Jump to content

Joe Biden beats Donald Trump, officially making Trump a one-term twice impeached, twice popular-vote losing president


Recommended Posts

The argument goes that Bernie has only been attacked with kid gloves. Some Democrats believe that he is a certain loss against Trump whenever the attacks are amped up 10x, so they want to preempt that so they defeat trump in 2020. This will be spun as the establishment and neoliberals being worried that they are losing control, but I believe any reasonable person looking at the situation should be able to admit that betting on the younger demographic for a November win has historically been a loser and is risky. The problem for these concerned Dems is Biden sucks and will be destroyed just as bad or worse with Hunter and his record and every other pragmatic democrat has no traction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

The argument goes that Bernie has only been attacked with kid gloves. Some Democrats believe that he is a certain loss against Trump whenever the attacks are amped up 10x, so they want to preempt that so they defeat trump in 2020. This will be spun as the establishment and neoliberals being worried that they are losing control, but I believe any reasonable person looking at the situation should be able to admit that betting on the younger demographic for a November win has historically been a loser and is risky. The problem for these concerned Dems is Biden sucks and will be destroyed just as bad or worse with Hunter and his record and every other pragmatic democrat has no traction. 

If Bernie ends up being the nominee, it's going to be pretty interesting to watch--it'll essentially be a national shouting match over 'socialism' until election day.

 

I do think Sanders will have to up his game; thus far, every time I've seen him asked a question about what makes 'democratic socialism' preferable to 'capitalism', or what 'democratic socialism' even really is, he usually degenerates into spouting vague social democratic platitudes, effectively dodging the question.  

 

That's one of the more irritating things about both him and AOC--they don't really seem to have a robust theoretical grasp of either socialism or capitalism.  Their definitions for both are reductive and cryptically ahistorical.   And that could become a problem once the Republicans start trotting out the ghost of Mao and Stalin.  Sanders will have to get very specific very quickly about why he's not like them, and what makes his 'revolution' different from the socialist revolution the Russians carried out in the name of Marx and Engels, which the average American most certainly does not want to see repeated on their home soil.

 

If he can reassure people that he's essentially just talking about an idealized capitalism with a beefed-up welfare state--that his model is FDR, not the Soviets--he might have a decent shot.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Signifyin(g)Monkey said:

If Bernie ends up being the nominee, it's going to be pretty interesting to watch--it'll essentially be a national shouting match over 'socialism' until election day.

 

I do think Sanders will have to up his game; thus far, every time I've seen him asked a question about what makes 'democratic socialism' preferable to 'capitalism', or what 'democratic socialism' even really is, he usually degenerates into spouting vague social democratic platitudes, effectively dodging the question.  

 

That's one of the more irritating things about both him and AOC--they don't really seem to have a robust theoretical grasp of either socialism or capitalism.  Their definitions for both are reductive and cryptically ahistorical.   And that could become a problem once the Republicans start trotting out the ghost of Mao and Stalin.  Sanders will have to get very specific very quickly about why he's not like them, and what makes his 'revolution' different from the socialist revolution the Russians carried out in the name of Marx and Engels, which the average American most certainly does not want to see repeated on their home soil.

 

If he can reassure people that he's essentially just talking about an idealized capitalism with a beefed-up welfare state--that his model is FDR, not the Soviets--he might have a decent shot.

 

I agree, he has a decent shot. His policies seem to be better described as social democracy. Why does he not use that label? He likes being called a socialist, so maybe we should just believe that his end goal is for the state to seize more industries. He held such views in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

I agree, he has a decent shot. His policies seem to be better described as social democracy. Why does he not use that label? He likes being called a socialist, so maybe we should just believe that his end goal is for the state to seize more industries. He held such views in the past.

Yes, and I expect the fondness for nationalization he expressed in the past will be brought up on the campaign trail.

 

It will be interesting to see how he responds, since a lot of the working class people he's claiming to be advocating for could conceivably be hurt by the nationalization of industries like healthcare or fossil fuels--and the Republicans are likely to point this out in the loudest, most bombastic terms possible.  (Then again, there are still a lot of pro-Trump farmers whose margins are being flogged by his tariffs, so who knows how the allegiances play out) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Massdriver said:

The argument goes that Bernie has only been attacked with kid gloves. Some Democrats believe that he is a certain loss against Trump whenever the attacks are amped up 10x, so they want to preempt that so they defeat trump in 2020. This will be spun as the establishment and neoliberals being worried that they are losing control, but I believe any reasonable person looking at the situation should be able to admit that betting on the younger demographic for a November win has historically been a loser and is risky. The problem for these concerned Dems is Biden sucks and will be destroyed just as bad or worse with Hunter and his record and every other pragmatic democrat has no traction. 

