a clown car full of millionaires: the 2016 presidential primary thread

I would vote for Gore, but it's so not gonna happen. Biden = No. Warren more useful in the Senate. The rest = blech

I am over here at my cubicle applauding goole's post like a crazy person

Ditto, except for that he said "two things" and then listed three.

btw I know exactly one person irl (a gay asian Canadian coworker) who is *super-excited* about Hillary

really demonstrates a bad read on the state of the party he's trying to lead.

fingers crossed for a sex scandal

And Sanders would still lose.

I am not voting for who is likely to win if I wanted to do that I would bet corporate every time.

It's an election for who would do the best job. Not who is going to score more points. It's not a football game. I'm not gambling on horses here. Though I am smelling a lot of manure.

https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/3c3fa5d817532558fac54d832006c165f5810988/22_0_1210_726/500.jpg?w=460&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=4e5d739ff0336fa39968e259117881ad
https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--WVLVzTiB--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/1450677354228592526.jpg

a liberal black friend at lunch a couple days ago: "I want to support Bernie, but he's acting already as if I must support him, the unspoken assumption being that if I don't I support Hillary and the Republicans."

"better the condescending Goldman Sachs sack of shit you know..."

sachs of shit, i meant

Basically, anyone who comes at me with "Bernie is your only option, you HAVE to vote for him to be a Good Black Person" is going to make me campaign for Hillary out of sheer spite.

Adam Bruneau nicely proving the point that Sanders' supporters are kinda assholes.

"I want to support Bernie, but he's acting already as if I must support him, the unspoken assumption being that if I don't I support Hillary and the Republicans."

how is bernie acting like this, without using words? has he been playing charades on Ustream?

I think my friend was uncomfortable with the progressive coronation of Bernie without feeling as if he, my friend, were part of it.

I'm sure you've all seen this in you fb feed, but it's still pretty damning:
http://images.elephantjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/imgur.jpg

So supporting Sanders makes you a kinda-asshole? WTF?

that would be crappy rhetoric, djp, especially when Lupe Fiasco is the ideal (if slightly under the mandated age) first choice

don't all candidates act/speak as if you'd be best off supporting them?

the majority of Sanders' money has come from people that do not have money, yes

LOL unions are poor - what a bunch of losers.

like let's be real, half of the Clinton money is coming from interests that donate to any candidate they see as "viable," to the extent that they donate to both sides of the aisle

those same unions will back the democrat regardless!

I haven't gone down the whole list, either -- did any of the unions also donate to Clinton's campaign? they could have donated an equal or even greater amount

Point is Sanders won't take money from GS, etc, not that Hillary won't take money from Unions.

The point is that with Super PACs, he never will have to. The advertisements will run regardless.

I mean, it is a noble thing to not take those donations, but that money is going to get spent in his name, regardless.

wait, goldman sachs is bankrolling a pro-sanders super PAC? link? what's their stake there again?

In the primaries?

No, I meant in the general election, should he get the nomination

lol I figured that was obvious but when I didn't type it I figured I'd be quickly called out

LOL unions are poor - what a bunch of losers.

You speak as if "unions" were a few wealthy individual instead of the aggregate of millions of individually not-wealthy individuals who each give a small amount. Get one brane.

(was being sarcastic)

always a great idea!

lol

I know there's always a race on these threads to see who can be the most cynical, but I'm not getting this one. If Bernie got the nom, he'd (apparently?) get the same Dem super-PAC money, he'd definitely pull in the minority vote (not saying he should just expect it or anything, and he clearly hasn't done that) since the GOP is painting itself into a more and more racist corner, and he'd energize a bunch of people who are sick of corporate politics. In addition, he doesn't have the baggage of the Clintons. I know he has his issues (he's a socialist), but this whole thing where people proclaim him unelectable sounds like 2008 all over again.

Democratic Party's had challenger(s) from the left in every presidential primary of my lifetime, it's a time honored tradition. For me it's not a question of whether or not he's electable as much as I just don't think he'll win the nomination - Clinton has a wider, more deeply entrenched swathe of support, she has the money, she has the party leaders, etc. And Sanders won't win any southern primaries against her, after that it'll be over for him. He will probably push Hillary's rhetoric to the left - he already has done so as far as I can tell - which is eh, okay. Coming from her it's safe to assume it's just rhetoric.

I don't think he's unelectable just because of his political positions, being 'a socialist' doesn't help but it's not nearly as bad as the way he comes across as a candidate. hollywood couldn't cast a better stereotypical cranky jewish college professor. e warren would have been a different story. despite literally being a cranky college professor and having positions essentially as left-wing as sanders, she's just so much more personable on camera.

he maybe he coulda got an accent coach

minus first he

Adam Bruneau nicely proving the point that Sanders' supporters are kinda assholes.

― Frederik B, Monday, September 28, 2015 2:09 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Dude wtf. Since you've decided that is what I am shouldn't it be ME personally attacking you?

Are you so connected to horse race politics that you take personal offense from me taking the piss?

