Your next 2020 Democratic presidential primary thread: Now we're serious

because all African Americans over 35 have similar politics? wait ... what? The main difference I see is that African-American men were more likely to be pro-Bernie than women, some of whom were Warren supporters.

― sarahell, Wednesday, March 4, 2020 12

Never said that, and I know quite a few POC who're Sanders or Warren voters

I was very excited that Kiese Laymon and Janelle Monae were for Warren.

I don’t think it’s a “conspiracy”, it’s basic politics. biden was polling horribly (relatively) in SC and most of the super tuesday states, clyburn made his endorsement, he won SC in a rout, and then butti/klob made very well-timed exits and endorsements. it worked exactly how it was supposed to work

how did the treacherous DNC and Warren make the youth vote stay home compared to 2016?

is it seriously your belief that if the primaries were held 2 weeks ago the “will of the voters” would have been the same?

all of this conspiracy business, wtf nobody thinks there's some secret cabal, but there is very obviously been a concerted effort on the part of moneyed interests and careerist pols to "manipulate" and "suppress"

ffs they've been nonstop disingenuously hammering away on this "socialism" nonsense, not to mention "electability" horseshit despite his consistintently outpolling everybody else head-to-head v TRump

The Sanders wing is not the majority of the party.

unless of course you blind-test his policies, in which case he's very clearly represents the majority

what a snow job

hasty indignation typos^

biden was polling horribly (relatively) in SC

this is not a fact, Biden was always ahead: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/sc/south_carolina_democratic_presidential_primary-6824.html#!

(relatively)

Never said that, and I know quite a few POC who're Sanders or Warren voters

― TikTok to the (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, March 4, 2020 9:38 AM (one minute ago)

sorry. I definitely get the sense that some of these issues re risk are different for POC in more conservative states than in say, the San Francisco Bay Area.

unless of course you blind-test his policie

people don't vote based on policies, they never have, and they likely never will

It's true, though: two weeks made the difference.

Seems more like overall turnout increased and the youth vote stayed about the same?

generally speaking, yeah

xxp especially not when every major media outlet refuses to discuss them in any depth and instead subs in a caricature of the guy

I mean I know most ilxors don't watch cable news but the voting public does, and shit have you even seen the coverage? It's comical.

is it seriously your belief that if the primaries were held 2 weeks ago the “will of the voters” would have been the same?

of course not, because the circumstances were different! How is this relevant? Timing is everything in politics, and Biden capitalized on Klobuchar and Mayor Pete giving up (this is the only point on which a conceivable "conspiracy" could be hung, but even there I think it's a misnomer/mischaracterization - nothing underhanded happened. No doubt both candidates, as diligent party hacks, were sensitive to calls to drop out from party apparatchiks/leaders, in addition to all the other stuff stacked against them. They wanted Biden instead of Bernie, and they cashed their chips in. That's party politics for ya).

anyway I am not crying foul, powerful politicians did what powerful politicians are supposed to do and it clearly had an impact on the elections over the last two weeks. take a look at the exit polling data and tell me your interpretation. that’s life though and maybe this was inevitable in some shape or form

there was media saturation of BIDEN HAS THE MOMENTUM

if you think this meant NOTHING, may i recommend Marshall fucking McLuhan

Yes, the same way endless media coverage of Biden's failures as a campaigner and pathetic showing in Iowa/NH and Sanders establishing himself as the clear front-runner led Sanders to an upset victory in South Carolina

wtf nobody thinks there's some secret cabal

there are plenty of Berniebros who think there's a secret cabal gimme a break, they tweet/post about the nefarious machinations of the DNC all the time

that's not a secret cabal

why was Sanders youth vote down?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/03/04/super-tuesday-bernie-sanders-youth-votes-fell-short-compared-2016/4947795002/

don't tell me cable news

there are plenty of Berniebros who think there's a secret cabal gimme a break, they tweet/post about the nefarious machinations of the DNC all the time

― Οὖτις, Wednesday, March 4, 2020 9:46 AM (six seconds ago)

ah our mutual friends ... how is B3n T1nker doing? Haven't seen him in a while.

unless of course you blind-test his policies, in which case he's very clearly represents the majority

If that's how elections were won, the Democrat would get 65% of the vote every time.