I really think the Dem "establishment" donor class would rather have Trump get re-elected than have Sanders as President.  I think they'd even be OK if Biden lost to Trump.  That way their gravy train keeps on pouring & their way of life ticks on.  Sanders would work to completely flush out all of the corporate-friendly influence at the DNC & kick the lobbyists/donor class to the curb.  He'll be out there campaigning for an agenda he ran on and if you're a democrat or even a republican that's against it, he's going to show up to campaign for a primary challenger that support's him. I don't think we have fully realized how fierce Sander's is going to be with the movement he's building.  This man is going to be a very vocal fighter & use that bully pulpit like it's fucking Thor's hammer.  He's rallying people around popular ideas & telling them that their voice is bigger than they realize. The establishment/donor class doesn't want him to flip their world upside down & lose their political influence. I think the kids gloves will be coming off very soon, especially if he wins these upcoming states.  I think it's about to get really ugly. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

I'd like a 2008 repeat, where two big elections in a row (2006/2008, 2018/2020) Democrats kick ass, but without the 2010 repeat. :p 

 

I was flying out of the country the day after the 2006 election. I was flying back home the day after the 2008 election (sent in my absentee ballot). Those were great moments. But my favorite moment was actually 2012 when Obama won re-election against Mitt Romney. I was in my senior year at BYU and you could just feel the depression on campus. It gave me a raging boner.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya know, the article itself isn't that weird? It just goes into the anti-Semitic attacks and Jewish conspiracies connecting socialism and Jews (as the Nazis did, which right-wingers don't seem to get when they call Nazis left-wing), and this seems to be the thesis:

 

Quote

Sanders’s supporters think his outsider appeal can bring in disaffected voters. But anti-Semitism says that it is non-Jews who have been made outsiders, and that taking the country back requires uniting against Jews.

 

In an economy where more people feel like outsiders than insiders, this is a message with dangerous appeal — and Jews aren’t the only ones at risk. The Judeo-Bolshevist myth doesn’t just preach that Jews are bad; it says that the search for “impossible equality” is itself morally suspect. The reality is that defending Jews and defending the right of all people to fight for a fair economy will be one struggle.

 

Anti-Semitism poses a threat to Democrats in 2020. The answer is not to hide from it. When anti-Semitism increases, even non-Jews can’t escape it. Just ask Franklin D. Roosevelt, who presided during the last historic rise of American anti-Semitism. Roosevelt wasn’t Jewish, but that didn’t protect him from consistent rumors that he was secretly a Jew or that he was a puppet of his Jewish advisers. Nor was this phenomenon limited to the 1930s — look at the anti-Semitic rhetoric used in 2016 against Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, both by Republican candidate Donald Trump and his supporters.

 

Americans will need a candidate who can slay this dragon, a leader who understands that the answer to both anti-Semitism and inequality in America is to face them head-on. Such a candidate will need supporters who grasp how anti-Semitism works in America: its deep roots, its power to divide movements and its strategic role in silencing people who know how possible equality really is.

 

Not really that weird. I guess what WaPo typed in the Tweet took away from what seems to be a decent article from a Jewish author.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GeneticBlueprint said:

 

I was flying out of the country the day after the 2006 election. I was flying back home the day after the 2008 election (sent in my absentee ballot). Those were great moments. But my favorite moment was actually 2012 when Obama won re-election against Mitt Romney. I was in my senior year at BYU and you could just feel the depression on campus. It gave me a raging boner.

 

I still remember the people crying about Romney's loss.

 

KwhyYTc3EWNFj4sXhA8fjInXcjlKVeyT-kcEkIc3

article-2230329-15EEAB95000005DC-390_634

 

2SGGT81YwKlva_tX8Usm3D1ZwSHeVtjpl6ZCePOg

 

Republicans-lose-election-008.jpg?width=

 

hqdefault.jpg

 

When someone brings up "crying liberal snowflakes in 2016," I'll post one of these pics and get them to laugh at it (one without Obama/Romney's names on it), and then bring up that they're laughing at Republicans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

I still remember the people crying about Romney's loss.

 

KwhyYTc3EWNFj4sXhA8fjInXcjlKVeyT-kcEkIc3

article-2230329-15EEAB95000005DC-390_634

 

2SGGT81YwKlva_tX8Usm3D1ZwSHeVtjpl6ZCePOg

 

Republicans-lose-election-008.jpg?width=

 

hqdefault.jpg

 

When someone brings up "crying liberal snowflakes in 2016," I'll post one of these pics and get them to laugh at it (one without Obama/Romney's names on it), and then bring up that they're laughing at Republicans.


 

0-FF8-B871-EDF2-4-BE2-8-E93-9-AE95-F064-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

Bloomberg hits 12 percent, surpasses Buttigieg in new national poll

 

Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg hit double digits in a new Morning Consult poll on Tuesday, marking the latest sign of his campaign's growing support since launching in November. 

 

Twelve percent of Democratic primary voters supported Bloomberg in the poll, putting the former New York City mayor above former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 7 percent, businessman Andrew Yang at 5 percent and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) at 3 percent. 

 

Former Vice President Joe Biden led the field with 29 percent support, followed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) at 23 percent. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) rounded out the poll's top three spots with 14 percent support. 

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/480236-bloomberg-hits-double-digits-in-new-national-poll

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bloomberg plays all the time here in Florida. I'm very curious how his poll numbers will be affected after Iowa and New Hampshire. His strategy is to skip those states and focus on Super Tuesday. That's been done by candidates who didn't have his money (Giuliani 2008) and has failed, but his money is large. No debates, unlikely wins or news cycles in the early states, but tons of money for ads for Super Tuesday.

 

I'll be verrryyyy curious to see if he holds after the early states or if he's forgotten despite the money advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...