2020 Democratic presidential primary

I can assure you that the Real Richard Nixon would not have said "and so on and so forth" in that sentence.

he's the best candidate, but that doesn't mean he's the only one thats good not terrible

fixed

Bernie is not my ideal candidate, and he does tend to phrase things in a way that is not exactly up to date with the wokest phrasing. But the candidates that are more adept at woke phrasing also happen to suck more politically. The best of them politically is surely Warren, but she (1) also puts her foot in her mouth when it comes to wokeness and (2) has done some things that make me question whether she has the political aptitude to face Trump. And iatee I think you are being a bit disingenuous since I doubt Warren is your candidate of choice.

also maybe a lot of wokeness sucks idk maybe tho

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.

― Mordy, Tuesday, February 19, 2019 7:05 PM (twenty-two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I agree with the people who think that the first and second of these options would have annoyed most of the people annoyed by the answer he actually did give, the third one would be interesting, if he made a choice to try and present himself as the potential First Jewish President instead of Another Old White Guy, I kind of wonder how that would play for him, if it would harm him more than benefit him? It seems that saying something like that would be contrary to his personal values, I feel like he'd be uncomfortable going down that route even if it would help him.

as done some things that make me question whether she has the political aptitude to face Trump

this is most sensible ppl's major, possibly only, concern w/r/t Warren I think

not deems who is a stalwart of anti-woke perspectives but it's kinda funny that the most pushback on ilx against standpoint theory or identity politics happens in defense of bernie sanders

It seems that saying something like that would be contrary to his personal values, I feel like he'd be uncomfortable going down that route even if it would help him.

fwiw i suspect it would not help him lol

some candidates i will not name are clearly "slick" before they're anything else

they can lose elections nevertheless

I think this Natalie Shure thread sums up a lot of ppl's views on Warren v Sanders

Difference between Sanders and Warren: she's an anti-monopoly wonk striving to write fairer rules for capitalism with a safety net; he's a New Dealer who wants to confront capitalism as the root of social problems and build robust universal entitlements.

— Natalie Shure (@nataliesurely) February 19, 2019

I think Bernie would be wise to let someone else in the race invoke his jewishness before countering with the First Jewish President rebuttal. If no one tries to make it a negative issue, I don't think there's much mileage in his trying to leverage it into a net positive issue.

he's the best candidate, but that doesn't mean he's the only one thats good not terrible

Well at the end of the day they're all terrible, I wouldn't have any of them in the house, bernie included. but i would have them introduce free healthcare and take a break from wars

she also seems like the straight-up smartest candidate in the field and he does not if that sorta thing matters to you (it does to me) xxxp

boy would Bernie would have been perfect for 2008 and Obama for today.

I agree that his jewishness becoming an issue would be unlikely to help him and would probably just add another dimension of toxicity to the whole thing, re where jews fit into id politics based on white/PoC binary and Israel and probably lots of other things that cause arguments on the left

The not-religious person broadly seen as an old white guy proclaiming his Jewishness as diversity cred would take waaaaaaay more shit than even his poorly worded statement today.

Shure makes a mistake: the New Deal didn't want to destroy capitalism either ("confront" is a hedge).

if that sorta thing matters to you

it matters to me less than it would to, say, gabbneb. being 'smart' can help one foresee difficulties and a path around them, but when you're working inside a large, complex political system, then having good political instincts, honed by extensive experience, will get you farther than just an abundance of intelligence. It's the difference between a Tip O'Neill vs. an Adlai Stevenson.

He'll be under scrutinywiths Harris re:incarceration; Vermont disproportionately incarcerates non-whites in a state that is really, really white.

Vermont disproportionately incarcerates non-whites in a state that is really, really white.

Hard for me to see a US Senator as responsible for his state government's legal system. That's entirely up to the governors, attorneys general, legislators, county prosecutors, judges and juries.

Shure makes a mistake: the New Deal didn't want to destroy capitalism either ("confront" is a hedge)

neither does Bernie, that's why she used that word and not the other word

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.

