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

Yes, we’re all clear on why Clyburn’s endorsement carried so much weight. (That’s how successful machines work... they deliver.)

That doesn’t translate to your argument that criticism of or even reference to a South Carolina establishment - which you now seem to agree exists - amounts to a racist attack on black voters.

I do my Negronis with 1.25 gin, .75 Campari, 1.0 vermouth

shakey you are being tendentious and morphing into Fred on one of his bad days. (sorry Fred.) if i said andrew cuomo was a prominent figure in the New York political establishment, would we be arguing about how i just dismissed all of his "establishment voters" and how insensitive that is since many of them are women, minorities, poor, etc.?

Obviously not good but racism is a fuckin outlandish explanation in this case

let's ask some African American South Carolina Dem primary voters how they feel about it, I would think "Sanders doesn't understand the needs of our community" would be a common response that puts it rather kindly. In my experience when black voters are told their votes aren't wanted/needed they tend to draw conclusions white voters might not.

Also, machines can deliver and do good things at times and also do things that some might describe as bad for the machine’s constituents. Perhaps you’ve heard of the Teamsters Union? (Or the Las Vegas Culinary Union?)

Or Clyburn, as a leader of a political machine, saw more advantage (for his constituents, for the machine) in continuing to support the existing party power structure rather than bet on the guy who campaigns on breaking down those structures.

Which is to say, Clyburn was always lost to Bernie but it was ever to be thus because it’s not a matter of wining and dining, it’s about the underlying relationships of power.

― Greta Van Show Feets BB (milo z), Wednesday, March 4, 2020 11:31 PM (three minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

I don't get how anyone thought Bernie could ever win the nomination if this was the case

My Negronis have more gin than the amaro, with a splash of vermouth.

I dunno Doc, did Cuomo claim that his constituencies votes were being dismissed as the establishment? I didn't make the claim, Clyburn did.

xps

i am with shakey on this. I am not getting the disconnect. They are specifically talking about african american voters and not implying anything.

I could use a hemingway and some vitamin c.

xxpost-ish That looks pretty good! Elderflower(St. Germain?) is a great sweetener. I think the Corpse Reviver #2 wins, though, for a 1:1:1:1, lemon, triple sec, gin and lillet blanc, with a drop of absinthe. Complex and tasty, but easy if you've got the stuff. I think a Negroni does live or die on the quality of the vermouth. Gin is gin, more or less, and Campari is its own thing, but use, say, Carpano Antica, and mmmmm. Obviously it's easy to mess with the ratio to taste of course, or even the ingredients (as in a Boulevardier).

Also, machines can deliver and do good things at times and also do things that some might describe as bad for the machine’s constituents

hey look we agree on something

you guys don’t HAVE to take the bad faith bait shakey is offering...

personally this argument is making my head feel like it's gradually tying itself into a knot

Brad, let's have a Negroni.

do negroni's unknot the head

do you guys go through that much vermouth before it goes bad?

I try!

i need to make more of an effort.

I honestly think vermouth going bad is ... if not a myth then overblown. I mean, I do keep it in the fridge, but I've never had any that tasted particularly off to me.

Remedy that ASAP! At the very least it's a useful life skill to know how to mix drinks with ingredients in equal ratio. 1:1:1 for the win!
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, March 4, 2020 4:14 PM (seventeen minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Except the equal-parts proportions is exactly what makes a Negroni kind of cloying! If you're mixing a spirit, a fortified wine, and an amaro, I prefer a 2:1:1 ratio.

― jaymc, Wednesday, March 4, 2020 2:33 PM (eleven minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

never found a negroni too sweet personally

It’s kind of funny that the conventional wisdom even when he was considered the presumptive front runner was always that Biden was going to struggle in the first few states and then mount a comeback in SC. Then exactly that happened and everyone was dumbfounded.

this doesn't seem exceptionally complicated to me:

1) Democratic black voters in the South are generally part of political machines which, for good or ill, are perceived by those voters as a lifeline to political power
2) Running a campaign that threatens to tear down those machines/vilifying them as "establishment" makes those voters nervous, they see that as a threat
3) Gambling that you can win the presidential nominee without those votes implies that you don't need them and/or they aren't worth getting
4) Black voters (like any other voters) tend not to react well when your approach implies they aren't needed, and some are going to interpret that as racist
5) This conclusion stems from the historical experience of black people being shut out of the political process because they are black

xps

5 ) wrt negronis, I will have one this weekend!

