Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 02-25-2020, 08:30 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,761
I was just sticking it to him. Yes, Bernie is better than Trump and everyone should go vote for him if he takes the nomination.
  #152  
Old 02-25-2020, 08:38 PM
penultima thule is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,443
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Let's say you've got 1000 voters. 450 will vote for Trump. 400 will vote for any Democratic candidate. 150 will only vote for the Democratic candidate if it's Sanders.

How the fuck do you use this scenario to recommend against nominating Sanders?
What you have is 1000 voters, 325 are rusted on any GOP, 215 are rusted on any DEM and 110 are Bernie or the Highway (numbers for illustrative purposes only).
Your scenario comes into play if the only available demographic to pitch to is the activated DEM base. Is that really the case?
  #153  
Old 02-25-2020, 10:23 PM
Chisquirrel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
I'm thoroughly unconvinced that's true--but let's say it is.

Let's say you've got 1000 voters. 450 will vote for Trump. 400 will vote for any Democratic candidate. 150 will only vote for the Democratic candidate if it's Sanders.

How the fuck do you use this scenario to recommend against nominating Sanders?
Who said it's a knock on Sanders, and not his supporters?
  #154  
Old 02-25-2020, 10:34 PM
Chisquirrel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,942
For reference, 16% of Sanders supporters say they will not vote if Sanders isn't the nominee, and another third that have to see who the nominee is first.

So yeah, it's not out of left field for the "Vote Blue No Matter Who" crowd to look at Sanders' supporters a bit askance.

Last edited by Chisquirrel; 02-25-2020 at 10:34 PM. Reason: Removed a nut
  #155  
Old 02-25-2020, 11:03 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
I'm thoroughly unconvinced that's true--but let's say it is.

Let's say you've got 1000 voters. 450 will vote for Trump. 400 will vote for any Democratic candidate. 150 will only vote for the Democratic candidate if it's Sanders.

How the fuck do you use this scenario to recommend against nominating Sanders?

By the same principle that you shouldn't encourage hostage-taking by negotiating with hostage-takers. To prebut an anticipated response: it's not the same when you try to appeal to centrist swing voters. Those voters are sincerely torn between voting for a right of center party or a left of center party, finding both sides too extreme and weighing which compromises are tougher. For the far left to play "Chicken" by threatening to sit it out unless they get to control the party forevermore (and it would be forevermore if we encourage them) is just flat-out extortion. They aren't genuinely torn between the parties. It's totally disengenuous, "take my ball and go home", completely opposed to any notion of coalitionbuilding.

Have you seen the studies about how strong the norm of reciprocity is in social psychology? In studies, people get so angry about any perceived violation of it that they will sabotage themselves to punish transgressions. For instance, researchers will tell someone that a stranger in another room has chosen to keep 75% of some sort of cash prize (like $15 out of $20). Then they can choose to take the $5 that's left, or torpedo the whole thing so neither of them gets anything. People will most often choose to get nothing rather than let the other person make what they see as an unfair division. Same principle applies here.


Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
I was just sticking it to him. Yes, Bernie is better than Trump and everyone should go vote for him if he takes the nomination.

If Bernie wins the nomination, I will vote for him, but for the first time in over 20 years, I won't canvas or phone bank for the presidential election, and I won't speak up for him (nor against him) online. I can't bring myself to be that disingenuous. If some wavering voter expresses concerns about Bernie, I won't be able to convincingly assure them it's all fine. (I know this is a different standard than I expect from candidates, but I would admittedly be a bad politician.)
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 02-25-2020 at 11:07 PM.
  #156  
Old 02-25-2020, 11:07 PM
Try2B Comprehensive's Avatar
Try2B Comprehensive is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
What part of the OP involved "machinations" or not giving the nomination to the candidate the majority of Democratic voters want? Again, why is Bernie allowed to bring out AOC to persuade voters to support him, but more moderate candidates are not allowed to do the same? No one is talking about taking Bernie's name off the primary ballots, at least not anyone in that OP.

