|
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. |
7th February 2020, 10:19 AM | #241 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 20,632
|
|
7th February 2020, 10:32 AM | #242 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 6,332
|
|
7th February 2020, 10:36 AM | #243 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 6,332
|
|
7th February 2020, 10:56 AM | #244 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 20,632
|
MayorCheat is what the internet hive mind came up with due to the ridiculous machinations of the DNC. I've posted several articles with information you didn't hear in the junk news you allow into your living-room. You can ignore or pretend to ignore that, but what "the Sanders side" is you won't define. Remember that you aren't responsible for my posts and I'm not responsible for your posts. |
7th February 2020, 11:39 AM | #245 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 6,332
|
The hyperfocus and vilification of Pete Buttigieg is something that's emerged in progressive circles in the past year. Many of the prominent progressive hot takes make it seem as though they lived in South Bend and they know Pete personally. It's just sad. The danger there of course is it makes it a bit harder to take legitimate criticisms of Pete seriously.
But Pete and the Democratic establishment (whatever this means in the context of the Iowa caucus; the Des Moines Register isn't in on it) are hopelessly intertwined in our minds, so a barely tested app goes wrong, Iowa Dem officials scramble to match results and delay release, and everyone gets angry at Pete....for.....what exactly? Declaring victory? Everyone does that. It wasn't like he was 4th before the crash. They got mad at him for one of his supporters reporting that they couldn't see everyone on screen. Why though? It'd be enough to stop there, but no, those other criticisms apparently didn't hit hard enough to satisfy their craving to get at Pete. We have to proclaim he CHEATED. Like I said, Bernie is too classy for some of his supporters. |
7th February 2020, 12:07 PM | #246 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
|
|
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.” |
|
7th February 2020, 12:11 PM | #247 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
|
|
7th February 2020, 12:16 PM | #248 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
|
I cannot even detect sarcasm anymore.
|
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.” |
|
7th February 2020, 01:05 PM | #249 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,661
|
The process should be rigged against Sanders, he's not a Democrat, it should be harder for him to get the nomination on that score.
|
7th February 2020, 01:34 PM | #250 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 60,375
|
|
__________________
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. |
|
7th February 2020, 01:38 PM | #251 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
|
|
7th February 2020, 01:43 PM | #252 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,511
|
|
7th February 2020, 01:45 PM | #253 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
|
|
7th February 2020, 01:48 PM | #254 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 20,625
|
True, he's currently/temporarily on the ballot as a Democrat.
Perhaps a better way to have stated it is "He's not a long-term democrat". I don't know if I agree that it should be harder for him to become the nominee, but I can certainly understand the sentiment... long-term party members may not want to see their party 'hijacked' from the outside. "We built this party, and now this guy who doesn't want to associate with us wants to take over". |
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot |
|
7th February 2020, 01:48 PM | #255 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,511
|
|
7th February 2020, 01:51 PM | #256 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 39,057
|
|
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant. |
|
7th February 2020, 01:58 PM | #257 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 35,043
|
If Sanders isn't a democrat, then are his supporters also not democrats? Would you be happier if he ran under a different party and took his voters support there?
I recall in 2016 a lot of anger directed towards Jill Stein and the Green Party as spoilers. Complaining about spoilers and saying Sanders isn't a Democrat aren't consistent criticisms. You have to pick one. Would you rather Sanders ran as a Democrat or as a spoiler? I know many would prefer he just disappeared from the political stage, but that's just wishful thinking. |
__________________
Previously known as SuburbanTurkey |
|
7th February 2020, 02:08 PM | #258 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 35,043
|
Looks like Biden supporters are jumping ship to Pete.
This seems like a good thing for Bernie. Pete is poaching Biden's supporters, but it's not clear that he will have quite the same strong support among black voters in the South. Fracturing the centrist wing vote is a win for Bernie. I've got my fingers crossed that Pete will take the lead as the leading centrist candidate, but some states will hold firm for Biden, making neither viable. |
__________________
Previously known as SuburbanTurkey |
|
7th February 2020, 02:09 PM | #259 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 20,625
|
Not really sure why you think one statement (Sanders isn't a democrat) automatically leads to the other (supporters not democrats). Its certainly possible for some democratic supporters to thrown their support behind an "outsider".
