All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Steel Inquisitor]

The anti-semitism issue was the defining one though.

This minimises how badly he's hated for other reasons. It doesn't just stop at antisemitism.

Corbyn's ideas and platform included reckoning with the Empire. Likewise, Corbyn was a vocal opponent of the Iraq War and the Labour Government of Tony Blair's handmaiden role in that conflict and a good chunk of his inner-party enemies were Blairites who backed the Iraq War.

And if that was all he did he wouldn't be as disruptive as he was, instead he was ok being incredibly lazy with his own shadow cabinet and preferred letting Labor politicians who weren't in his faction lose then add more votes, he was a politician who preferred party before country. His rivals in the party may have signed onto the Iraq War but that wasn't why they disliked him so much. His mismanagement and alienating style of leadership was far more divisive then the Iraq war stance. "Blairities" is the wrong term to use since Blaire left years ago - he wasn't their secret leader, it wasn't just one faction against Corbyn it was several. The Corbyn backers relied on terms like that to make it a binary stitiuion, when it was more complicated as a matter of politics.

The Iraq War was far more destructive to UK politics than US politics, precisely because the Labour government, the Left party openly and stupidly backed W.'s drive to war. That single decision is the source of all its woes. No Iraq, no Brexit.

Except it wasn't those people who signed up with Brexit, but many leftists did. It's been documented how Corbyn is a Euro-skeptic for years and his defense against Breixt is a punch line. He hates NATO.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8766421.html

There's his controversial stance against the UK have nuclear weapons and not using them and his bizarre take about the Russian poisonings that gave Russia cover. All there of these are opinions alienate Labor voters by themselves, you don't need to get into antiseimitism or the Iraq war for that. He's such a bad leader.

If not Corbyn, people would bring up George McGovern or Henry Wallace or other quite radical political figures who tend to not make it for fears of electability.

I didn't bring up Corbyn at random, he's an ally of Bernie Sanders and he lost just before the '16 American elections.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...-jeremy-corbyn

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) heaped praise on Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn this week, saying he was "impressed" by the U.K. candidate's willingness to talk about class issues.

“I am also impressed by his willingness to talk about class issues,” the former Democratic presidential candidate said Thursday during a U.K. speaking tour promoting his book.

“Too many people run away from the grotesque levels of income and wealth inequality that exist in the United States, the UK and all over the world," Sanders said.

"We will never make the kind of changes we need unless we take on the levels of inequality that exist."

Sanders pointed out similarities between anti-establishment movements that he and Corbyn have pushed.

“What has impressed me – and there is a real similarity between what he has done and what I did – is he has taken on the establishment of the Labour Party, he has gone to the grassroots and he has tried to transform that party … and that is exactly what I am trying to do,” Sanders said.

Bernie didn't have too lose as badly as Corbyn did but there were far more weaknesses for less turnout with him at there helm than Biden was and that's not getting into how disgracefully Corbyn lost the second election. He broke records in electoral defeat.

But fundamentally, as Lichtman has shown, elections are about the Incumbent and not the candidate and the campaign. HRC could have run in 2020 and won against Trump. I am not saying Biden was a bad candidate or he ran a bad campaign or anything just that you can run the best campaign in the world and still come up short if the odds aren't entirely with you.

You're not listening to what I'm saying. If Bernie sanders had said that Castro comment in the presidential Trump would have had 4 more years. The ideas that candidates shouldn't have the self awareness to grow is baffling, the left is suppose to be all about this concept. Humility and responsibility aren't just words, they must be followed others why should we trust our leaders? And why are you deflecting when we're analysing Bernie? Biden won, Bernie didn't. This is about increasing the odds of winning, and doing things like praising Castro is a death knell for a campign - it could be argued that that move was a fatal blow to his campaign on Super Tuesday. He was the front runner for a while and he was unable to maintain that lead, that's on Bernie. Biden had his own problems.

If Bernie runs, he probably doesn't take Florida. But then neither did Biden. I don't think anti-Castro sentiment is such a hard thing to overcome on the national level.

