ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 2020 elections , Bernie Sanders , presidential candidates

Reply
Old 22nd February 2019, 09:41 AM   #201
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,470
Originally Posted by Lambchops View Post
What exactly was "non-progressive" about Clinton? You mean besides the fact that she was a centre-right corporatist more interested in defending the status quo and her filthy-rich backers rather than the interests of USAian workers?

Come on man, there is nothing even remotely "progressive" about the establishment US Dems. They are bought and paid for, just like the Repubs.
Keep in mind that this person you labeled a "center-right corporatist":

- Wanted an increase in the federal minimum wage. (https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-minimum-wage/)

- Supported increased banking regulations, including enforcing rules to prevent banks from taking big risks with other people's money, better funding for regulatory agencies, and additional punishments for banking executives who break financial laws. (https://www.politico.com/agenda/stor...-street-000175)

- Supported paid family leave, supported with taxes on the wealthy. (https://qz.com/782652/hillary-clinto...t-needs-to-be/)

- Proposed increased taxes on the wealthy, including the removal of deductions that primarily benefit the rich, and a 4% tax surcharge on families earning more than $5 million. (https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-...the-ultra-rich)

Tell me, just how many right wing politicians are calling for higher taxes on the wealthy, and MORE banking regulations?

Just because she doesn't want to throw every rich person in jail or burn all the banks to the ground, doesn't mean that she wasn't interested in changing the "status quo". Its possible to want changes to the economy that benefits lower and middle class people without going all Bernie Sanders and burning everything to the ground.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 09:47 AM   #202
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,073
Originally Posted by Lambchops View Post
Lol, right.
You had a winky emoji, I thought you were joking. When I get back from work...
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 09:48 AM   #203
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,905
Originally Posted by Donal View Post
Can we all agree that "better than Donald Trump" is not a high enough bar?
The bar isn't "better than Trump": it would be hard to find anyone worse than Trump outside a Super-Max.
The bar is "able to beat Trump in an election".
More details of plans means more surface for attack, more chance for Fake News bolstered by a fragment of actual fact.

I would consider it a wiser strategy if Candidates kept their plans to themselves until the start of the Debates.
__________________
Careful! That tree's bark is worse than its bite.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 10:06 AM   #204
Donal
Illuminator
 
Donal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,828
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
The bar isn't "better than Trump": it would be hard to find anyone worse than Trump outside a Super-Max.
The bar is "able to beat Trump in an election".
More details of plans means more surface for attack, more chance for Fake News bolstered by a fragment of actual fact.
They will invent things to smear a candidate with. It doesn't matter. The right wing talking heads are not interested to relaying facts and the right wing sheep aren't interested in hearing them. Stop worrying about what they will say.

Quote:
I would consider it a wiser strategy if Candidates kept their plans to themselves until the start of the Debates.
No, the plans should come out and be criticized. Let the candidates address the perceived flaws and weaknesses.
Donal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 10:20 AM   #205
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,927
Originally Posted by Donal View Post
They will invent things to smear a candidate with. It doesn't matter. The right wing talking heads are not interested to relaying facts and the right wing sheep aren't interested in hearing them. Stop worrying about what they will say.
It's not as simple as that.

While what you say is true for most candidates, the COMMIE charge sticks easier to some than others. It sticks a lot easier to candidates who self-identify as "socialists", and who in the past cut slack for a dictator like Castro, and who currently is cutting slack for a dictator like Maduro.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 11:04 AM   #206
portlandatheist
Illuminator
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,134
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post

