to believe Biden is progressive or will do progressive things to help enough and want to sit out afterwards, then the party really does not need to win you over. Nothing will.
Baby step, compromise and sacrifices are the only ways to make good progress in this country. Meanwhile sitting out proves that young progressives don't really care about anything that they say they do.
biden's record proves he's not as progressive as you'd like me to believe. Advocating to cut medicare and supporting doma are pretty big no nos to progressives. It's fine if you like biden, just don't pretend he's a progressive, and don't pretend to support progressive ideals. And I couldn't care less about the party. If biden is the best you got, then your party ain't good enough and I want no part of it. I'm interested in people, not political parties.
-
@The:
biden's record proves he's not as progressive as you'd like me to believe. Advocating to cut medicare and supporting doma are pretty big no nos to progressives. It's fine if you like biden, just don't pretend he's a progressive, and don't pretend to support progressive ideals. And I couldn't care less about the party. If biden is the best you got, then your party ain't good enough and I want no part of it. I'm interested in people, not political parties.
His record also shows he is plenty progressive and does what his supporters want though. And his current run is the most progressive nom we have ever had so yeah. I don't really have to pretend, I know he is one and he'll do a fine job and if progressives can't see that, it's really on them at this point. You should care about the party since it's the only way to make progress in this country. And Biden is clearly the best, he is what most people want. No one can say we underprepared this election with him.
-
Biden supported DOMA but so did a lot of people back then. Biden also forced the Obama Administration to come out in support of gay marriage by publicly coming out in support of gay marriage. People can and do change their political views as time goes by.
Plus, well, this: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/vice-president-joe-biden-officiated-wedding-sex-couple/story?id=41058123
Far as SCOTUS goes, there's been a bunch of people lately claiming that Merrick Garland would have been interchangeable or worse than Trump's pick; I thought that was what you were referring to.
-
@Dorobō:
His record also shows he is plenty progressive and does what his supporters want though. And his current run is the most progressive nom we have ever had so yeah. I don't really have to pretend, I know he is one and he'll do a fine job and if progressives can't see that, it's really on them at this point. You should care about the party since it's the only way to make progress in this country. And Biden is clearly the best, he is what most people want. No one can say we underprepared this election with him.
Just because he's the one centrists and establishment dems want doesn't mean he's the best, lol. It just means they don't want progress. They want a return to the status quo "normalcy" of before trumpy. That's literally his biggest selling point. And to say the democratic party is the only hope for progress is hubris of the highest order and also a lie. If this cycle has proven anything it's that the broader democratic party doesn't want progress, they want the status quo back.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Biden supported DOMA but so did a lot of people back then. Biden also forced the Obama Administration to come out in support of gay marriage by publicly coming out in support of gay marriage. People can and do change their political views as time goes by.
Plus, well, this: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/vice-president-joe-biden-officiated-wedding-sex-couple/story?id=41058123
Far as SCOTUS goes, there's been a bunch of people lately claiming that Merrick Garland would have been interchangeable or worse than Trump's pick; I thought that was what you were referring to.
I don't really buy into the Obama hate going around recently. He still seems alright by me. Not great, but good.
-
Regaining the status quo of four years actually would be progress right now because so many things have been made substantially worse by the Trump administration.
-
Regaining the status quo of four years actually would be progress right now because so many things have been made substantially worse by the Trump administration.
Hm…I suppose I can agree with that. I'd still prefer actual progress be made, but I suppose settling for status quo now and try to make progress later is as good as I can hope for from biden. That compromise is like a green light to not even try in the future though. If we're willing to settle now, when does it end?
-
Except nothing in that call makes it seems like it was about a rape. If it's her mom or not, it's still a big nothing burger story.
-
Tara Reade has lied about most aspects of her story so I'm not exactly inclined to believe her on this.
-
All the attacks on Biden have been very weak if you ask me. And this one has been the weakest one.
-
@Dorobō:
Except nothing in that call makes it seems like it was about a rape. If it's her mom or not, it's still a big nothing burger story.
It doesn't matter that she didn't specifically mention rape in the call.