An acquaintance in SC wrote the following when I remarked on how 27% of South Carolina voters polled said that James Clyburn’s endorsement “strongly” motivated them to vote for Biden:

I'm an SC resident and am honestly surprised the number isn't higher. He's beloved by an awful lot of Dems here across the spectrum, both inside and outside his district. I talked to a formerly Sanders-curious coworker this morning who said Clyburn's endorsement was the deciding factor in her vote, and she's a kinda leftie who's only lived in the state for a couple years. My guess is that a lot of loyal Dem voters who aren't political junkies were frankly relieved to be able to contract their decision-making out to someone they trust and respect and get on with their lives.

ha I don't talk politics w T1nker really. Saw him a couple weeks ago at a friends' 50th bday party, all music chatter

xps

how did the treacherous DNC and Warren make the youth vote stay home compared to 2016?

Running with this line is questionable - the states where it was supposedly down were primarily red states and exit polls showing a difference of 2-3% aren't exactly an absolute fact.

I guess in the end it's sort of a relief to know the concerted, over-the-top redbaiting effort of three 24-hour cable new channels + local network affiliates + two remaining newpapers had no deleterious effect on the Sanders campaign

power to the ever-wise people

of course it had an effect

I think I would take up the middle ground somewhere between tin hattin' it re: Big Media's coordinated war on Bernie and the notion that there was no concerted effort on their part to turn the narrative against him.

you don't need a tin hat, you just need to watch more tv

I really don't.

I don't even own a television subscribe to cable or have an antenna

xp well you are wiser for it, in every regard but when it comes to having a handle on how releltless and yes, coordinated, this thing has been

in other words, "wake up sheeple"

k3vin what are you talking about exactly

― Doctor Casino, Wednesday, March 4, 2020 12:38 PM (twenty-two minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

just reread my posts which I think are pretty clear?

just wanted to point out occam’s razor, which is that the party decides. I think alfred’s friend is probably not alone

I mean, I definitely don't watch televised news of any sort on the actual tv while it's airing, guilty as charged on that count, but I have seen enough clips after the fact to suggest that both the 'Bernie is a commie devil from hell' and the 'Bernie's popularity is a sign of an interesting paradigm shift' narratives were getting some play. How disproportionate one may have been over the other I can't say, but I'm not aware of any anchors, like, getting the boot for pondering the latter on air, so I'm disinclined to believe there was mandate handed down by corporate.

seeing a lot of angry Berniebros on twitter going after Warren (of all people) for ruining this election for Bernie, for the country as a whole etc. The remarkably hypocritical deployment of arguments previously denounced as fallacious is quite something.

shakey hypocrisy in politics has never been a vice, and accusations of it never land, against anyone of any stripe

the point is to scream until you win not be smarter and better

lol how's that workin out for ya

I mean I think people saying "Warren cost Bernie the election!" are wrong but hypocrisy, whomst cares

I am inclined to think that the more...vociferous element of the Berniebro contingent is, in their own way, as potentially problematic as the deplorables.

at least we might be able to arm them as paras in the coming militia wars

"Warren cost Bernie the election" is "Jill Stein cost Clinton the election" for members of the DSA

whomst cares

I care, insofar as the argument being made is unconvincing due to its being transparent. It means the argument is being deployed in the service of a foregone conclusion (Bernie is the only acceptable candidate). Cult of personality behavior is always baffling/depressing to me. I like to think that the left is better than that but obviously we are not.

xp Not even close (to as potentially problematic)

xposts By which I mean those who tend toward treating Bernie's thing more like a cult of personality without really taking to the underlying politics so much. Those for whom strident shouting and being right are among the most important things.

There's a shite element to every stanbase. (For Warren ppl it's primarily the "if only these uneducated rubes understood her appeal!" stance)

lol, did not even see Shakey's evocation of 'cult of personality' but there you go.