Are people actually reading the link in the OP, or just making wild assumptions about what it says?
Dude, I read the link. Who said moderate candidates aren't allowed to accept the endorsements of Democratic grandees? What your article is promoting is some Dem demigod that can move all of these established Democrats around like chess pieces to jointly pull a Tonia Harding on Bernie. I'd call that a machination:

Quote:
And I promise you that every one of them who is right now weighing when to put their thumb on the scale will quickly decide after Super Tuesday that they don’t want to be fighting a lonely battle against an inevitable Bernie.

Some of these individuals could shake up the race. Imagine the consolidation pressure if an Obama or Clinton came out for Pete or Joe or Amy in the way Ted Kennedy did for Obama in 2008. That would be the type of event that could legitimately change the balance of the race. If it happened soon.
Put their thumb on the scale? Change the balance of the race? Jeb's former staffer should spend more time asking these prominent Dems if they want to endorse candidates in the way he suggests. I'd wager they don't, since they haven't, and maybe for the kinds of reasons the author describes, because the Dems still have some American values while the Rs have squandered theirs in the hope it gives them an advantage.

Look, I'm like you, I have a union job where there are enough Trumpers around. I get it. I also get the arguments about Bernie's electability and his effects down ticket. Still, demanding that some Dem grandee swing their reputation like a club at Bernie's kneecaps is going too far.

Still, if Liz can get Obama to give one of his fiery speeches for her between now and Super Tuesday, that's totally legit. It's fine if the author wants to give out some free campaign advice, like this:

SPOILER:
Joe!
__________________
Above it isn't bright, below it isn't dark.
  #157  
Old 02-25-2020, 11:08 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
If Bernie wins the nomination, I will vote for him, but for the first time in over 20 years, I won't canvas or phone bank for the presidential election, and I won't speak up for him (nor against him) online.
Really...thanks for this.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill
  #158  
Old 02-25-2020, 11:10 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
Really...thanks for this.

Sincere? I can't tell.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #159  
Old 02-25-2020, 11:15 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Sincere? I can't tell.
100% sincere.

If you were an employer looking to hire someone to advocate for "X" and you showed up saying the things you have said about Sanders in opposition to "X" would you hire you?

I sure wouldn't.

So yeah...if you cannot get on board then sit it out. Or pull the lever for Turmp...as you like.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill

Last edited by Whack-a-Mole; 02-25-2020 at 11:16 PM.
  #160  
Old 02-25-2020, 11:23 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
100% sincere.

If you were an employer looking to hire someone to advocate for "X" and you showed up saying the things you have said about Sanders in opposition to "X" would you hire you?

I sure wouldn't.

So yeah...if you cannot get on board then sit it out. Or pull the lever for Turmp...as you like.

I'm offended by that last part. Nothing I have EVER said should provide anyone with any reason to think I would vote for Trump for any reason short of some maniac holding my wife and kids hostage. Nor would I deny the Democratic nominee my vote. When I participate in the primary process I believe it's an implicit contract to vote for whichever nominee wins, even if it is the second-worst candidate running (the worst being Tulsi Gabbard). Nor do I think it's right to shit-talk that nominee once there is no possibility of denying them the nomination. Once Bernie has 1,991 delegates, I will observe the Thumper rule, go quiet, and then quietly, privately go vote for Bernie and the DFL slate on Election Day.

ETA: Upon a moment's reflection, I don't want to state as some inviolable principle that someone who participates in a party's nominating contest must always vote for ANY nominee. I think it was honorable for instance for NeverTrumpers to refuse to vote for him in the 2016 election. But I do then believe if that happens, you need to leave the party and cannot in good conscience come back and vote in that party's primary four years later. You gotta sit at least one round out.