I would consider it a wiser strategy if Candidates kept their plans to themselves until the start of the Debates.
It probably is intentional and strategic. It is also cowardly. The public should be having an open debate about single payer health care, a plan to deal with climate change, globalization, immigration, etc.
portlandatheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 11:18 AM   #207
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,905
Originally Posted by portlandatheist View Post
It probably is intentional and strategic. It is also cowardly. The public should be having an open debate about single payer health care, a plan to deal with climate change, globalization, immigration, etc.
I disagree.
Experts should be the ones checking the plans for flaws and potential - feasibility isn't determined by majority vote.
__________________
Careful! That tree's bark is worse than its bite.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 12:41 PM   #208
portlandatheist
Illuminator
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,134
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
I disagree.
Experts should be the ones checking the plans for flaws and potential - feasibility isn't determined by majority vote.
But don't you feel it is also important to understand a candidates relationship with expertise and established knowledge? Once aspect of populism, and certainly of Trumpism, is the contempt of expertise and the celebration of going with your gut instincts instead of being data driven or expertise driven.
Tom Nichols book "The Death of Expertise" is a great exploration of this aspect of populism and how we can square democracy and the problem of when people think democracy is supersedes truth and actual knowledge.
From his book:
Quote:
And this, sadly, is the state of modern America. Citizens no longer
understand democracy to mean a condition of political equality,
in which one person gets one vote, and every individual is no more
and no less equal in the yes of the law. Rather, Americans now think
of democracy as a state of actual equality, in which every opinion is as
good as any other on almost any subject under the sun. Feelings are
more important than facts: if people think vaccines are harmful, or if
they believe that half of the US budget is going to foreign aid, then it is
"undemocratic" and "elitist" to contradict them.
Bernie Sanders isn't only wrong about an issue like trade, tariffs and protectionism but he isn't open to listening to what knowledgeable economists have to say or to look at the data. He isn't nearly as bad as Trump, who knows more about everything than anybody else, but he has it too to some degree also.
portlandatheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 01:10 PM   #209
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,905
The US is in desperate need of a Technocratic government.
__________________
Careful! That tree's bark is worse than its bite.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 02:06 PM   #210
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 44,596
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
It's not as simple as that.

While what you say is true for most candidates, the COMMIE charge sticks easier to some than others. It sticks a lot easier to candidates who self-identify as "socialists", and who in the past cut slack for a dictator like Castro, and who currently is cutting slack for a dictator like Maduro.
And Sanders continued..support for Maduro has caused the first real problem in his campaign.
ANd that is a problem I have with Sanders...he seems unable to see evil and stupidity on the left end of the political spectrum..and I think a President needs to be able to see extremism on both ends of the political spectrum. Obama was never afraid to criticize evil on the left end of the spectrum, though he was a liberal.

And I have a basic problem with the Cult of Bernie:To his followers he is GOd and no do no wrong and is incapable of making a mistake. I have had more then enough of that crap over the past two years.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 02:07 PM   #211
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 44,596
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Keep in mind that this person you labeled a "center-right corporatist":

- Wanted an increase in the federal minimum wage. (https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-minimum-wage/)

- Supported increased banking regulations, including enforcing rules to prevent banks from taking big risks with other people's money, better funding for regulatory agencies, and additional punishments for banking executives who break financial laws. (https://www.politico.com/agenda/stor...-street-000175)

- Supported paid family leave, supported with taxes on the wealthy. (https://qz.com/782652/hillary-clinto...t-needs-to-be/)

- Proposed increased taxes on the wealthy, including the removal of deductions that primarily benefit the rich, and a 4% tax surcharge on families earning more than $5 million. (https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-...the-ultra-rich)

Tell me, just how many right wing politicians are calling for higher taxes on the wealthy, and MORE banking regulations?

Just because she doesn't want to throw every rich person in jail or burn all the banks to the ground, doesn't mean that she wasn't interested in changing the "status quo". Its possible to want changes to the economy that benefits lower and middle class people without going all Bernie Sanders and burning everything to the ground.
TO some people, anybody to the right of Pol Pot or Mao Tse Tung is a evil tool of the capitalists....
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 02:38 PM   #212
portlandatheist
Illuminator
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,134
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
And Sanders continued..support for Maduro has caused the first real problem in his campaign.
ANd that is a problem I have with Sanders...he seems unable to see evil and stupidity on the left end of the political spectrum..and I think a President needs to be able to see extremism on both ends of the political spectrum. Obama was never afraid to criticize evil on the left end of the spectrum, though he was a liberal.