or six but who's counting?

this thread today makes a lot of sense if you assume all the fighting is just getting the sad feels out through what must seem to most ppl petty asinine bickering about nothing

this thread today board, everyday

ftfy

it is possible to mount criticisms of sanders or his campaign without every single post reading like you just don't like sanders and are excited to be handed new clubs with which to beat him. when on earth did sanders indicate he didn't want or need the state's black voters? i saw *clyburn* signalling to voters that he didn't feel like he'd been aggressively courted by sanders. how much are the statements of people campaigning for rival candidates supposed to tell us about the feelings of voters on the ground?

the argument that black voters are for good reason skeptical of anti-"establishment" candidates is viable and interesting. but i think it would require some nuance about the word "establishment." the establishment sanders rails against is "millionaires and billionaires" and "drug companies" and "huge corporations." he's grumbled about the DNC a bit but it's not like he's running on a "all democrats are crooked, throw the bums out, and we need to clean house of all these political machines" platform. that doesn't mean it's impossible for him to offend, alienate, or push away black voters! obviously he has not attracted as many as he needs or as he tried to (though far more than zero).

....but idk tbh i'd be more interested in being talked out of my pov here by someione who's not posting like he's back in the elton john ballot poll thread trolling with play-dumb readings of beloved songs. talk about insulting and dismissing people!

this has been your "commuting home and the train was too crowded to grade midterms standing up" political argument post series from dr casino. i will now log off and seek out a round of frosty painkillers with seafood and wings, xoxo

I’ll say it again, I absolutely do not begrudge older black voters for sticking w Biden out of concern for “electability”, even as I’ve become hostile to the concept myself.

But I wouldn’t mind hearing from Rep Clyburn which of Joe’s specific policies are designed to help poor and working class black voters in the south. I mean, a “return to decency” doesn’t really get you insulin.

wtf re: defining the "establishment" I was just responding to what silby and milo z were posting eg

he's [Clyburn] been in his seat for a quarter of a century, is that not "established"?

Sanders is attacking The Establishment because The Establishment doesn't support Sanders and therefore are, yes, his enemy, for the time being

friends, we all want the same things. not us, thus, and such

I have a feeling age is being discounted as a factor here. Older Democratic voters have been around long enough to distrust the electoral prospects of wide eyed revolutionaries. It just so happens in these southern states that lots of these older voters are black.

how much are the statements of people campaigning for rival candidates supposed to tell us about the feelings of voters on the ground?

considering a large majority of his constituents (61% iirc?) followed his lead, I would say a fair amount

xps

The Shaddock for the 1:1:1:1 win -- genever, Aperol, elderflower, lemon juice.

Whoa, I have all of those at home. Going to make one when I get there.

Corpse Reviver #2 is also A+, can confirm.

Can we just trade cocktail recipes for the rest of this thread?

This corpse of a thread needed a reviver eh

responding to what silby and milo z were posting eg

Weirdly you quoted something I didn’t say?

I quoted silby and then got sick of trying to scroll above the fold

this thread is infected, someone find a vaccine plz

but since you asked here's one where you equate Clyburn with the establishment/machine politics and how Bernie is explicitly a threat to that

Or Clyburn, as a leader of a political machine, saw more advantage (for his constituents, for the machine) in continuing to support the existing party power structure rather than bet on the guy who campaigns on breaking down those structures.

Which is to say, Clyburn was always lost to Bernie but it was ever to be thus because it’s not a matter of wining and dining, it’s about the underlying relationships of power.

xps

but yeah we're just going around in circles

i mean it's not like there aren't a lot of things being written today by black people about how black people voted.

at least try to remove 3-4 kevin bacons to figure this shit out.

otm

ive been f/ing with aperol spritz since visiting bologna last summer fwiw

here's one where you equate Clyburn with the establishment/machine politics and how Bernie is explicitly a threat to that

is that incorrect?

or rather, are either sides of that conjunction wrong?

you're gonna have to work pretty hard to convince me the third-ranking House Democrat isn't part of the Democratic establishment

Doc Casino seemed to think so, do you guys even read other people's posts

it's not like he's running on a "all democrats are crooked, throw the bums out, and we need to clean house of all these political machines" platform.

xps