Biden had far more room than Bernie did with Florida. Biden also has a stronger relationship with the black voting bloc than Bernie does, in general and in the south. Did Bernie choosing to be in Michigan rather than be there for the anniversary of Bloody Sunday a good decision in your eyes? To me that was a massive mistake, especially when running for president. I think you underestimate how badly left dictatorships are hated in the Democratic party and for good reasons. Do you think the American public love Castro?

[Tendrin]

Biden absolutely won off the strength of the African American vote in certain states. We absolutely can not take for granted that Bernie would have done the same when he clearly couldn't carry that vote in the primary and didn't do enough to try, and no, Nina Turner and Killer Mike, nor Brianna Joy Grey, are not really representative of that voting bloc.

This is one of the reasons why the left must more broadly be welcoming of, and support, black leadership in all areas.

This point is broadly argued here as well:
https://www.thenation.com/article/ac...es-white-left/

[DrNewGod]

Biden absolutely won off the strength of the African American vote in certain states. We absolutely can not take for granted that Bernie would have done the same when he clearly couldn't carry that vote in the primary and didn't do enough to try, and no, Nina Turner and Killer Mike, nor Brianna Joy Grey, are not really representative of that voting bloc.

This is one of the reasons why the left must more broadly be welcoming of, and support, black leadership in all areas.

This point is broadly argued here as well:
https://www.thenation.com/article/ac...es-white-left/

Biden won off the Anti-Trump vote (and Thank God). Pretending otherwise is asking for an assbeat in the next two terms. Just ask Doug Jones.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Biden won off the Anti-Trump vote (and Thank God). Pretending otherwise is asking for an assbeat in the next two terms. Just ask Doug Jones.

America is not Alabama (thank god).

All I am saying is that, it's not a given that Bernie or Warren would have cost the Dems the Presidency or that Biden was essentially the best choice in 2020. The consequentialism i.e. because Biden won he was the best, isn't really useful for understanding. Nor is examples from UK.

I say that as someone who says that Biden's general mildness, likability, and strong record under Obama did make him a very good candidate.

Because life is complex...many things can be true at once.

[TheDarman]

Biden won off the Anti-Trump vote (and Thank God).

Part of that is certainly true.

But...it was still a close election in a number of key states.

Would Sanders have taken Arizona? Maybe. But he wouldn’t have won the endorsement of Cindy McCain, whose late husband is still widely celebrated in the state.

Would Sanders have taken Georgia? Maybe. But given his lack of strength in the voting bloc of African Americans (many of whom, when polled, state they are more fiscally conservative; certainly more so than Sanders), I don’t see him putting Georgia on the board when Biden, who was comparatively very strong with that voting bloc, barely crawled over the finish line.

I think you could make a solid argument that Sanders would have taken back Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania as well. He is a genuine populist—and he might have won those states by even larger margins than Biden. But that is a case of electoral inefficiency. Biden ended up being electorally efficient by taking five states by slim margins. That’s what wins. Not close electoral vote calls with higher margins.

Could Sanders have picked off Texas or another more diverse state? Maybe. But Florida certainly is out of the question given that voting bloc’s disgust for socialists. And Texas is probably still a few cycles from being a truly purple state.

The point is that we can play counter-factuals all day, but we don’t truly have a clear understanding of all the variables at play. Making robust statements like these are not particularly adequate to describe a complicated situation.

Pretending otherwise is asking for an assbeat in the next two terms. Just ask Doug Jones.

Anti-Trumpers were a key part of the constituency. But so were the uniquely pro-Trumpers (but non-GOPers). The next election will be different (hopefully) and fought on a different battlefield. And Doug Jones won the first time, barely, against an accused sex offender in a ruby red state during an off-year special election. The country isn’t Alabama.

[Tendrin]

America is not Alabama (thank god).

All I am saying is that, it's not a given that Bernie or Warren would have cost the Dems the Presidency or that Biden was essentially the best choice in 2020. The consequentialism i.e. because Biden won he was the best, isn't really useful for understanding. Nor is examples from UK.

I say that as someone who says that Biden's general mildness, likability, and strong record under Obama did make him a very good candidate.

Because life is complex...many things can be true at once.

Given the slenderness of the margins and Bernie's failure to bring out the youth vote, I'm not sure he would've constructed the kind of coalition that was required. I agree it's not a given. Bernie *could* have won, and we have to be careful not to view what happened as what was 'destined' to happen.... but I think the Darman's post above largely raises the right points.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Would Sanders have taken Arizona? Maybe. But he wouldn’t have won the endorsement of Cindy McCain, whose late husband is still widely celebrated in the state.