And I have a basic problem with the Cult of Bernie:To his followers he is GOd and no do no wrong and is incapable of making a mistake. I have had more then enough of that crap over the past two years.
Another super annoying aspect of the Cult of Bernie was the complaint that the primaries were rigged(Sanders loves that word nearly as much as Trump) and indulgence in Seth Rich conspiracy theories.
portlandatheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 03:30 PM   #213
Axiom_Blade
Master Poster
 
Axiom_Blade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,979
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
For three years I've had Bernie Bros attacking me on facebook and Twitter calling me "genocide supporter" and "murderer" because I voted Hillary in the general election and not Stein. You see, it goes like this, anyone not Bernie is a centralist, establishment or "globalist" and they are all in favor of genocide and war for profit or something. All I know is that they find out I voted Hillary and I get invective thrown at me until I block them.
People were mean to you? On Facebook and Twitter, you say?

If I were to judge a candidate by their supporters, Hillary still wouldn't have gotten my vote, either. Some of the most toxic stuff I've ever heard came from Hillary supporters. A lot of them didn't sound much different from the MAGA-hats.

Quote:
I'm just through with it. His supporters online are little more than bullies that refuse to actually talk policy and go straight to screaming "murderer" if you are not immediately all in on Bernie and disagree at all that he was robbed of his rightful nomination and dear god help you if they find out you voted for Hillary and not Stein.
As a Stein voter, I can assure you that I didn't get hugs and flowers from the Democrats.

Here's what I find so funny about Democrats. I used to think that they were about pragmatism. Ideology be damned. You're supposed to back the candidate who can win. Winning is the only thing that matters! I think that's backwards morally, but I can kind of see where they're coming from. You want to put up a lesser-evil candidate who can beat the greater-evil Republican.

What Bernie revealed is that the whole "pragmatism" thing is a load of bull. Both in 2016 and 2020, Bernie's their most compelling candidate, and the one most likely to beat Trump. The Democrats apparently aren't interested in beating Trump, though. They want a candidate who is pure, and Bernie doesn't fit the bill. He's not a "real Democrat", he's too white, too old, too male, etc. etc. They would rather lose with the "right" candidate than win with the "wrong" one. In other words, they're doing exactly what they accuse the Green Party of doing.
Axiom_Blade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 03:34 PM   #214
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,254
Originally Posted by Axiom_Blade View Post
They want a candidate who is pure, and Bernie doesn't fit the bill. He's not a "real Democrat", he's too white, too old, too male, etc. etc. They would rather lose with the "right" candidate than win with the "wrong" one.
It wasn't really the white male thing - the real centrist purity test is just pleasing the donor class. Nothing more, nothing less.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 03:38 PM   #215
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,754
Besides his political position how is it going to play with the women and ethnic minority voters that the Democrats answer to a 70-something year old white incumbent is a 70-something white male challenger?
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 03:40 PM   #216
portlandatheist
Illuminator
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,134
Originally Posted by Axiom_Blade View Post
People were mean to you? On Facebook and Twitter, you say?

If I were to judge a candidate by their supporters, Hillary still wouldn't have gotten my vote, either. Some of the most toxic stuff I've ever heard came from Hillary supporters. A lot of them didn't sound much different from the MAGA-hats.



As a Stein voter, I can assure you that I didn't get hugs and flowers from the Democrats.

Here's what I find so funny about Democrats. I used to think that they were about pragmatism. Ideology be damned. You're supposed to back the candidate who can win. Winning is the only thing that matters! I think that's backwards morally, but I can kind of see where they're coming from. You want to put up a lesser-evil candidate who can beat the greater-evil Republican.

What Bernie revealed is that the whole "pragmatism" thing is a load of bull. Both in 2016 and 2020, Bernie's their most compelling candidate, and the one most likely to beat Trump. The Democrats apparently aren't interested in beating Trump, though. They want a candidate who is pure, and Bernie doesn't fit the bill. He's not a "real Democrat", he's too white, too old, too male, etc. etc. They would rather lose with the "right" candidate than win with the "wrong" one. In other words, they're doing exactly what they accuse the Green Party of doing.
from article:
Quote:
In 2016, he upset Clinton in both Michigan and Wisconsin, which in the general election she desperately needed to win, but capitulated. Sanders would have won both states, as he did in the primaries. After all, he defeated Clinton by a total of 152,337 votes in Michigan and Wisconsin. Clinton lost both to Trump by a total of 33,452 votes. Had Sanders been the nominee, Dems would have won both by a margin of ≈100k.
Am I missing something here? How does knowing how much more votes Sanders received in the primaries translate to he would have won in the general election in those places? I'm going to vote for whoever is on the Dem ticket, even Sanders, despite who I support in the primaries.
Is there actual data here that would tell us Sanders would have won these states had he been on the ticket?
portlandatheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 03:44 PM   #217
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,470
Originally Posted by Axiom_Blade View Post
Here's what I find so funny about Democrats. I used to think that they were about pragmatism. Ideology be damned. You're supposed to back the candidate who can win. Winning is the only thing that matters! I think that's backwards morally, but I can kind of see where they're coming from. You want to put up a lesser-evil candidate who can beat the greater-evil Republican.