If it's definitely her, it corroborates Tara's claim that she told her mother about it in 1993, and unless you believe she privately lied to her family about being raped by Joe Biden then kept it a secret for decades for no reason before bringing it up again in 2019/2020 just to hurt his presidential campaign, you should agree that would make it very damaging evidence.
@Cyan:
Tara Reade has lied about most aspects of her story so I'm not exactly inclined to believe her on this.
You don't really need to believe her, that's the best part (although the claim that she's lied about most parts of her story is false as I discussed earlier).
CNN should still have call records (especially for someone claiming to be a whistleblower), so there's a very good chance we're going to either get hard proof that she's lying, dead silence from CNN if they continue to commit to burying the story (which I would take as an admission of guilt), or a confirmation from CNN that it actually was her mother who called.
-
It does not even sound like a talk about a rape in the call because it's probably not a rape nor her mom for all we know. The woman lies all the time and makes threats to sue people when they point it out. Her story is done with because she is not credible in any way.
Wake us up when there is real evidence and not just Rose Twitter wanting Trump to win again.
Edit The call needed to actually bring up an assault for it to fit her version of the story remembering the call. Which she says she recalls her mother bringing up the assault and her getting fired over it. And there is some debate about the date of the episode being wrong too. So again case closed, she is found to be a liar once more.
-
@Dorobō:
It does not even sound like a talk about a rape in the call because it's probably not a rape nor her mom for all we know. The woman lies all the time and makes threats to sue people when they point it out. Her story is done with because she is not credible in any way.
Wake us up when there is real evidence and not just Rose Twitter wanting Trump to win again.
Edit The call needed to actually bring up an assault for it to fit her version of the story remembering the call. Which she says she recalls her mother bringing up the assault and her getting fired over it. And there is some debate about the date of the episode being wrong too. So again case closed, she is found to be a liar once more.
Think this is just being overly picky. It would be easy to imagine a victim seeing that at the time and knowing she was talking about the assault, to misremember using those words.
Also what did she lie about? -
Think this is just being overly picky. It would be easy to imagine a victim seeing that at the time and knowing she was talking about the assault, to misremember using those words.
Also what did she lie about?It's really not giving what she is accusing someone of in Biden's position and the timing of it all. She could not remember the year or the date of this Larry King episode so someone else found it for her and it does not even match up to what she claims. The line "only thing she could have done was go to the press" also contradicts Reade's previous statements indicating her mom supposedly told her to go to the police.
The more this story goes on, the weaker it gets. As soon as she takes her own story seriously I will but so far, it's been insane nothing pushed by people and journalists who want Trump to win. There is a reason for this. It's because she is lying.
-
@Dorobō:
It does not even sound like a talk about a rape in the call because it's probably not a rape nor her mom for all we know. The woman lies all the time and makes threats to sue people when they point it out. Her story is done with because she is not credible in any way.
Wake us up when there is real evidence and not just Rose Twitter wanting Trump to win again.
Edit The call needed to actually bring up an assault for it to fit her version of the story remembering the call. Which she says she recalls her mother bringing up the assault and her getting fired over it. And there is some debate about the date of the episode being wrong too. So again case closed, she is found to be a liar once more.
Before the King video was discovered, Reade told media outlets, including POLITICO, that her mother had called into his show. She did not remember the date of the show at the time.
"She called him, I think, 'a prominent senator,'" Reade said in an interview last month. “She didn’t get into the assault, she got into the harassment. She said my daughter was sexually harassed by a very prominent senator, and then they retaliated and fired her.”According to The Intercept, property records confirm that Tara's mother lived in San Luis Obisco County at the time, which is too much of a stretch to be a believable coincidence.
To my knowledge this is now the most damning evidence of a sex crime that a major party presidential nominee has faced in our lifetime, if not ever.
-
Still nothing but contradictions and it's zero evidence.
-
@Dorobō:
Still nothing but contradictions and it's zero evidence.
What the hell kind of evidence do you want?