But I'm not there with Bernie. I will vote for him unless he does something I can't even conceive of (and I think I know him well enough for that to be unlikely). If OTOH Gabbard had somehow won, that might have been enough to make me quit the party.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 02-25-2020 at 11:27 PM.
  #161  
Old 02-25-2020, 11:27 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 21,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I'm offended by that last part. Nothing I have EVER said should provide anyone with any reason to think I would vote for Trump for any reason short of some maniac holding my wife and kids hostage. Nor would I deny the Democratic nominee my vote. When I participate in the primary process I believe it's an implicit contract to vote for whichever nominee wins, even if it is the second-worst candidate running (the worst being Tulsi Gabbard). Nor do I think it's right to shit-talk that nominee once there is no possibility of denying them the nomination. Once Bernie has 1,991 delegates, I will observe the Thumper rule, go quiet, and then quietly, privately go vote for Bernie and the DFL slate on Election Day.
I did not suggest you would or should vote for Trump. I merely suggested an option I'd prefer than you canvassing for Sanders.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill
  #162  
Old 02-25-2020, 11:37 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,207
Mmm.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #163  
Old 02-26-2020, 11:28 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,402
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4...-top-of-ticket

Pelosi is comfortable with the possibility of Bernie winning the nomination.

This supports my prediction that the "establishment" is slowly but surely coming to terms with and accepting the likelihood of Bernie winning.
__________________
My new novel Spindown

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 02-26-2020 at 11:31 AM.
  #164  
Old 02-26-2020, 11:32 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,761
That is a little small potatoes to be latching on to.
Quote:
The congresswoman was asked the question as she was leaving a closed-door meeting in the House basement Wednesday morning.

She replied with one word: "Yes."
  #165  
Old 02-26-2020, 11:37 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,402
We'll see!
  #166  
Old 02-26-2020, 11:44 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,761
No, this isn't a guessing game. A one word "yes" while she's walking out of a meeting is small potatoes.
  #167  
Old 02-26-2020, 12:03 PM
pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 300
Better than a one word "No."
  #168  
Old 02-26-2020, 12:14 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
No, this isn't a guessing game. A one word "yes" while she's walking out of a meeting is small potatoes.
No! Medium potatoes! THIS IS A GUESSING GAME!

  #169  
Old 02-26-2020, 01:36 PM
elucidator is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 60,565
Are those electable potatoes? Socialist potatoes are right out!
  #170  
Old 02-26-2020, 01:54 PM
Try2B Comprehensive's Avatar
Try2B Comprehensive is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,794
No potatoes! No potatoes! You're the potato!
  #171  
Old 02-26-2020, 02:06 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 42,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisquirrel View Post
For reference, 16% of Sanders supporters say they will not vote if Sanders isn't the nominee, and another third that have to see who the nominee is first.

So yeah, it's not out of left field for the "Vote Blue No Matter Who" crowd to look at Sanders' supporters a bit askance.
As long as that "bit" is "1/6", and you're 5/6 behind them, I guess I'm with you.

Look: anyone who would ever consider voting for Trump is kind of awful. Someone who's guaranteed to vote for Trump is more awful than someone who's just kind of considering it.

Someone who'd vote for Sanders if nominated, but Trump otherwise, is awful--but less awful than someone who'd vote for Trump no matter what.

Someone who doesn't vote is less awful than someone who votes for Trump, but more awful than someone who votes for the Democratic nominee.

Someone who'll vote for Sanders if the nominee, but won't vote otherwise, is more awful than someone who votes Blue no matter what, but less awful than someone who won't vote no matter what.

There's no reason to excuse the "Bernie or Bust" brigade. Criticize their position for its merits or lack thereof. Be specific. I do it myself, and I've used one of my rare Facebook unfriending dramas in the past week or so to get rid of one because I've put up with their bullshit long enough.

But your stats show that they're a small minority of all Sanders supporters. Don't paint all Sanders supporters with that brush. And definitely don't criticize their position, as some folks have done here, as though they're traitors or interlopers or party crashers or other stupid stuff like that.
  #172  
Old 02-26-2020, 04:25 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 85,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
So yeah...if you cannot get on board then sit it out. Or pull the lever for Turmp...as you like.
Twelve minutes later:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
I did not suggest you would or should vote for Trump.
  #173  
Old 02-26-2020, 05:27 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,207
Rep. Clyburn may have just saved the day!

