2020 Democratic presidential primary

citing this dumb meaningless statistic is a way to...show you can’t read? take out curated online party positioning? show solidarity with neera tanden and peter daou?

actually daou is good naou

THREAD: On #Bernie2020#BernieSanders is running for president again. From the bottom of my heart, I ask Clinton and Sanders supporters to avoid replaying 2016. I know it's hard to let go of the mutual animosity, but if we intend to defeat the radical right, we MUST join forces.

— Peter Daou (@peterdaou) February 19, 2019

yeah I saw that! good for him. we’ll see how long it lasts

anyone who supports him over warren should do some soul searching as to how they ended up in that spot.

not antisemitic enough?

(im sorry youre such a person of bullshit, sincerely)

Oof

This thread is a pretty good explanation for why Bernie shouldn't run again, lol

I can see wanting Bernie for a number of good reasons (there’s both valid pragmatic and aspiration cases to be made imo) it’s just that the “everyone sucks but him”/“he’s the only good candidate” voices are super toxic, have been bad for him and everyone.

It's early days. Everyone is running and everyone hopes to become relevant. Only two or three will be relevant one year from now.

AFAICT pretty much every Bernie person I encounter thinks Warren is at least fine

fred, with all due respect, you already benefit from living in a country with the quality of life that bernie wants to bring to america. i don't think you understand how important it was that he made things like a living wage and universal healthcare feel politically possible for the first time.

Lol “at least fine”, with friends like these...

Lol “at least fine”, with friends like these...

hmmm, perhaps you failed to notice what "at least" means.

Anything more hardcore/stanning than “most/all of them are fine but I’d rather Bernie” is the thing that annoys people and causes the “Bernie Bro” tag to stick

lol

This answer seems perfectly calibrated to make people Mad Online. https://t.co/k2uh0MaqqV pic.twitter.com/YQBSCxD7ev

— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) February 19, 2019

Warren seems good to me, and it seems the Native gaffes have been oveplayed in media?

This thread is a pretty good explanation for why Bernie shouldn't run again, lol

― Frederik B, Tuesday

I can sort of see this, people putting forward why he shouldn't run but I haven't really seen anything substantive about why he shouldn't be president, I'm unclear what it is about either his policies or his personality that isn't suitable for the presidency

anvil, it was just a comment on how awful todays discussion has been

i'm not sure how it is that this thread is consistently way worse than the other US politics threads but my god is it terrible. literally every three days people we start over again from either unsubstantiated old-hat 2016 arguments, obvious concern-troll cliches, outright tendentious trolling from the usual suspect, or the latest moronic variation on "but explain to me again, why do you think i should take a candidate's past actions and words into account when deciding who to support in a primary?" it's the closest ile discourse gets to something that genuinely could be produced by a well-taught algorithm. everyone needs to stop and like, read the whole thread through before posting again... shock to the system, break the cycle.

the funny thing to me about the Berne Bro tag is that I could not possibly count the number of extremely online leftists (and some folks I know IRL) for whom Bernie is a compromise candidate at best and are not shy about saying so

I posted a story this morning that based on a wide swath of party faithful, including the indigenous, the DNA stuff is a Beltway phenomenon

I get that, Fred! its more of a general thing - I'm finding it easy enough to find out why he shouldn't be a candidate, but really difficult to find out why he shouldn't be president!

i don't want to speak for iatee but my concern about a bernie presidency is that it would be contentious and he would struggle to even keep his own party in line let alone bringing over republicans to support legislation. that a future bernie presidency would seem to require massive social action + demonstrations from the voters after he wins to help generate support for his preferred legislation is also a warning sign to me since i am suspicious of the American public's willingness or ability to engage in that kind of action. nb that i recognize opinions may differ on all of the above but that's my concern - that he'd come in with an ambitious agenda but lack the tools or ability to wield the levers of power to actually execute it and that hoping the American public would generate that consensus themselves seems to me unlikely.

