All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[Kirby101]

For me Marx was a great observer of what was wrong with society. But his remedies were not workable.

[shooshoomanjoe]

Most Americans don't really understand communism, we are conditioned just to think of them as the enemy and inherently evil, and we never spend much time learning about why certain countries turned to communism or why people continue to stay loyal to those regimes despite all the struggles they go through. But it's one of those things where it's like, if we're the ones labeling all these people we don't like as basically these orcs from Mordor, doesn't that make us the real assholes here?

Most communist countries are gone. Do the people of Cuba and North Korea have an option of not being loyal? Communism has failed. No need to go back to a system that doesn't work.

[TheDarman]

Honestly, I just wouldn't count on the loyal supporters of Joe Biden to deliver a win in the general election because, as far as I can tell, there don't actually seem to be any. Biden's entire appeal is that he's a generic Democrat that won't entertain any radical ideas and will bring civility and unity back to DC, but this image completely falls apart the minute he actually tries to give a speech, never mind have a one on one interaction with a voter. He's actually been quite lucky in the early going because he's been able to hang back while Sanders, Warren, and Bloomberg go after each other, but now that he's the frontrunner and presumptive nominee, he'll actually have to get out there and show who he really is to the public, and I'm sure his campaign and the DNC are terrified of that.

Again, I think we are underestimating how many people actually really do like him as a candidate. I understand Sanders is many people’s candidate, but I think we do him a disservice. The fact of the matter is Biden has had less a visceral reaction of distaste even among the Democratic electorate than Clinton did back in 2016. Biden is doing better with moderates and “somewhat liberal” people than she was. Judging by the fact that Sanders basically re-ran the same campaign this time, it seems clear to me that last time’s results with Sanders coming close to getting the nomination had more to do with him being “not-Clinton” than he probably initially presumed when coming back. Biden isn’t Clinton. And we need to stop pretending like he is if we are to give meaningful commentary on this. Presuming they are the same because they both fit under a myopic view of the “establishment” (spooky) is a little too reductionist.

Nothing he says would be demoralizing at all if there weren't any truth to it. The reason you're worried is because you know you're about to nominate a horrible candidate who's going to blow an easily winnable race AGAIN. Bernie could drop out tomorrow and the dirtbag left can all just keep our mouths shut, and this fundamental reality will still be true. Don't blame us when you lose.

The fact of the matter is Russian agents and Trump believed that Sanders would lose to Trump fairly easily. Trump didn’t find him a threat. Meanwhile, we launched an impeachment against Trump because he was so scared of Biden that he needed something to hit him on. The actions he took are not of a man confident on his impending victory. Now, one could argue they have miscalculated the appeal of Sanders and Biden, but that’s their perception. My perception is that analysis has shown us we lose a lot of moderates who secured Democrats victories in 2018 if we go for Bernie. That’s just a fact. The question then becomes can Sanders make up for it with a new coalition. So far, in this primary, his “revolution” coalition has failed to turn out the way moderates have for Biden.

[Jack Dracula]

Nothing he says would be demoralizing at all if there weren't any truth to it. The reason you're worried is because you know you're about to nominate a horrible candidate who's going to blow an easily winnable race AGAIN. Bernie could drop out tomorrow and the dirtbag left can all just keep our mouths shut, and this fundamental reality will still be true. Don't blame us when you lose.

It's just as easy to demoralize with with exaggerations, out-of-context arguments and outright lies, so your truth argument is groundless. Besides that, my point isn't about truthfulness, it's about the negative effects of constant negativity going into what is arguably a critical election. What people like you are doing is damaging to all our interests - yours included. What your doing is arguing in favor of cutting off your own nose to spite your face.

"Don't blame us when you lose" tells us that you don't understand that we ALL will lose in November if we don't stand together no matter who gets the nomination.

[TheDarman]

At the end of the day, Sanders was a candidate that excelled in particular conditions:

1) Lower turnout primaries (2016)
2) A plethora of undemocratic caucuses (2016 & 2020–though there are fewer now)
3) A divided field (2020)

Without at least one of these conditions holding true on a consistent basis, Sanders loses strength. Strong candidates, like Obama, can run outsider candidacies and win. But they also need to excel in more conditions than Sanders has. He just hasn’t ever been able to prove his strength in raw vote contests and loses his huge delegate leads in some states from 2016 in 2020 because of a switch from caucuses to primaries almost nationwide. With the “moderate lane” consolidated, it appears Biden has a majority of folks on his side. It seems odd to me that the folks condemning votes for the conventional wisdom of who can beat Trump were always the folks who got outnumbered when their policies were looked at for broad appeal to the Democratic base. Sure, you can find particular policies that were popular on Sanders’ side, but was his rhetoric ever popular? I somehow doubt it spoke to anyone besides those want to agree with him anyway.