Quote:
“I don’t see a whole lot of 2016 in this election,” Clyburn said. “I see a whole lot of 1972.”
And he was there. (He's a year older than Bernie, Biden, and Bloomberg.)
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #174  
Old 02-26-2020, 05:52 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Rep. Clyburn may have just saved the day!



And he was there. (He's a year older than Bernie, Biden, and Bloomberg.)
Fuck that shit. That's exactly the attitude that could lose November.

Assuming Bernie runs well ahead of everyone else through the primaries, the Dems may or may not be able to win with Bernie if they rally around him. But I guarantee you they'll lose if a nontrivial chunk of the party runs away from him.
  #175  
Old 02-26-2020, 06:06 PM
squidfood is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 499
lol. I really have Bernie right now to thank, for something finally clicking in terms of understanding Trump voters.

Intellectually, I'm still behind Warren. But watching the establishment centrist Dems (especially the billionaires and corporate media heads who are, on a deep level, Not On My Side) scurry in this panic looking for a savior, and listening to you all panic about "electability" and rant about Sanders supporters, hits me on a deep deep emotional level that makes me say "you go Bern - tear it all down!"
  #176  
Old 02-26-2020, 06:10 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,999
...Obama isn't coming to save you. If you guys want to save your republic then you are going to have to show some guts and do it yourselves.

And if you insist on listening to "pragmatic Democrats" or "Never Trumpers" on what to do at the next election, don't bother reading the cite in the OP (that was written by communications director for Jeb Bush, and spokesman for the Republican National Committee.)

Just heed the words of right-wing tea-party republican "Obama is a Muslim" former representative Joe Walsh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Walsh
I would vote for socialism over authoritarianism.
https://twitter.com/WalshFreedom/sta...92007135907840

Simple and to the point.

This isn't a hard choice. Let them fight it out in the primaries. Whomever gets the nomination will get the nomination. Then throw your support behind the winner (whether its Sanders or Warren or Bloomberg) and fight to save your republic. Playing the game any other way makes the road for a Trump victory that much easier.
  #177  
Old 02-26-2020, 06:25 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Fuck that shit. That's exactly the attitude that could lose November.

Assuming Bernie runs well ahead of everyone else through the primaries, the Dems may or may not be able to win with Bernie if they rally around him. But I guarantee you they'll lose if a nontrivial chunk of the party runs away from him.

Clyburn's intervention here will hopefully prevent Bernie from running well ahead of everyone else through the primaries. But if it doesn't, Democrats in vulnerable seats (the ones who won in 2018 and gave Pelosi the gavel) would be well-served to distance themselves from Bernie and try to save the House. We need that bulwark against total power by a second-term Trump who doesn't even have fear of electoral defeat to constrain him.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #178  
Old 02-26-2020, 06:31 PM
PhillyGuy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.A.
Posts: 1,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
That's exactly the attitude that could lose November.
Maybe, but I think it's more like this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Look: anyone who would ever consider voting for Trump is kind of awful.
There's an enormous difference between someone on an internet discussion saying it, and if a Democratic candidate were to insult people considering whether or not to vote for Donald Trump. But I do think people will be more likely to come out on a possibly rainy day and vote for DJT if they feel looked down on.

Last edited by PhillyGuy; 02-26-2020 at 06:31 PM.
  #179  
Old 02-26-2020, 06:33 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,207
Relatedly, it's a huge political foul in this country with this economy in the 21st century to constantly talk about "the working class" as Bernie does. He virtually never refers to "the middle class", which is just not the way it's done in American politics. Maybe he knows something every political consultant is unaware of, but I doubt it.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 02-26-2020 at 06:34 PM.
  #180  
Old 02-26-2020, 06:47 PM
PhillyGuy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.A.
Posts: 1,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
By the same principle that you shouldn't encourage hostage-taking by negotiating with hostage-takers.
Every situation needs to be considered individually. But, generally I do believe in negotiating with hostage takers.