A sex tape with Joe Biden audibly saying "yes, I'm raping her" while holding up her driver's license, passport and social security cards?
Sure, the possibility still exists that she's exaggerating the incident, but the initial sexual harassment allegation now has more proof than anyone could possibly have dreamed of.
If she's lying she would have needed artificial knowledge of the clip before making the allegations, which is starting to get into Russian conspiracy territory.
It's seriously more believable that Russia planned this all out and spent millions of hours watching old clips of every 90s talk show they could get their hands on before contacting everyone who ever worked for Biden and somehow getting lucky that one of them not only agreed to work for Putin but coincidentally had a mother who lived in the area at the same time she worked for Biden, who, lucky for Russia, was a prominent senator at the time as mentioned in the video.Scratch that, it's more believable that a Russian asset made the phone call in the 90s and Russia has just been planning this for 30 years.
-
Something that corroborates her own story would be nice for a change. But so far nothing.
No idea what the rest of your post is going on about. I made my points, don't even need to get into her love of Putin to see through her lies.
We have more evidence of her being a lair and thief than anything she said about Biden in her second story she hyped up like Roger Stone did for Al Franken's allegations. It's all political agenda and little to do with justice here.
-
@Dorobō:
It's really not giving what she is accusing someone of in Biden's position and the timing of it all. She could not remember the year or the date of this Larry King episode so someone else found it for her and it does not even match up to what she claims. The line "only thing she could have done was go to the press" also contradicts Reade's previous statements indicating her mom supposedly told her to go to the police.
The more this story goes on, the weaker it gets. As soon as she takes her own story seriously I will but so far, it's been insane nothing pushed by people and journalists who want Trump to win. There is a reason for this. It's because she is lying.
What's wrong with the timing? It's not October, still time to fix things and do investigations in to the matter etc. Joe Biden isn't the only one who can beat Trump, heck democrats aren't even happy about the choice.(Polls show all time low for enthusiasm among supporters.)
-
What's wrong with the timing? It's not October, still time to fix things and do investigations in to the matter etc. Joe Biden isn't the only one who can beat Trump, heck democrats aren't even happy about the choice.(Polls show all time low for enthusiasm among supporters.)
He just won the primary as it came out. This is the new thing to try and push like the story about Biden's son. It failed the same way. Though instead of the president being impeached, here we are seeing a woman who loves Putin and thinks she can talk to horses making sexual allegation stories from women into jokes only for political smear jobs. It's gross to be honest.
The press has done their investigations and her story does not hold water and she herself did not want to be vetted by more mainstream news as well.
Biden is the only one that can defeat Trump, he is our best shot and he is our nom. It's coming down to him vs Trump, that's what I called the night of Trump's victory and it's gonna happen.
And enthusiasm means nothing. Bernie had it and he lost big time.
-
@Dorobō:
Something that corroborates her own story would be nice for a change. But so far nothing.
No idea what the rest of your post is going on about. I made my points, don't even need to get into her love of Putin to see through her lies.
We have more evidence of her being a lair and thief than anything she said about Biden in her second story she hyped up like Roger Stone did for Al Franken's allegations. It's all political agenda and little to do with justice here.
The video and surrounding evidence does corroborate her story.
-
The video and surrounding evidence does corroborate her story.
No, it contradicts her own story. Again, my point was made.
-
@Dorobō:
He just won the primary as it came out. This is the new thing to try and push like the story about Biden's son. It failed the same way. Though instead of the president being impeached, here we are seeing a woman who loves Putin and thinks she can talk to horses making sexual allegation stories from women into jokes only for political smear jobs. It's gross to be honest.
The press has done their investigations and her story does not hold water and she herself did not want to be vetted by more mainstream news as well.
Biden is the only one that can defeat Trump, he is our best shot and he is our nom. It's coming down to him vs Trump, that's what I called the night of Trump's victory and it's gonna happen.
And enthusiasm means nothing. Bernie had it and he lost big time.
Bernie did lose big, once Biden got his momentum but Biden also flopped hard in the two most heavily campaigned states for a reason. Biden wasn't the only one who could beat Trump, he was the only one who could beat Bernie.