What Bernie revealed is that the whole "pragmatism" thing is a load of bull. Both in 2016 and 2020, Bernie's their most compelling candidate, and the one most likely to beat Trump. The Democrats apparently aren't interested in beating Trump, though. They want a candidate who is pure, and Bernie doesn't fit the bill.
This claim has been made before, and it has been debunked before.

Basically, while people may point to how popular Sanders was, Sanders has never been subject to the sort of widespread attacks that Hillary was subject to.

(I should also point out that some of the claims in that article you referred to were out and out wrong. For example, it claimed that Sanders was popular among minorities, but it was actually Clinton who earned the most votes from minority voters. See: http://graphics.wsj.com/elections/2016/how-clinton-won/)

See:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=108
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=113
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 03:48 PM   #218
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,254
Sometimes attacks are effective, but other times (like the ones on AOC) they basically backfire.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 03:49 PM   #219
Axiom_Blade
Master Poster
 
Axiom_Blade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,979
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Basically, while people may point to how popular Sanders was, Sanders has never been subject to the sort of widespread attacks that Hillary was subject to.
Sure. Maybe the Republicans will invent a time machine to go back and start attacking Bernie in 1996, like they did with Hillary.

Besides, if the Republicans can just defeat anybody with "widespread attacks", then why does it matter who gets nominated?
Axiom_Blade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 03:54 PM   #220
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,470
Originally Posted by portlandatheist View Post
What Bernie revealed is that the whole "pragmatism" thing is a load of bull. Both in 2016 and 2020, Bernie's their most compelling candidate, and the one most likely to beat Trump. The Democrats apparently aren't interested in beating Trump, though. They want a candidate who is pure, and Bernie doesn't fit the bill. He's not a "real Democrat", he's too white, too old, too male, etc. etc. They would rather lose with the "right" candidate than win with the "wrong" one. In other words, they're doing exactly what they accuse the Green Party of doing.

from article:
In 2016, he upset Clinton in both Michigan and Wisconsin, which in the general election she desperately needed to win, but capitulated. Sanders would have won both states, as he did in the primaries. After all, he defeated Clinton by a total of 152,337 votes in Michigan and Wisconsin. Clinton lost both to Trump by a total of 33,452 votes. Had Sanders been the nominee, Dems would have won both by a margin of ≈100k.

Am I missing something here? How does knowing how much more votes Sanders received in the primaries translate to he would have won in the general election in those places?
It is certainly questionable logic, as it ignores the fact that a politician needs to appeal to voters outside the party as well, so success within a primary is no guarantee of success in a general election.

Frankly, that whole article read like a Bernie Sanders campaign ad. Some of its claims are completely bunk (like Sanders' appeal to minorities.) Some of its claims seem to apply equally to Sanders and Clinton (e.g. both believe in global warming). And much of it seems to be pretty empty rhetoric, of the "Look at Sanders! He's authentic!" type.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 03:55 PM   #221
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 44,596
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
It wasn't really the white male thing - the real centrist purity test is just pleasing the donor class. Nothing more, nothing less.
What total BS.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 03:57 PM   #222
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 44,596
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
It is certainly questionable logic, as it ignores the fact that a politician needs to appeal to voters outside the party as well, so success within a primary is no guarantee of success in a general election.