― |Restore| |Restart| |Quit| (Doctor Casino), Tuesday, February 19, 2019 2:01 PM (one hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I think the issue is that everyone here is too plugged in, too jaded, weary etc — we’ve seen it all before. and there’s this tendency (on all sides) to overthink things, to think like a pundit, to try to triangulate all the opinions of varying people we talk to instead of just being voters who care about issues. we all do it!

I do think bernie bros like myself could stand to just have thicker skin, too! I am actually open to a lot of these candidates personally and am not sure at all whom I’ll vote for. I would just appreciate a little more correctness being brought than the usual “did you know that some bernie voters voted for trump??!??” bs or whatever

xpost i know a lot of articles were written about it in 2016 but it goes back to criticism about Bernie not doing shit for non-white people in Vermont.

I'm not really sure what it is people are claiming he didn't do as Senator. If he had actively opposed legislation that would be good for POC or actively supported legislation that would be bad for POC that would be different.

Bernie is not my ideal candidate, and he does tend to phrase things in a way that is not exactly up to date with the wokest phrasing. But the candidates that are more adept at woke phrasing also happen to suck more politically. The best of them politically is surely Warren, but she (1) also puts her foot in her mouth when it comes to wokeness and (2) has done some things that make me question whether she has the political aptitude to face Trump. And iatee I think you are being a bit disingenuous since I doubt Warren is your candidate of choice.

There are a bunch of articles that examine his record in Vermont and how the black community view(ed) him. Anyway, I see that there is a new Bernie thread.

Pretty sure that one is purely for bro shitposting.

He replaced the comic book store guy. Bodes well

https://www.thedailybeast.com/bernie-sanders-hires-top-civil-liberties-advocate-faiz-shakir-as-campaign-manager

Was that weaver? Or Devine? Honestly they seemed like the worst part of his campaign so moving on is a great move

Weaver. Agreed.

Faiz comes highly recommended

Also: pic.twitter.com/rXLSe6doL6

— David Klion (@DavidKlion) February 19, 2019

referring to anything from the stolen emails is shitty.

Heaven forbid.

https://giphy.com/gifs/community-ill-allow-it-146heXDX89mUgw

Ok as long as Doctor Casino doesn’t talk about his stupid house again, that type of thing can only be funny one time.

his answer sounds kinda like ... MLK

― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, February 19, 2019 7:23 PM (one hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This is so dumb that it's actually offensive.

First candidate to talk up universal surrogacy gets my vote

no births to citizens permitted until climate change countered

school enrollment levels to be maintained with refugees

tsrobodo (who?), where were you in 1964?

xp you just earned a flag post from me, nerdstrom

seriously, wtf is wrong with you?

tsrobodo (who?), where were you in 1964?

― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, February 19, 2019 10:39 PM (six minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Dreaming of a world where people are judged solely by the content of their character isn't the same thing as repeatedly failing to acknowledge that we don't and urging people to essentially pretend that we do.

I don't think that's what his platform is doing at all, on criminal justice, immigration, or foreign policy.

What tsrobodo just posted is exactly how tone deaf Bernie comes off.

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🕸]🐦

I wouldn't quite equate that with MLK, I'll grant.

i don't think he was saying people should "move past" race and gender, or ignore inequities. he is saying that he shouldn't be de facto disqualified from running for president based on his race, gender and age.

Eh if it were just two out of three

Implying "Consider me, y'all, because I'm not a woman, gay, or a person of color" is even more cynical!

Is that what he was doing? He was responding to the question of whether he “represents the face of the new Democratic Party.”

I honestly do not think this dude is trying to appeal to racists and chauvinists.

I tried to make this point earlier but this did it better.

One of the reasons Bernie is the best candidate is that he understands that you don’t take the political situation you’re handed as a given. You team up with grassroots activists, organize, & fight hard for what’s right. So the answer is, eventually, all of them are possible. https://t.co/QfoaGzOodr

— Ben Spielberg (@BenSpielberg) February 19, 2019