[TheDarman]

It's just as easy to demoralize with with exaggerations, out-of-context arguments and outright lies, so your truth argument is groundless. Besides that, my point isn't about truthfulness, it's about the negative effects of constant negativity going into what is arguably a critical election. What people like you are doing is damaging to all our interests - yours included. What your doing is arguing in favor of cutting off your own nose to spite your face.

"Don't blame us when you lose" tells us that you don't understand that we ALL will lose in November if we don't stand together no matter who gets the nomination.

It’s funny because I had to have discussions with people I knew who went for Sanders in early primary states. They knew I wasn’t keen on him so they asked if I would be “too immature” to set aside my problems with Sanders and not vote “against Trump” should he win. And I said that I would absolutely give my vote to him. Getting nothing positive done through Congress (my take on Sanders) was certainly preferable to Trump getting another four years and installing more justices and judges, who would have their impact felt for generations yet. And now that they tide has turned and Biden looks to be the nominee, they can’t assure me of the same thing for Biden that I told them for Sanders.

Now, let’s also be clear, there are moderates who might not have had the same outlook on Sanders’ candidacy. And even more still who aren’t in the primary who might not have gone for Sanders. I just want to add that disclaimer in case anyone wanted to take my anecdotal case to prove why Sanders was more electable as a result of extortion by a particular side of our political aisle.

[PwrdOn]

Trust me, if I thought that the DNC was going to contest the general election with even a fraction of the vigor and dedication that they've shown in trying to destroy Bernie, I'd gladly line up for as many hours as I needed to and vote for whoever they nominate. But we all know that's not going to happen, once the threat of scary commie Bernie has been neutralized, the Democrats are going right back to their spineless waffling ways, going out of their way to appeal to those mythical white working class Midwesterners and shitting all over the dreams of all the people who carried Biden to the nomination.

[ed2962]

The noted star of "Cannibal Women in the Avocado Jungle of Death" really wants to give us his opinion huh ?

Thing is, Chris has been doing this stuff for years and it's been no secret. I don't believe that's real reason he was let go. I think it's him having a nervous breakdown over Bernie Sanders. All this talk about executions in Central Park and comparing Sanders's popularity to a Nazi coup really offended quite a number of people. It's one thing to have Judge Jeannie rant like that, but I think MSNBC saw Chris as starting to hurt their credibility.

[aja_christopher]

Trust me, if I thought that the DNC was going to contest the general election with even a fraction of the vigor and dedication that they've shown in trying to destroy Bernie, I'd gladly line up for as many hours as I needed to and vote for whoever they nominate. But we all know that's not going to happen, once the threat of scary commie Bernie has been neutralized, the Democrats are going right back to their spineless waffling ways, going out of their way to appeal to those mythical white working class Midwesterners and shitting all over the dreams of all the people who carried Biden to the nomination.

The DNC didn't "destroy" Sanders -- he just didn't appeal to African-American or female Democratic voters.

Stop making excuses for your candidates lack of general appeal -- it sounds like all you learned from the Sanders campaign was hatred.

[Malvolio]

So, to try to discuss something OTHER than the interminable Holy War between the Bernie Faithful and the rest of the unwashed heathen masses...

I work at an elementary school, and currently, the fourth grade classes I work with are studying the Holocaust and the rise of fascism in pre-WW2 Europe, as well as the aftermath of the war. One of the subjects that came up was Operation Paperclip, the organizer effort to smuggle Nazi scientists and thinkers into the US in order to bolster our race to space. One of the kids asked this question and, having recently watched the excellent HUNTERS show, it’s something I’m familiar with, and was wondering what people here might think:

Did Operation Paperclip help the Nazis we rescued from Justice spread their hatred here?

Now, the US was already pretty keen on fascism in the ‘30s. But it seems to me like that fascism that was being flirted with pre-Paperclip became a fully festering cancer in the years since, thanks - possibly - in large part to our ‘clever’ acquisition of - and aid in disappearing into America and abroad - a LOT of the greatest minds the Nazis had. Is it a loony conspiracy theory to note that correlation? Or does it only cross into loonytown if I start getting specific?

“Werner Von Braun secretly formed a cabal of hard right wing zealots and Nazis to take over the moon!” That’s an obvious loonytown conspiracy.
“Werner Von Braun and the other Nazi scientists brought over by our government, post-WW2, possibly never really renounced their ways and passed their beliefs to their children, grandchildren, and so on, as well as finding and lending support to white nationalist movements here where possible.” This...doesn’t seem far fetched and certainly helps explain a few things.

Is it too easy?

Is there proof to the contrary?