The question kind of seems calibrated to elicit a response that will make people mad online. How can he answer it other than suggesting that race shouldn’t be the defining factor in who is picked?

“most/all of them are fine" is something I would have a hard time saying about any group of pols.

btw i could point you to at least one popular blog of Democrats where the sentiment is just short of "die Bernie die."

he could've said "i bring ideological + policy diversity," or he could've said, "i think you'll find my policies will help people of all genders and racial identifications" or he could've said, "i'd be the first Jewish president which would be diverse" -- the answer he gave was probably the worst version.

I posted a story this morning that based on a wide swath of party faithful, including the indigenous, the DNA stuff is a Beltway phenomenon

I feel bad that i took it at face value people saying this was a more damaging issue than it maybe really is. Things move fast and subconsciously its easy to take things as a given when. The smears on all the candidate are bad enough, trying to stay above all that as much as possible!

As for doubting if the American populace will take to the streets, anything short of massive social action + demonstrations to remake the global economy and humanity is finished within a century or two. So despite Alfred casting Sanders as John the Baptizer, a presidential messiah will not save you.

He should have responded with the “that’s bait” reaction gif from Mad Max Fury Road

Many xps holy shit

He gave a terrible but completely Bernard answer.

https://media.giphy.com/media/sEkPeVUGlGz0Q/giphy.gif

I don't think anyone is going to care about this answer 24 hours from now

Except everyone remembers every answer like that one. Throw it on the pile.

he would struggle to even keep his own party in line let alone bringing over republicans to support legislation.

lol

he could've said "i bring ideological + policy diversity," or he could've said, "i think you'll find my policies will help people of all genders and racial identifications"

these answers would also have made people mad, and in fact he has said things akin to the second at various points iirc

people who don't support him will always say "wrong answer"

There was no good answer to that question. It was a trap.

anyway, about fucking time

Kamala Harris calls for paper ballots in elections: "Russia can't hack a piece of paper" https://t.co/69BWXtDjXh pic.twitter.com/mQbsPfazDY

— The Hill (@thehill) February 19, 2019

The notion that he would answer a key question on the first day of the most important campaign of his career to get some 'people mad online' need to leave the web for a day or two.

he gave the worst answer - the others would've been positive proactive visions. instead he degraded anyone who feels like a woman or black president might actually be a good thing. nb that i don't ascribe to standpoint theory and it's not critical to me but there are lots of ppl who don't think we should just ignore the identities of the other candidates and he could've answered the question without just writing them off. i don't really care tbph but the idea that any answer he gave would've been bad are missing the specific issue here.

He can't help himself. He's done this numerous other times.

I voted for Bernie, but yeah...

i don't think that it should be controversial to say that bernie has flaws as a pol, and one of those flaws is having a tendency to be brusque or put his foot in his mouth when he's not talking about his pet issues.

The notion that he would answer a key question on the first day of the most important campaign of his career to get some 'people mad online' need to leave the web for a day or two.

― Van Horn Street, Tuesday, February 19, 2019 2:18 PM (two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i think people itt were saying that the question was aiming for a controversial answer, not that bernie answered the way he did to piss people off online

He gave the answer least reassuring to the people least convinced about his candidacy in 2016.

his answer sounds kinda like ... MLK

who is outta fashion, i realize

So despite Alfred casting Sanders as John the Baptizer, a presidential messiah will not save you.

Dance of the Seven Bernies

I agree that that’s bad. The worst part about his entry into the race is the return of residual drama that most people want to move past. People like him too much and people hate him too much. Comparible argument for why Hillary shouldn’t have run in 16.

“btw i could point you to at least one popular blog of Democrats where the sentiment is just short of "die Bernie die."
― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr

his answer sounds kinda like ... MLK

― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, February 19, 2019 2:23 PM (thirty-two seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

who is outta fashion, i realize

― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius),

since when do you allude to Rich Lowry?

equating "policy diversity" with or in comparison to "racial diversity" would have been a fucking disaster tbh