-
The video and surrounding evidence does corroborate her story.
It shows that she had an issue with Biden but not much beyond that. It's certainly not the most damning thing to ever come out against a candidate like you suggested.
But, fine, let's say that Biden does drop out because of this. Who's it going to be then? Bernie has clearly been rejected by a two thirds majority of the party and Reade's status as a Bernie supporter woukld have major repercussions in the party. Gillibrand's presidential campaign was a nonstarter because of her calling Al Franken to drop out. Do we just redo the entire primary then?
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Bernie did lose big, once Biden got his momentum but Biden also flopped hard in the two most heavily campaigned states for a reason. Biden wasn't the only one who could beat Trump, he was the only one who could beat Bernie.
Biden's consistently polled better against Trump than any other member of the field and in a wider range of places. Bernie also did noticeably worse in almost every contest to date (besides the NMI) so it's pretty clear a lot of his 2016 support was anti-Hillary more than anything else.
-
Biden's consistently polled better against Trump than any other member of the field and in a wider range of places. Bernie also did noticeably worse in almost every contest to date (besides the NMI) so it's pretty clear a lot of his 2016 support was anti-Hillary more than anything else.
That is true but he was also the front runner for the majority of time it could be a little misleading. Since I believe it wasn't true when Warren surged for a bit and Bernie for his short lived front runner status as well(Tho would like to point out Bernie did obviously have a very real problem in Florida.)
-
@The:
Biden's record proves he's not as progressive as you'd like me to believe. Advocating to cut medicare and supporting doma are pretty big no nos to progressives. It's fine if you like biden, just don't pretend he's a progressive, and don't pretend to support progressive ideals. And I couldn't care less about the party. If biden is the best you got, then your party ain't good enough and I want no part of it. I'm interested in people, not political parties.
This position on a politician ALWAYS bugs me.
"Well, here's what they believed 20 years ago so clearly we can't trust them now." always fucking bugs me.
I guarantee you I don't believe all the same things I did even TEN Years ago. I used to be more pro-gun. I bought all the bullshit "If the person REALLY wanted to kill someone, they would have used a knife" kinda jargon.People change over time full stop.
"Well, Over 20 years ago, Biden was against Marriage Equality, that means it's IMPOSSIBLE he's learned or grown since then". Hell his campaign website has a whole section on LGBT issues and he's VERY pro LGBT now according to it.
Like, seriously, have people bought so hard into the "Politicians lie" thing that they now just expect that literally every single thing a politician says is a lie?
Here's a fact about Politics: If a politician is promising something on the campaign trail, you can reasonably expect that they will keep those promises or at least actively try not to appear they are going back on those promises. Obama promised healthcare reform and we got it. The GOP forced a watered down version of it, but it happened. He made good. Even THE big unfulfilled promise of his campaign, closing Guantanamo Bay, I've read several analyses of the situation and it does look like attempts were made by his administration that ran into roadblocks with the Pentagon, Congress, and diplomacy issues. Even then, down to just a few months left in his 2nd term, when he really didn't even need to care anymore since he wasn't going to be up for reelection, he and his administration still made comments about still wanting to close it.Hell, even TRUMP gets this on some level. Why do you think they're going so full-steam ahead on the freaking wall? There have been a ton of logistical problems with ownership of the land it has to be built on, and the terrain it would have to be built over in places, and the cost has ballooned, and someone in his administration has to have crunched the numbers and realized what everyone else has about how it won't even be good at doing the one thing it's supposed to do.
He could have even taken the out when Conservative Media started covering for him and was like "He's speaking metaphorically. He just means increased border security." He could have rolled with that and still be seen as keeping his promise and it would have still been seen as the symbolic "Fuck you" to Mexico and Immigrants his supporters wanted, but nope. He promised a wall, so dammit, he's building a wall.
Bottom Line: If Biden is promising it on his website, you can probably count on him doing at least the bare minimum necessary to still be able to say he's "Keeping his promises". and in literally every single one of those areas, the bare minimum is leagues ahead of what we have now.