Frankly, that whole article read like a Bernie Sanders campaign ad. Some of its claims are completely bunk (like Sanders' appeal to minorities.) Some of its claims seem to apply equally to Sanders and Clinton (e.g. both believe in global warming). And much of it seems to be pretty empty rhetoric, of the "Look at Sanders! He's authentic!" type.
I also think writing off the whole idea of going after the centrist votes is insane;they decide elections.
This idea that the centrist voter is dead is just pure delusion;comvined with a devout belief in a Lost Tribe of Radical Left voters it's a recipe for disaster at the polls.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 04:00 PM   #223
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,470
Originally Posted by Axiom_Blade View Post
Quote:
Basically, while people may point to how popular Sanders was, Sanders has never been subject to the sort of widespread attacks that Hillary was subject to
.
Sure. Maybe the Republicans will invent a time machine to go back and start attacking Bernie in 1996, like they did with Hillary.
Why would they need to?

Sanders has plenty of skeletons in his closet. The republicans would have no problems dragging them out before the general election. Plenty of time to remind people how Sanders was a thief, who hung out at a rally where people were chanting "Die Yankees".
Quote:
Besides, if the Republicans can just defeat anybody with "widespread attacks", then why does it matter who gets nominated?
They can't necessarily defeat "anybody", but that doesn't mean that Sander's popularity during the primaries would be maintained throughout a general election.

Any claim of "look how popular he was in "2015/early2016" is irrelevant.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 04:07 PM   #224
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,470
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Sometimes attacks are effective, but other times (like the ones on AOC) they basically backfire.
I agree that the attacks on AOC have not been successful.

But with Sanders, there was a mountain of material to use against him. If the whole stealing electricity thing didn't get traction, then trot out the "Yankies die" comment.

Oh, and by the way.... you know how all the BernieBros are claiming "America is embracing socialist policies"? The problem is, people may like the idea of single payer health care, etc. (at least the vague notion of it), but they still don't like the word socialist.

From: https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-amer...not-vote-for-a
In a new Hill.TV/HarrisX American Barometer poll released Tuesday, an overwhelming majority of respondents, 76 percent, said they would not vote for a “socialist” political candidate, while only 24 percent of those polled said they would vote for a socialist candidate.

Now you could complain about the logical disconnect of people liking socialist policies but not liking the word socialist, but whether you like it or not is irrelevant. That's what the politicians have to deal with.

And Sanders used the term 'socialist' to describe himself.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 04:12 PM   #225
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,470
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Quote:
It wasn't really the white male thing - the real centrist purity test is just pleasing the donor class. Nothing more, nothing less.
What total BS.
WE really should come up with a 'bingo' card, with all the various words and phrases that Bernie fans like to use.

Donor Class, purity test, white male, corporatist, status quo
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 04:14 PM   #226
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,927
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Sometimes attacks are effective, but other times (like the ones on AOC) they basically backfire.
The day that general election voters in MI, WI, and PA weigh in on Bernie or AOC is the day I'll give this credence.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 04:19 PM   #227
portlandatheist
Illuminator
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,134
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
It wasn't really the white male thing - the real centrist purity test is just pleasing the donor class. Nothing more, nothing less.
How do we recognize this "donor class" and do we differentiate between them and the "authentic" citizen? These type of comments remind me of this article about populism:
Quote:
here is a solid consensus among political scientists as to the general outlines of what qualifies as populism.1 Populists target a country’s corrupt elites in the name of “the people”, an authentic core of the population whose interest are no longer adequately represented by said elites. By invoking an authentic “people” as their natural constituency, populists paint those who disagree with them as illegitimate—either as hopelessly corrupted by financial interests, or as elements in some way “foreign” to society, bent on undermining its health. And by calling into question the responsiveness of elites to the concerns of these “true” people (their natural constituency), populists question the legitimacy of the institutions that constitute liberal democracies. In other words, populists claim, democratic representation itself has been corrupted by out-of-touch elites, and only someone with a direct connection to the authentic people can properly speak for them. Though sometimes populist parties persist as collectives, often a charismatic leader who most clearly communes with the will of the people emerges. This can lead to the centralization of power within the government, and the repression of dissenting views in the broader society.
It is one of the many things that rubs me the wrong way about Sanders, his references to an ephemeral and vague class of people who have different interests than the rest of us, and you seem to be painting centrists as illegitimate and corrupted by this "donor class"
portlandatheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 04:20 PM   #228
mgidm86
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,526
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Keep in mind that this person you labeled a "center-right corporatist":