However, I'll try to take your side another way.

16 percent of Sanders supports indicate that they wouldn't vote for another Democrat. Whereas 53 percent of Americans polled wouldn't vote for a socialist.

Of course, the 53 percent didn't really say they wouldn't vote for a socialist. Rather they answered yes to a question. Some of them just meant they considered being a socialist a big negative in a candidate. Similarly, some of the 16 percent would be really pissed off if the nominee were Biden but vote for him anyway.

Last edited by PhillyGuy; 02-26-2020 at 06:52 PM.
  #181  
Old 02-26-2020, 06:51 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Relatedly, it's a huge political foul in this country with this economy in the 21st century to constantly talk about "the working class" as Bernie does. He virtually never refers to "the middle class", which is just not the way it's done in American politics. Maybe he knows something every political consultant is unaware of, but I doubt it.
Tell it to Trump, who got elected making bullshit promises to the working class.
  #182  
Old 02-26-2020, 06:55 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Fuck that shit. That's exactly the attitude that could lose November.

Assuming Bernie runs well ahead of everyone else through the primaries, the Dems may or may not be able to win with Bernie if they rally around him. But I guarantee you they'll lose if a nontrivial chunk of the party runs away from him.
Don't worry. Pelosi is not uncomfortable with Sanders so it's all gonna be all right. Possibly. Just guessing really.
  #183  
Old 02-26-2020, 09:06 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,614
I am still unlikely to vote for Sanders when it is my state's turn to vote, I still don't like him much and I don't think he'd be a very effective president, but I can come around to wrapping my brain around his theory of electability.

And it is not the increased turnout of young voters. Honestly I think Trump's evilness is enough for most of that group who are going to come out. And those who wouldn't for that, likely will find something else is more important on election day than coming out for Sanders.

It is undercutting the Trump support with the group that just wants "change" and does not care what that change is really. Trump has had his swing at being "change" and now is what must be changed. (Yeah like the dirty diaper he is.) He is the swamp to be drained. I'm not sure that this group isn't more the true swing voter bloc than anything else, more than ideology anyway. Sanders is a more a change candidate than a center Left one is. And more than Trump is now. He is not charismatic per se but he is authentically what he is and speaks with passion. Okay yells with passion.

Romney-Clinton voters you lose some of but to staying home I think, not to Trump.

The big downside is I think the Senate gets out of reach and even the House may be at risk as some will vote for down ticket offsetting balance.

I can see him with Kamala Harris as VP - she'd be good in the old tradition of VP candidate as "attack dog", prosecuting the case against Trump with Sanders more focussed selling on what he aspires for this country. (Agnew is classic VP candidate "attack dog" model.)
  #184  
Old 02-26-2020, 09:31 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Tell it to Trump, who got elected making bullshit promises to the working class.

Did he use the phrase “the working class”? That is not my recollection. Even if he did, it’s highly perilous to emulate Trump in any way. Is there any Democratic president in the modern era (say, in the past 50 years) who campaigned regularly with that slogan? “Working families” I remember, but not “working class“, which has a very proletarian/Marxist ring to it.

And Americans have a very funny tendency to want to think of themselves as “middle class”, whether they make $25,000 a year or $250,000 a year. So what Bernie is calling “working class”, the people so named themselves would prefer to think of as “lower middle class”. “Blue collar” is another term that is generally considered safe to use.
  #185  
Old 02-26-2020, 09:37 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,761
I don't know if that is wisdom that will last the ages. Are service workers "blue collar"? Generally, I wouldn't say so. Blue collar are the more monied of the working class, eg factory jobs or the trades.
  #186  
Old 02-26-2020, 09:57 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,207
I have heard “pink collar”, and of course people talk about “service workers“. But whatever the case, “working class” is a term that doesn’t resonate well with Americans, and Bernie uses it because he is an old lefty who likes to think of himself as Eugene Debs or Joe Hill so he can’t resist.
  #187  
Old 02-26-2020, 11:13 PM
Paul in Qatar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Dammam, Saudi Arabia
Posts: 13,295
Last night, I saw Joe Hill.
__________________
800-237-5055
Shrine Hospitals for Children (North America)
Never any fee
Do you know a child in need?
  #188  
Old 02-26-2020, 11:49 PM
China Guy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,943
The Veep choice is going to be important, no matter who wins the Dem nomination.