-
Sorry Rin, but I'm tired of arguing. Never liked it in the first place, but I was tired of letting people roll over me. I've made myself clear, I'll vote for biden but I ain't gonna like it. No one is gonna convince me he's the best we could've done. He's just a shit sandwich to me.
-
But, fine, let's say that Biden does drop out because of this. Who's it going to be then? Bernie has clearly been rejected by a two thirds majority of the party and Reade's status as a Bernie supporter woukld have major repercussions in the party. Gillibrand's presidential campaign was a nonstarter because of her calling Al Franken to drop out. Do we just redo the entire primary then?
Bernie would be nice but the DNC will probably just choose someone all on their own.
If they weren't going to re-do Iowa, they don't really care who the base wants.
-
Bernie would be nice but the DNC will probably just choose someone all on their own.
If they weren't going to re-do Iowa, they don't really care who the base wants.
The best we can hope for is biden to pick a strong progressive vp who will force him to the left. And a democrat congress. Barring that it's gonna be the same old shit, different day.
-
So, Rocket-Man is… unalive??
-
That is true but he was also the front runner for the majority of time it could be a little misleading. Since I believe it wasn't true when Warren surged for a bit and Bernie for his short lived front runner status as well(Tho would like to point out Bernie did obviously have a very real problem in Florida.)
Pretty sure Biden always polled better regardless of lead changes in the primary itself, which were never that common anyway. He was pretty much always out front on average.
Bernie would be nice but the DNC will probably just choose someone all on their own.
If they weren't going to re-do Iowa, they don't really care who the base wants.
I guess there's really no point in trying to explain again that the DNC isn't some shadowy cabal that has absolute mastery over the primary process.
So, Rocket-Man is… unalive??
Kim Jong-Schrödinger.
-
Biden also won the most swing voters in IA and NH I believe. So while huge failures in states that are not the Democratic base and should not matter in the primary, he still did good with the voters that make or break elections. Still proud of Pete for doing well in those states and hope he builds a better relationship with black folks going forward. He was a great surprise this election in my view.
-
@The:
Sorry Rin, but I'm tired of arguing. Never liked it in the first place, but I was tired of letting people roll over me. I've made myself clear, I'll vote for biden but I ain't gonna like it. No one is gonna convince me he's the best we could've done. He's just a shit sandwich to me.
Be assured you're not alone. I mean, I don't think he's a shit-sandwich, but he wasn't my first pick. My dear Elizabeth was always first for me.
Lots of Dems aren't happy they're stuck with Biden, but all we can do now is concentrate on his good points and get the Angry Mango out of office.
-
As I said in an above post, Biden's been my pick since the horrible night that was the last election just going off the fact he is likable and what the party voters like and view as strong. Second pick was Warren then Pete then a huge tie between Harris, Booker and Bennet who I all view as the future of the party going forward. Really hoping Harris gets the VP spot since she would be a great pick.
-
I guess there's really no point in trying to explain again that the DNC isn't some shadowy cabal that has absolute mastery over the primary process.
Who do you think they'd pick if Biden had to step down and it wasn't possible to re-do the primaries because of COVID19 and sheer lack of time?
It's not Bernie.
-
Be assured you're not alone. I mean, I don't think he's a shit-sandwich, but he wasn't my first pick. My dear Elizabeth was always first for me.
Lots of Dems aren't happy they're stuck with Biden, but all we can do now is concentrate on his good points and get the Angry Mango out of office.
Agreed. I was always vote blue no matter who. Obviously I would've liked a progressive (For all the shit I give Warren about the misogynist Bernie accusation she was still always my second pick) but we get what we get and just have to deal with it.
-
Who do you think they'd pick if Biden had to step down and it wasn't possible to re-do the primaries because of COVID19 and sheer lack of time?
I haven't the slightest idea. I'm sure there's always a contingency drawn up in case the frontrunner dies in a plane crash or something along those lines but there's no way of knowing what that is before a VP is picked.
I know there's a big circle of Bernie supporters who have been claiming that the DNC will have him step aside at the convention so somebody like Cuomo can sweep in but that's nonsense.