- Wanted an increase in the federal minimum wage. (https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-minimum-wage/)

- Supported increased banking regulations, including enforcing rules to prevent banks from taking big risks with other people's money, better funding for regulatory agencies, and additional punishments for banking executives who break financial laws. (https://www.politico.com/agenda/stor...-street-000175)

- Supported paid family leave, supported with taxes on the wealthy. (https://qz.com/782652/hillary-clinto...t-needs-to-be/)

- Proposed increased taxes on the wealthy, including the removal of deductions that primarily benefit the rich, and a 4% tax surcharge on families earning more than $5 million. (https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-...the-ultra-rich)

Tell me, just how many right wing politicians are calling for higher taxes on the wealthy, and MORE banking regulations?

Just because she doesn't want to throw every rich person in jail or burn all the banks to the ground, doesn't mean that she wasn't interested in changing the "status quo". Its possible to want changes to the economy that benefits lower and middle class people without going all Bernie Sanders and burning everything to the ground.

Bullcrap. Hillary Clinton's opinions blow with the wind. That is one of her biggest problems. Go back some years and see how she really feels about corporations, and any other hot topic of the day like gay marriage, the border.

Hillary Clinton, Progressive?!?!

Up until maybe 2010 - against gay marriage.
“No.” When asked if she is for gay marriage. “I believe that marriage is not just a bond, but a sacred bond between a man and a woman.”

Sacred! Sounds like a Republican.
__________________
Franklin understands certain kickbacks you obtain unfairly are legal liabilities; however, a risky deed's almost never detrimental despite extra external pressures.
mgidm86 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 04:40 PM   #229
Axiom_Blade
Master Poster
 
Axiom_Blade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,979
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
I also think writing off the whole idea of going after the centrist votes is insane;they decide elections.
This idea that the centrist voter is dead is just pure delusion;comvined with a devout belief in a Lost Tribe of Radical Left voters it's a recipe for disaster at the polls.
What's confusing is that what is actually "centrist" now is what the media calls "far left".
Axiom_Blade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 05:37 PM   #230
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,254
Originally Posted by portlandatheist View Post
How do we recognize this "donor class" and do we differentiate between them and the "authentic" citizen?
They tend to be wealthier than average, and people in congress (and their staff) spend a lot of time talking to them.
See:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.b272484c7ef3

Quote:
"Call time" is not time spent calling your family, or think tank experts, or ordinary constituents. It's time spent calling donors. Strategic outreach is, of course, also time you can spend with donors, and if your constituent visits include constituents who are donors, then all the better!

When we worry about money in politics, we tend to worry about a system that's akin to bribery. That happens, but it's rarer then you might think. Typically, politicians raise money from interests they're already relatively aligned with. Money brings the legislator and his benefactor closer into alignment, and it certainly helps concentrate a politician's attention on issues they might otherwise have ignored,...
Quote:
All that would be enough to fill a completely empty schedule. But all that's impossible if you're spending four hours dialing for dollars each day and another hour or two attending fundraising breakfasts and lunches. The fact is that fundraising is squeezing everything else out.
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...lawmakers-into
Quote:
The House member told “60 Minutes” he sat behind closed doors with party leadership, where he was told he had six months to raise $2 million.

“Your job, new member of Congress, is to raise $18,000 a day. Your first responsibility is to make sure you hit $18,000 a day,” he said he was told
Quote:
Jolly told “60 Minutes” the schedule of Congress is arranged around fundraising — and called the setup “shameful.”

“It's beneath the dignity of the office that our voters in our communities entrust us to serve.”
Quote:
Since the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FEC, he said, both parties have told new members they should spend 30 hours a week on calls — and the prospect is keeping people from running for office.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 05:51 PM   #231
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36,869
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
They tend to be wealthier than average, and people in congress (and their staff) spend a lot of time talking to them.

See:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.b272484c7ef3











https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...lawmakers-into
And we take The Hill and the WaPo at face value because...?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 05:53 PM   #232
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,254
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
And we take The Hill and the WaPo at face value because...?
Do you doubt any of those basic facts? I don't believe they're controversial. Google "how much time does congress spend fundraising with donors" (or anything like that) and see for yourself.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 07:13 PM   #233
Venom
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,743
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
ANd that is a problem I have with Sanders...he seems unable to see evil and stupidity on the left end of the political spectrum..and I think a President needs to be able to see extremism on both ends of the political spectrum. Obama was never afraid to criticize evil on the left end of the spectrum, though he was a liberal.
Right, which is why he basically urged his followers to vote Clinton to prevent a Trump presidency? The extremists on the left damn near abandoned him after that.

Originally Posted by portlandatheist View Post
Another super annoying aspect of the Cult of Bernie was the complaint that the primaries were rigged(Sanders loves that word nearly as much as Trump) and indulgence in Seth Rich conspiracy theories.
Sanders often says the system is rigged in the sense that the DNC basically crowns their favored candidate who tows the party line for whatever election every year.

And he's been criticized from the hard left for not calling the DNC out explicitly either. If anything it should be refreshing to see Sanders chugging along with his duties without slinging mud.

There's no comparison between his view and Trump's at all.
Venom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 07:20 PM   #234
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,254
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
This idea that the centrist voter is dead is just pure delusion;
It's not dead - it's just no longer advantaged.

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...han_Ideologues

Quote:
Man Bites Blue Dog: Are Moderates Really More Electable than Ideologues?
Quote:
...while moderates have historically enjoyed an advantage over ideologically extreme candidates in Congressional elections, this gap has disappeared in recent years, where moderates and ideologically extreme candidates are equally likely to be elected. This change persists for both Democratic and Republican candidates.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2019, 07:30 PM   #235
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,254
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
WE really should come up with a 'bingo' card, with all the various words and phrases that Bernie fans like to use.

Donor Class, purity test, white male, corporatist, status quo
"White male" is usually a slur hurled at Sanders by identity politics focused centrists, and accusations of having a "purity test" is usually an insult hurled at progressives by centrists.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd February 2019, 01:15 AM   #236
Axiom_Blade
Master Poster
 
Axiom_Blade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,979
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
"White male" is usually a slur hurled at Sanders by identity politics focused centrists, and accusations of having a "purity test" is usually an insult hurled at progressives by centrists.
The first time I ever heard of a "purity test" was from Hillary supporters blaming the rest of us for her losing.
Axiom_Blade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd February 2019, 01:30 AM   #237
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,254
Originally Posted by Axiom_Blade View Post
The first time I ever heard of a "purity test" was from Hillary supporters blaming the rest of us for her losing.
Yeah, it's often paired with being called an "emoprog" and accusations about unrealistic "ideological purity".

Krugman, who I usually like, used the "purity test" insult just the other day when discussing M4A.

Eta: not that exact phrase, but close:
https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/stat...82525417365504
Quote:
One thing that's different: in 2008 the problem was overcoming timid centrists; this time it may mainly be about reaching an accommodation with progressive purists. If they make immediate transition to single-payer a litmus test, it will be a problem 3/
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 23rd February 2019 at 01:38 AM.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd February 2019, 01:31 AM   #238
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,073
Originally Posted by mgidm86 View Post
...
Up until maybe 2010 - against gay marriage.
“No.” When asked if she is for gay marriage. “I believe that marriage is not just a bond, but a sacred bond between a man and a woman.”

Sacred! Sounds like a Republican.
That's all you got?
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd February 2019, 01:41 AM   #239
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,254
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
That's all you got?
I'm hardly her biggest fan, but that criticism really is weaksauce. Gobs and gobs of people genuinely evolved on the marriage equality issue over the last decade.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd February 2019, 01:51 AM   #240
Venom
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,743
TBH many progressives shot themselves in the foot trying to do that to Hillary all the time.

When Tulsi Gabbard's even more fervent opposition to LGBT rights was revealed, "Oh she's antiwar though and Killary would get us into a war with Russha!"

It's sometimes best to avoid the relatively petty hypocrisy/flip flopping wars; 1990s, 2000s era talking points.

Last edited by Venom; 23rd February 2019 at 01:53 AM.
Venom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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 On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:36 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.