All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[jetengine]

While one could say its not true theres more to the story.

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...-attack-biden/

For the record my choice was Warren, and she got kicked off.

And how is no one here at all talking about the fact that these two are actually very friendly with each other and kept accidentally calling each other by their first names.

As a friend told me, as some one who works in a pub, this debate felt more like two friends meeting for a drink and debating policy than a pay per view boxing event. Both came out looking good in their own way.

Compared to when Bloomberg came on and was annihilated

[worstblogever]

Compared to when Bloomberg came on and was annihilated

[ed2962]

Trump has been pushing for Bernie to win and looking for some dirt on Biden...because he is more scared of Sanders? I don’t really get that.

I do think Trump might have underestimated Sanders, in the same way many of us underestimated a Trump, but I think it is clear Trump has been, and continues to be, more scared of Biden.

I don't doubt he was probably looking for dirt on everyone. How Trump handled the Ukraine situation is what made it unique not that he was looking for dirt on Biden. There's tape of Trump saying how hard it would be to run against Sander because, "He's giving away free stuff."

[ed2962]

I disagree there too. The fact of the matter is, Trump looked bad in the debates, but a number of developments in late October made it much more important to the voters to look beyond debates. I mean, Clinton won the debates in polling by double-digits every time. We can criticize her and her campaign on a lot, but not her debate performance.

I meant more in the minds of some of the public. They didn't go, "Wow, this guy's really full crap and shouldn't be anywhere near the office." They fell for his act and saw someone who was tough and wouldn't back down.

[ed2962]

Damn he said that? Sounds like he was hoping for their vote and was disappointed how it turned out. I think everyone was surprised that the people who want Bernie didn't go out to vote for him.

Well, before Super Tuesday he was doing really well. Heck, the fact that it's come down to Joe vs Sanders says a lot.

[XPac]

While one could say its not true theres more to the story.

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...-attack-biden/

For the record my choice was Warren, and she got kicked off.

And how is no one here at all talking about the fact that these two are actually very friendly with each other and kept accidentally calling each other by their first names.

As a friend told me, as some one who works in a pub, this debate felt more like two friends meeting for a drink and debating policy than a pay per view boxing event. Both came out looking good in their own way.

Sanders has gone out of his way to say they're friends... and I think it's fair to say it showed.

Course, I also think that came as a detriment to Sanders campaign as he likely didn't go negative enough when he probably should have. When you have Sanders flat out say publically that Joe can beat Trump, you're practically asking people to not jump ship from him and join his campaing.

Still, I would agree going out of the debate both looked pretty good. Little stuff here and there you can ding both on, but neither person was really hurt here. Which works in Bidens favor overall, since he was obviously in the lead. Bernie needed Biden to self destruct and that didn't happen. It's just a matter of waiting for Sanders to drop.

[XPac]

Well, before Super Tuesday he was doing really well. Heck, the fact that it's come down to Joe vs Sanders says a lot.

Since Sanders was last democrat standing in the primaries last election too, it's probably that surprising that he lasted as long as he did.

Nonetheless, I do think progressives tend to sort exist in a echo chamber where their own voices tend to create the illusion that there are more of them than there really are. They are loud and have a strong presence on social media, but when it's time to vote the numbers just aren't there. That's not a knock against them or anything, but I think it has the ability to fool others (and even themselves) into thinking the movement is bigger than it actually is. Then something like Super Tuesday comes, and a bit of reality seeps in.

[Tendrin]

Sanders has gone out of his way to say they're friends... and I think it's fair to say it showed.

Course, I also think that came as a detriment to Sanders campaign as he likely didn't go negative enough when he probably should have. When you have Sanders flat out say publically that Joe can beat Trump, you're practically asking people to not jump ship from him and join his campaing.

I've seen the sentiment echoed on twitter that Bernie should've gone all in, that 'those people' are 'never friends' and so on and how they wished he would stop calling him that.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Since Sanders was last democrat standing in the primaries last election too, it's probably that surprising that he lasted as long as he did.

Nonetheless, I do think progressives tend to sort exist in a echo chamber where their own voices tend to create the illusion that there are more of them than there really are. They are loud and have a strong presence on social media, but when it's time to vote the numbers just aren't there. That's not a knock against them or anything, but I think it has the ability to fool others (and even themselves) into thinking the movement is bigger than it actually is. Then something like Super Tuesday comes, and a bit of reality seeps in.

What you said made a lot of sense. Like so many people, I thought the progressive movement was a budding colossus, but it wound up being less than that. Another factor which I think has already been mentioned here was that Sanders' good showing in 2016 was sparked by his having gotten protest votes from people who wanted nothing to do with Hillary. With no such pariah in the 2020 race, Bernie's support just didn't materialize.