Get a female general on the ticket, preferably a woman of color, it doesn't really matter who it is (apologies to any of the potential female candidates) to pull in that entire demographic. And anyone that has a star(s) on their shoulders, is by definition politically savvy. And a general will be a proper counterweight to the Russian teat sucking lackies in office now.

Bernie, Sanders or Biden all have a non trivial chance of dying in office.
  #189  
Old 02-26-2020, 11:52 PM
Smapti is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 16,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
He virtually never refers to "the middle class", which is just not the way it's done in American politics.
What "middle class"?
  #190  
Old 02-27-2020, 12:01 AM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 85,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by China Guy View Post
The Veep choice is going to be important, no matter who wins the Dem nomination.

Get a female general on the ticket, preferably a woman of color, it doesn't really matter who it is (apologies to any of the potential female candidates) to pull in that entire demographic. And anyone that has a star(s) on their shoulders, is by definition politically savvy. And a general will be a proper counterweight to the Russian teat sucking lackies in office now.

Bernie, Sanders or Biden all have a non trivial chance of dying in office.
I disagree. (I seem to be doing a lot of that in this thread.) The fact that Sanders (or Biden if things change) is seen as a risk for dying in office means they have to have a VP who will reassure people that they are capable of handling the Presidency. That pretty much means somebody who has made a credible Presidential run or has at least been frequently mentioned as a potential candidate. This is not a time when the Vice Presidency should be seen as a meaningless position you use to score points with some demographic.
  #191  
Old 02-27-2020, 12:58 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,207
I agree that the VP choice needs to be someone who will be reassuring, but I don't see why that needs to be someone who was a candidate or often mentioned as a candidate. A military general sounds like a fine choice.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Smapti View Post
What "middle class"?

I suppose if we're going to be technical about it, we might say it's something like the 42% of households with incomes between $35-100K. But that ignores all the cultural baggage around the term. Of course, you presumably meant this as a clever quip indicating that there is only rich and poor, with no one in the middle. This is in reality quite false.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ome-in-the-us/

BTW, this will surprise a lot of people (it did me):

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2...st-for-a-while
Quote:
61 out of 100 U.S. households will break into the top 20% of incomes (roughly $111,000*) for at least 2 consecutive years.
They used the qualifier of two consecutive years to screen out people who receive a one-time windfall, otherwise it would be even more.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 02-27-2020 at 01:01 AM.
  #192  
Old 02-27-2020, 01:50 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
... Democrats in vulnerable seats (the ones who won in 2018 and gave Pelosi the gavel) would be well-served to distance themselves from Bernie and try to save the House. We need that bulwark against total power by a second-term Trump who doesn't even have fear of electoral defeat to constrain him.
Maybe you're right. But to abandon the Democratic nominee and make Trump's re-election even more certain, is ineffable tragedy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
... It is undercutting the Trump support with the group that just wants "change" and does not care what that change is really....

The big downside is I think the Senate gets out of reach and even the House may be at risk as some will vote for down ticket offsetting balance.
Sadly, I think Sanders' chances would have been better in 2016. The voters eager to pick an old wild white man got Trump ... and largely like what they see! Economy soaring. Blacks, browns, immigrants, wimmen put in their place. What's not to like?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul in Qatar View Post
Last night, I saw Joe Hill.
Joe Hill? JOE HILL!!??? Things must be really desperate if we're invoking ghosts who died before Pete Seeger was born.

For you young'uns, Joe Hill (né Joel Emmanuel Hägglund) was a labor organizer and singer. I don't know if any of Joe Hill's singing can be found on-line, but here is a "cover" of one of his songs.