I always thought that Von Braun and the other German scientists were Nazis for the same reason that Oskar Schindler was a Nazi. They wanted to protect their families, who might have been in trouble if they weren't seen as loyal members of the Party. I just hope we're never at a place in America where we feel a need to register as Republicans to keep our families safe.

[TheDarman]

The DNC didn't "destroy" Sanders -- he just didn't appeal to African-American or female Democratic voters.

Stop making excuses for your candidates lack of general appeal -- it sounds like all you learned from the Sanders campaign was hatred.

It’s important we recognize this all comes down to votes, not the “progressive” crowd and not the “establishment”. Here is why Sanders will not win the nomination:

At the end of the day, Sanders was a candidate that excelled in particular conditions:

1) Lower turnout primaries (2016)
2) A plethora of undemocratic caucuses (2016 & 2020–though there are fewer now)
3) A divided field (2020)

Without at least one of these conditions holding true on a consistent basis, Sanders loses strength. Strong candidates, like Obama, can run outsider candidacies and win. But they also need to excel in more conditions than Sanders has. He just hasn’t ever been able to prove his strength in raw vote contests and loses his huge delegate leads in some states from 2016 in 2020 because of a switch from caucuses to primaries almost nationwide. With the “moderate lane” consolidated, it appears Biden has a majority of folks on his side. It seems odd to me that the folks condemning votes for the conventional wisdom of who can beat Trump were always the folks who got outnumbered when their policies were looked at for broad appeal to the Democratic base. Sure, you can find particular policies that were popular on Sanders’ side, but was his rhetoric ever popular? I somehow doubt it spoke to anyone besides those want to agree with him anyway.

And, notice, it has nothing to do with the DNC doing anything. At most, you can argue they saw Sanders’ strength in the caucuses last time and pushed measures to transform caucuses to primaries in individual states. And how awful! They made the overall nomination process more democratic! Ironically, it is the democratization of the process that hurt the candidate whose supporters are saying the process was rigged against him. Indeed, it seems that the nomination process was rigged towards Sanders in 2016 and it is less rigged towards him this time.

[Billy Batson]

Jesse Jackson endorses Bernie Sanders for president

[Gray Lensman]

At the end of the day, Sanders was a candidate that excelled in particular conditions:

1) Lower turnout primaries (2016)
2) A plethora of undemocratic caucuses (2016 & 2020–though there are fewer now)
3) A divided field (2020)

Without at least one of these conditions holding true on a consistent basis, Sanders loses strength. Strong candidates, like Obama, can run outsider candidacies and win. But they also need to excel in more conditions than Sanders has. He just hasn’t ever been able to prove his strength in raw vote contests and loses his huge delegate leads in some states from 2016 in 2020 because of a switch from caucuses to primaries almost nationwide. With the “moderate lane” consolidated, it appears Biden has a majority of folks on his side. It seems odd to me that the folks condemning votes for the conventional wisdom of who can beat Trump were always the folks who got outnumbered when their policies were looked at for broad appeal to the Democratic base. Sure, you can find particular policies that were popular on Sanders’ side, but was his rhetoric ever popular? I somehow doubt it spoke to anyone besides those want to agree with him anyway.

I'll add in a 4th item. Hilary Clinton was a unique candidate with her own unique negatives ranging from the perceptions from a decades long smear campaign against her by the right to her own propensity for self inflicted wounds such as her email server, the perception that everything she did in government over those 20some years was to advance to the White House again to her own toxic surrogates (such as one of themractically calling women Bernie voters traitors to their gender) with Bernie being the ONLY alternative to her. No one in 2020 had quite the negatives attached to them that Clinton did, (maybe Tulsi for other reasons) and until recently there were multiple non-Bernie options if you didn't have Biden as your first choice.

That last part I'll mention again for a few others on the board - I don't think Biden was the first choice of anyone who posts here. He was obviously higher on the list for most of them than Bernie was, but they are already settling for someone other than who they wanted first.

[Gray Lensman]

I always thought that Von Braun and the other German scientists were Nazis for the same reason that Oskar Schindler was a Nazi. They wanted to protect their families, who might have been in trouble if they weren't seen as loyal members of the Party. I just hope we're never at a place in America where we feel a need to register as Republicans to keep our families safe.

I always thought they were more amoral than anything else. The science came first for many of them, and being a decent human being came second. As long as the science went forward, I think many of them (although not all) would have worked for any government which could have advanced their goals.

Although I wholeheartedly agree with that last statement no matter which of us is right about the rocket men.

[jetengine]

Honestly, I just wouldn't count on the loyal supporters of Joe Biden to deliver a win in the general election because, as far as I can tell, there don't actually seem to be any.

So....like Bernie voters then ? Considering atm Biden is outpacing him. Where are the loyal Bernyites ? Where are the votes ?