[Tami]

Since Sanders was last democrat standing in the primaries last election too, it's probably that surprising that he lasted as long as he did.

Nonetheless, I do think progressives tend to sort exist in a echo chamber where their own voices tend to create the illusion that there are more of them than there really are. They are loud and have a strong presence on social media, but when it's time to vote the numbers just aren't there. That's not a knock against them or anything, but I think it has the ability to fool others (and even themselves) into thinking the movement is bigger than it actually is. Then something like Super Tuesday comes, and a bit of reality seeps in.

Aside from those who are Socialists in the strict Anti-Capitalist kind of way, my own viewpoint from the beginning was that the Democratic Party was already more then enough Progressive as it is, on average.

Being Progressive is less about a Movement and more about new ideas. You don't need a movement to say, 'Hey, we have a problem with college students not being able to afford college. I have an idea as to how to deal with it.'

You don't need a movement to say, 'The ACA is a good start, but how about we expand it even more. How about we find a way to make sure everyone is covered and no one has to spend so much on health care that it bankrupts them.'

You don't need a movement to say, 'Climate Change is a danger, we need a more aggressive approach to dealing with it. Here are some ideas we can start with.'

You don't need a movement for these or any other policy ideas being floated around. All you need is float you idea, work out the details (like how to pay for it), get others in government to support it, and start passing laws.

This is how the ACA came about, this is how many other things came about that sprang from the Democrats efforts.

[ed2962]

I've seen the sentiment echoed on twitter that Bernie should've gone all in, that 'those people' are 'never friends' and so on and how they wished he would stop calling him that.

I'm not on twitter, but I've seen that other places. Thing is, that's exactly why some Sanders fans got mad at Warren. As things got closer to the wire, she took the gloves off and tried to go in on Sanders ( the way she went about it blew up in her face, but...)

[Lord Falcon]

Aside from those who are Socialists in the strict Anti-Capitalist kind of way, my own viewpoint from the beginning was that the Democratic Party was already more then enough Progressive as it is, on average.

Being Progressive is less about a Movement and more about new ideas. You don't need a movement to say, 'Hey, we have a problem with college students not being able to afford college. I have an idea as to how to deal with it.'

You don't need a movement to say, 'The ACA is a good start, but how about we expand it even more. How about we find a way to make sure everyone is covered and no one has to spend so much on health care that it bankrupts them.'

You don't need a movement to say, 'Climate Change is a danger, we need a more aggressive approach to dealing with it. Here are some ideas we can start with.'

You don't need a movement for these or any other policy ideas being floated around. All you need is float you idea, work out the details (like how to pay for it), get others in government to support it, and start passing laws.

This is how the ACA came about, this is how many other things came about that sprang from the Democrats efforts.

I would couch this with saying that a movement can be very helpful in applying political pressure and be a sign of the changing times to those who aren't as engaged.

But other than that, 100% agreed. Movements will 99% of the time not get everything they want.

[Tendrin]

I'm not on twitter, but I've seen that other places. Thing is, that's exactly why some Sanders fans got mad at Warren. As things got closer to the wire, she took the gloves off and tried to go in on Sanders ( the way she went about it blew up in her face, but...)

Can't really agree. She didn't really hammer Sanders all that hard, IMO. The reaction of many die-hard Sanders supporters (promoted further by rat$#$ing Republicans and foreign actors, no doubt), you'd have think she'd done something far worse than she did. But this just goes to show you the way that a movement can be defined by some of its loudest voices if you let it. I'm reminded of the way Mayor Pete was treated by a lot of the louder Sanders-supporting voices on the internet (CIA plant, Rat memes, so on) and when Sanders' supporters needed to expand their coalition to include people who liked Pete, there was really no salvageable way a lot of them could make that pitch, though they sure tried. w

And no, I don't think 'all Sanders supporters are that way'. If it doesn't apply, let it fly.

[Jackmando7]

I missed it.

Oh my goodness. Well, it was a good'en!

[XPac]

I've seen the sentiment echoed on twitter that Bernie should've gone all in, that 'those people' are 'never friends' and so on and how they wished he would stop calling him that.

I was just watching a Young Turks video, where they were saying after the loss of Super Tuesday that the Progressives were "going to WAR" and that we'd see "trench warefare like we've never seen."

I guess the moral of the story is you don't want Bernie Sanders leading you into war.

Which isn't to say that I don't genuinely find something very respectable about him being a nice enough guy not to want to knock a guy he considers a friend. But I guess that's just not how you win an election.