Is Joe Hill really still alive? Might he save us? Naah, the young'uns whose votes might sway the election will be too busy to vote — they've got to exchange more stickers on Instagram.
  #193  
Old 02-27-2020, 02:00 AM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 17,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Try2B Comprehensive View Post
No potatoes! No potatoes! You're the potato!
"Potatoe"
— J. Danforth Quayle
  #194  
Old 02-27-2020, 05:47 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Clyburn's intervention here will hopefully prevent Bernie from running well ahead of everyone else through the primaries.
Yeah, like Clyburn's going to make that much of a difference in the Super Tuesday states.
Quote:
But if it doesn't, Democrats in vulnerable seats (the ones who won in 2018 and gave Pelosi the gavel) would be well-served to distance themselves from Bernie and try to save the House.
By depressing Dem turnout and losing? That's a funny way to save the House.

Look, there's no evidence that they won by winning over disaffected Trump voters. GOP turnout was sky-high in 2018, because GOP voters overwhelmingly weren't disaffected. But Dem turnout, though not as high as GOP turnout, still won the day because there are more of us, and enough of us showed up in November 2018.

Republicans will still show up at the polls in huge numbers this November. We beat them by having massive turnout ourselves. Splitting the party and running away from the Presidential nominee will do exactly the opposite.
  #195  
Old 02-27-2020, 06:32 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
I disagree. (I seem to be doing a lot of that in this thread.) The fact that Sanders (or Biden if things change) is seen as a risk for dying in office means they have to have a VP who will reassure people that they are capable of handling the Presidency. That pretty much means somebody who has made a credible Presidential run or has at least been frequently mentioned as a potential candidate. This is not a time when the Vice Presidency should be seen as a meaningless position you use to score points with some demographic.
I disagree. The first thing is winning; if the VP nominee is ready to step in if necessary on Day 1 but we lose the election, we're screwed. (See 2016.)

I doubt that that many people are going to stay home or vote for Trump just because Sanders or Biden or Bloomberg picks a less experienced person of color as a running mate. We really NEED Blacks and Hispanics to show up this November. Stacy Abrams would be a great VP candidate.
  #196  
Old 02-27-2020, 06:49 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,871
Oh, and five days to go! Has Obama saved us yet?
  #197  
Old 02-27-2020, 06:55 AM
Smapti is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Olympia, WA
Posts: 16,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Rep. Clyburn may have just saved the day!
On behalf of my generation;

Who?
  #198  
Old 02-27-2020, 09:02 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smapti View Post
On behalf of my generation;

Who?
You don't speak for your generation. South Carolinians your age probably know who he is.

Last edited by CarnalK; 02-27-2020 at 09:03 AM.
  #199  
Old 02-27-2020, 09:32 AM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 19,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
I did not suggest you would or should vote for Trump. I merely suggested an option I'd prefer than you canvassing for Sanders.
Maybe so, but it sure looked like a "You're with Bernie, or you're against the Democratic party" kind of thing, which is the LAST thing that the Democrats need right now.
  #200  
Old 02-27-2020, 11:22 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
I disagree. The first thing is winning; if the VP nominee is ready to step in if necessary on Day 1 but we lose the election, we're screwed. (See 2016.)

I doubt that that many people are going to stay home or vote for Trump just because Sanders or Biden or Bloomberg picks a less experienced person of color as a running mate. We really NEED Blacks and Hispanics to show up this November. Stacy Abrams would be a great VP candidate.
There are overlaps between the sets of potential running mates that might help win and and those who would be ready to step in day one if need be.

To some degree being the latter is part of the former especially with an older president.

I think that you think little of Black and Hispanic voters if you think their turnout is dependent on having someone of their identity as running mate. It wouldn't hurt but top of importance list? No. Abrams might be good but not just because of "woman" and "Black".

A good VP running mate can complement (not "balance") the campaign style of the top of the ticket, can bring two or three points to their home state (which might be significant), and can signal importance of issues (here identity can be part of doing that, but record and accomplishments more so).
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:25 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017