It's a myth that Cindy McCain's support or McCain's legacy and Trump and Biden's opposite relationship to that, is the major or even the crucial reason why Biden won AZ. That makes for good morality story...Trump insulted John McCain and so that bad turn led to defeat, but it's not essential. Likewise, the AZ Republican party weren't always best buds with John McCain. They censured John McCain sometime in 2014 for not being a total wingnut (so Cindy McCain getting a call for censure is essentially following her husband's footsteps). McCain's popularity in AZ is because he appealed to a wider voter base than Republican die-hards in the state. So in either case, there's not evidence to suggest that Biden won because McCain Republicans defected, because it imposes a morality schema on stuff that's way more complex.

The major reasons why Biden won Arizona was the changing demographics, growing Hispanic population there, arrival of CA transplants, and above all...the Navajos who voted and mobilized in large numbers for Biden and Mark Kelly.
https://www.vox.com/21559183/navajo-...igenous-voters

The Navajos were motivated by depredations of the COVID-19 crisis as well as aspects of Biden's platform. Bernie Sanders did pretty well with Hispanic and Latino voters and especially in Arizona during the primaries. The Navajo voter turnout was the major swing that turned things for Biden. And there's no reason why they wouldn't come for Bernie especially since he would have come up with a similar platform, since these voters don't care about personality or ideology but rather for platform (therefore making them a model on how democracy should be). Arizona is not the personal fiefdom of the McCain Family. The Navajos have a bigger claim to it than he does.

The point is that we can play counter-factuals all day, but we don’t truly have a clear understanding of all the variables at play. Making robust statements like these are not particularly adequate to describe a complicated situation.

I agree. That's why I don't agree with the idea that Biden's centrist ideas was what won him, or Bernie and Warren wouldn't have won the Presidency.

As for Georgia...to be honest, I am not sure if Biden even mattered because so much of Georgia in 2020 was about local politics. It was about Warnock who was popular there for a long time, it was about Perdue and Loeffler (locally unpopular for a long time), it was about Stacey Abrams who made it her lifelong committment to turn Georgia Blue. That stuff likely would have happened no matter who was on the ballot.

I agree it's not a given. Bernie *could* have won, and we have to be careful not to view what happened as what was 'destined' to happen.... but I think the Darman's post above largely raises the right points.

I agree. That's my main issue...we shouldn't draw conclusions and morality plays and so on.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

AOC gives a moving first-person account of her time during the Putsch. Her description of a personal encounter (which she doesn't go into detail) during the riots really drives home the real terror of these attacks.

[numberthirty]

Biden absolutely won off the strength of the African American vote in certain states. We absolutely can not take for granted that Bernie would have done the same when he clearly couldn't carry that vote in the primary and didn't do enough to try, and no, Nina Turner and Killer Mike, nor Brianna Joy Grey, are not really representative of that voting bloc.

This is one of the reasons why the left must more broadly be welcoming of, and support, black leadership in all areas.

This point is broadly argued here as well:
https://www.thenation.com/article/ac...es-white-left/

Biden won off the Anti-Trump vote (and Thank God). Pretending otherwise is asking for an assbeat in the next two terms. Just ask Doug Jones.

You know what you cannot take for granted?

That how Sanders did in a Democratic Party primary where everyone had to drop out so that Biden had a shot actually reflects how things would play out in a General.

Biden won that the primary in the party, and still needed a "Jones..."/"Moore..." situation to just barely pull of a win in a General.

[Tendrin]

You know what you cannot take for granted?

That how Sanders did in a Democratic Party primary where everyone had to drop out so that Biden had a shot actually reflects how things would play out in a General.

Biden won that the primary in the party, and still needed a "Jones..."/"Moore..." situation to just barely pull of a win in a General.

Sanders strategy was to hold 30% of the vote in a contested primary where no one did the right thing, expecting what worked for Trump would work for him. Democrats are not Republican, so did it not work. That you're still carrying on about this explains a great deal. That his campaign made *extroidinarily little outreach* towards the middle and other voters who actually decided it was political malpractice and the results showed. It didn't have to be that way but his advisors were too busy trying to blow up the party while simultaneously shouting 'it's our party now'. Unsurprisingly, that did not work.