It's not Bernie.
And it shouldn't be; again, there's much more support for non-Bernie candidates and him being given the nomination would forever write off the whole thing as a setup.
-
I think the guessing game about who it is if it's not Biden is just very pointless since it's going to be Biden. Nothing stories will not take him down but in case he dies? It will be his VP pick most likely.
-
Pretty sure Biden always polled better regardless of lead changes in the primary itself, which were never that common anyway. He was pretty much always out front on average.
Looking at the data, think you're right. Must of seen the outliers being promoted at the time, giving me that impression. I had less luck looking up Warren polls but I'll take your word on it. Did think of another point on the polling but decided it sounds like ridiculous goal post moving and it's not hard data. Though my point was really that I don't think Biden is the only one that could beat Trump.. obviously the only option against Trump unless he withdraws etc.
I will say, decided personally that I will not be voting for Biden because of the sexual assault charges. Since I live in a red state, if he had a chance of winning here it would be a landslide.(I would love that to embarrass Trump) By all means if you don't live in a safe red state vote Biden. My mind could change depending on how things develop.. still long ways to November. Actually just voted in my state primary, it's wonderful when your vote doesn't matter. Just aside during the primaries(or I guess vetting period) my top 3 choices were actually Warren, Bernie and Biden in that order, surprisingly all 3 were actually on my ballot.. well Warren was a surprise.
-
@Dorobō:
I think the guessing game about who it is if it's not Biden is just very pointless since it's going to be Biden. Nothing stories will not take him down but in case he dies? It will be his VP pick most likely.
This is just the 2020 version of “Comey will indict Hillary and then Bernie will become the nominee”.
-
This is just the 2020 version of “Comey will indict Hillary and then Bernie will become the nominee”.
Yeah it really is. But more insane this time since waaaaaaay more people went to Biden over Bernie. So ain't happening.
-
This is just the 2020 version of “Comey will indict Hillary and then Bernie will become the nominee”.
Didn't that end up putting Trump in office?
-
This position on a politician ALWAYS bugs me.
"Well, here's what they believed 20 years ago so clearly we can't trust them now." always fucking bugs me.
I guarantee you I don't believe all the same things I did even TEN Years ago. I used to be more pro-gun. I bought all the bullshit "If the person REALLY wanted to kill someone, they would have used a knife" kinda jargon.People change over time full stop.
"Well, Over 20 years ago, Biden was against Marriage Equality, that means it's IMPOSSIBLE he's learned or grown since then". Hell his campaign website has a whole section on LGBT issues and he's VERY pro LGBT now according to it.
This just made me think of this mayor Quimby quote.
[hide] [/hide]
-
Arrgh. So now some dumbasses (specifically Stand For America Inc.) have started a petition to "Stop Communist China":
https://stopcommunistchina.com/?utm_source=sfa&fbclid=IwAR1t2H5zwtapcjBKNS32QdJDeUMif0a9jVenVAUOIwJAfbCx5W7I-9soc9sI'm not happy the land of my ancestors is ruled by a Communist government, but unless you can prove they created COVID-19 as a bio-weapon you're not going to get anywhere. And if you want to stop manufacturing in China you need to complain to the companies here who outsource to China in the first place. Idiots.
-
Arrgh. So now some dumbasses (specifically Stand For America Inc.) have started a petition to "Stop Communist China":
https://stopcommunistchina.com/?utm_source=sfa&fbclid=IwAR1t2H5zwtapcjBKNS32QdJDeUMif0a9jVenVAUOIwJAfbCx5W7I-9soc9sI'm not happy the land of my ancestors is ruled by a Communist government, but unless you can prove they created COVID-19 as a bio-weapon you're not going to get anywhere. And if you want to stop manufacturing in China you need to complain to the companies here who outsource to China in the first place. Idiots.
Have you heard of the dumbass republican congressman who wants people to sue china over covid-19? I don't remember who exactly he is, but I thought it was pretty ridiculous.
-
CNN finally covered the story.