Cool so Bernie Sanders is not going to win, I got that. I don't care. It doesn't matter I can still look at him like he has ideas and can bring value to the campaign season beyond being a percentage number. The real winner is probably going to be the same old shit we have now.

xp Frederik B's so detached from reality that he takes personal offense from everything.

Sorry if I'm blowing up there anyways. It's all good. Whatever we're all doomed anyways.

I suppose if a Clinton supporter calls you an asshole then you should vote for her.

I still think Sanders is running to be in the debates, raise some hell, and survive as long as possible with poll numbers high enough that he can't be marginalized as a fringe candidate; in other words, to re-establish a much harder-left economic progressivism as a viable alternative for the party and for the electorate to consider. He's not out to win the nomination - so I sort of tune out when the conversation turns to how detailed analysis of how unlikely he is to get the nomination and each of the hurdles he faces state by state, etc.... Like... duh?

That's not to say, however, that the conversation about constituencies and groups within the party that his message is/isn't resonating with isn't relevant though. It would be a failed candidacy in a lot of ways if he proves unable to model a version of left progressivism that listens to and incorporates the concerns and demands of minority voters, or to articulate a post-Ferguson stance on race in America that connects across the board. The anti-corporate progressive left needs those things if it's not going to just reiterate for the nth time (as many here believe Sanders has, or assume that he will/must) the "we're the left, you're minorities, surely that means you'll come along with us" attitude. If Sanders has become, however implausibly, the current standard-bearer for the party left, then I would like to see him accomplish this, and I'll be watching the polling as the race develops not to see if he's going to win, but to see if he's making inroads in these areas.

To the, let's call it the "Bill Bradley" point - yes, there have been people in the same position in many elections, but the point is in the act itself: if he does really well, it demonstrates that these are not in fact fringe positions, but something you can run on and do well, and in some states maybe even run on and win. That CNN poll showing Clinton 42 - Sanders 35 - Biden 17 (or with no Biden, Clinton 53, Sanders 38), if it's not a fluke, is important for this reason - that's a big enough chunk that you really can't ignore it. The equivalent on the Republican side would be someone with the combined support of Trump and Carson (at this moment). Not a winning coalition but clearly no Republican candidate is going "well we can basically calculate this thing as if those people didn't exist" and presumably a lot of others (in state and local elections) are taking it as confirmation that they can run on their wingnut views. I don't think Bradley was ever in that position outside of a few states like NH.

Interestingly, CNN has announced its debate thresholds for the first Democratic debate, and they are exceedingly generous: anyone who averages 1% in any three cherry-picked national polls between August and October. Not even a "the x most recent polls" deal. No one's even taking the chance that Jim Webb, Lincoln Chafee or Martin O'Malley might slip into further irrelevancy by then - per those rules, all three have already been issued invitations. Not to get conspiratorial but if you were trying to minimize Sanders's speaking time versus Hillary in prime time, that'd be a good way to start.

clinton was also "it's the economy, stupid" and tax increases (top two brackets, corporate tax, gas tax) and the earned-income tax credit among many others and major expansion of pell grants and college scholarships and the family and medical leave act and attempted universal health care falling back to the state childrens' health insurance program (thanks to hillary, on the issue that's driven her entire career) and how old were you in 1993 anyway?

― it's not a tuomas (benbbag), Monday, September 28, 2015 5:32 AM (13 hours ago)

not denying that clinton did some good things in his first year, but it is perverse to characterize the candidate who ran on "ending welfare as we know it" and subsequently did exactly that as an "economic populist."

maybe webb/chafee/o'malley will be allowed to stand at the back of the stage, kind of to the side, without a microphone

Doctor Casino otm

Adam Bruneau: Look, you're perfectly entitled to write what you want to write, and to say when you think our arguments are horseshit. I'm saying I think the way you say those things make you sound kinda assholish, and furthermore, that you remind me of a bunch of other Sanders-supporters. Which is crucial. Because on the other hand, I might be an asshole, but I don't think I'm a typical HRC asshole, though every time I criticize Sanders I'm being told that I'm probably payed by her or whatever. There's just a bunch of annoying reactions coming from Sanders' supporters, and I'm by no means the only one thinking so, and if his supporters were serious about helping him, they'd try to change that dynamic. They act as if there could be no legitimate reason not to support him.

I think Sanders seem like kind of a cranky asshole, and his supporters are condescending and annoying. And more important than that, I just don't like his policies, I think he's the wrong kind of left-left candidate for the election in 2016. Because there is a movement on the left, that are actually trying to change massive structural issues, that has made the right so terrified that they demonize and stigmatize as much as they can, that could hopefully pull the candidates to better positions. And that is obviously #BLM, and a good left-left candidate in 2016 would be much more in sync than Sanders, instead of crankily having to be drawn every inch of the way, to realize that perhaps it's not just a question of the 1% cheating the rest. Someone who wouldn't leave the stage when activists are trying to get him to speak up (lol at the description upthread that he 'stepped back and let the activists speak', they were trying to get him to talk about their issues, and he left the stage...)