And Trump? Trump won more votes for the GOP than any other Presidential candidate in historey... except for the other guy, so I think your ability to predict politics and be right about it has been proved, over and over again, to be badly informed.

[numberthirty]

Sanders strategy was to hold 30% of the vote in a contested primary where no one did the right thing, expecting what worked for Trump would work for him. Democrats are not Republican, so did it not work. That you're still carrying on about this explains a great deal. That his campaign made *extroidinarily little outreach* towards the middle and other voters who actually decided it was political malpractice and the results showed. It didn't have to be that way but his advisors were too busy trying to blow up the party while simultaneously shouting 'it's our party now'. Unsurprisingly, that did not work.

And Trump? Trump won more votes for the GOP than any other Presidential candidate in historey... except for the other guy, so I think your ability to predict politics and be right about it has been proved, over and over again, to be badly informed.

Biden being able to stand on some "Middle Ground..." that would bring home Ohio and Florida was a bunch of bunk even when he was going up against a guy who was taking a flame thrower to anything like a chance that he had.

Never mind that you were never going to get a better candidate to run during a General where folks needed relief than Sanders.

Meanwhile, you've got to just utterly and completely ignore how Sanders did with Latinos to build Biden up into whatever when he basically needed the exact same "Triple Lindy..." that Jones had to luck into to win.

Biden didn't deliver on what was supposed to be his ace up his sleeve, and lucked to a win.

It's good that it happened, but it's just nonsensical not to see it for what it actually was.

[Tendrin]

Biden being able to stand on some "Middle Ground..." that would bring home Ohio and Florida was a bunch of bunk even when he was going up against a guy who was taking a flame thrower to anything like a chance that he had.

Never mind that you were never going to get a better candidate to run during a General where folks needed relief than Sanders.

Meanwhile, you've got to just utterly and completely ignore how Sanders did with Latinos to build Biden up into whatever when he basically needed the exact same "Triple Lindy..." that Jones had to luck into to win.

Biden didn't deliver on what was supposed to be his ace up his sleeve, and lucked to a win.

It's good that it happened, but it's just nonsensical not to see it for what it actually was.

This is abject nonsense.

You will endlessly try to pretend away Sanders plain mistakes away while declaring that the people who actually won only 'barely' won (eight million more voters, flipped multiple states that haven't been in the dem column in a while) and try to move the goalposts by trying to pretend some argument about Ohio and Florida has merit. None of this has merit and calling it 'lucky' is just absurd. Sanders ran a bad campaign. Biden won off the strength of black voters and suburban disgust with Trump. There's *no* granting that Sanders would have won those same voters in the general and you need to stop pretending that there is.

Reflexitively defending Sanders is not helping him. In fact, the fact that his campaign was surrounded by people whose thinking is not wholly dissimilar to your's is one of the reasons he frigging lost.

When you're repeatedly wrong about something it might behoove you to recheck your initial assumptions.

First it was 'Bernie woulda won!' and now it's 'Bernie woulda won bigger!'.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

So one of the members of the Putsch was an Olympic Gold Medalist, Klete Keller:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/12/s...mid=tw-nytimes

2 time Olympic Gold winner...well if fascism won't come to the Olympics, the Olympics will go to Fascism.

Another article that talks about the upper-middle class nature of the Putsch:
https://www.inquirer.com/columnists/...-20210112.html

[numberthirty]

This is abject nonsense.

You will endlessly try to pretend away Sanders plain mistakes away while declaring that the people who actually won only 'barely' won (eight million more voters, flipped multiple states that haven't been in the dem column in a while) and try to move the goalposts by trying to pretend some argument about Ohio and Florida has merit. Literally none of this has merit, and calling it 'lucky' is just absurd. Sanders ran a bad campaign. Biden won off the strength of black voters and suburban disgust with Trump. There's *no* granting that Sanders would have won those same voters in the general and you need to stop pretending that there is.

He had about the same win that Trump had in 2016.

Which was just barely a win because his opponent was fool enough to count some chickens.

[numberthirty]

And this nonsense...