Quote:
I don't think he was a 'big name' prior to his 2016 election run, and its not like he had the financial resources to 'buy' his way into spotlight (a la Ross Perot). Maybe if Sanders ran as an independent (or for some 3rd party ticket) he might have ended up siphoning off some support from Clinton. On the other hand, he might have also siphoned off some of the 'BernieBros' who migrated to Trump. (Plus, without the prolonged Clinton/Sanders battle, perhaps the Democrats would have been better focused on Trump.) |
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot |
|
7th February 2020, 02:10 PM | #260 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
|
Careful what you wish for, "No one" is surging over at 538.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...mary-forecast/ |
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.” |
|
7th February 2020, 02:12 PM | #261 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 35,043
|
My point is this. What does it mean to be a Democrat?
Bernie is running as a Democrat and getting lots of support from Democratic primary voters. So yeah, if being a Democrat means getting the blessing of the DNC elites, then Bernie isn't a Democrat. If being a Democrat means people in that party turn out to vote for him in large numbers, then he obviously is. People saying "Bernie isn't a Democrat" would be more accurate in saying "Bernie isn't sanctioned by the party elite". Who decides who is a real Democrat? Is it the primary voters who like Bernie, or the party establishment who don't? WHen people say "Bernie isn't a Democrat" the implied statement is also "Democratic voters shouldn't vote for Bernie". Seems presumptuous to me. As an example. Many people said that Trump wasn't a Republican. Obviously he is. He's more Republican than any other mainstream Republican he beat. The Republican voters were the final authority, not some party operative. |
__________________
Previously known as SuburbanTurkey |
|
7th February 2020, 02:31 PM | #262 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 20,625
|
Uhhh... no. I think they're saying "taking out a membership makes you technically a democrat, but we don't believe you are really a democrat because you weren't one just a few months ago, and you probably won't be one in a few months from now if you should lose". Sanctioning by party elites has little to do with it.
Again, I don't think Sanders should be treated differently, but I can understand long-time Democrats being miffed at any outsider trying to take over.
Quote:
You have no idea if they will work with other Democrats. You have no idea if they will work towards whatever goals you have fought for over the past years.
Quote:
And yes, Trump is a republican. And yes, he was an 'outsider' prior to the 2016 election. It would not have been wrong for an individual republican voter to look at him and say "do we really want someone from outside the party to take over?" If someone were actually interested in actual conservative principles, they should have been wary about giving the party reigns to Trump. (Of course, because they are completely corrupt it didn't really matter. But it could have.) |
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot |
|
7th February 2020, 03:03 PM | #263 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
|
|
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.” |
|
7th February 2020, 03:12 PM | #264 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,661
|
All I'm saying is that it makes sense for a party to want their candidates to actually be members of their party. To some degree, its generous of them to let him run at all. A rule to the effect of, "in order to stand for election as a R/D you must have been a registered R/D for x amount of time would be entirely reasonable. I wouldn't suggest it as a law, just an internal rule. Where it gets squirrely is that the US runs public elections for internal party decisions which is really quite strange.
Keep in mind, I'm probably not one of those folks who were complaining about spoilers. At least not last time. There's pretty good arguments for Nader and Perot when they ran though. As a rule, I encourage third parties. I'm curious, is bernie even currently registered as a democrat? |
7th February 2020, 03:19 PM | #265 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 35,043
|
Again, would they rather Sanders run third party?
We have a two party system. That cuts both ways. The party has to be open to outsiders because otherwise outsiders might run as third parties and poach their vote. Sanders is a candidate that is pulling tremendous support in the primary. Excluding Sanders means excluding some percentage of his supporters who would go with him to third party. The Democratic party has a choice. Excluding a popular candidate means resigning itself to non-viability. |
__________________
Previously known as SuburbanTurkey |
|
7th February 2020, 05:22 PM | #266 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
|
Parties have to let those qualified to run* do so because we all have the right to participate in the political process.
There may be other ones, but that's the big one. *citizenship, age, residency, etc. |
7th February 2020, 05:29 PM | #267 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
|
|
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.” |
|
7th February 2020, 05:58 PM | #268 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
|
It's a foundational requirement for a functioning democracy.
Allowing parties to be gatekeepers of who is or is not allowed to participate would just be outsourcing the suppression of that right. I'm not for it. If you don't like someone not declaring allegiance to a specific political cabal, express so by not voting for them. |
7th February 2020, 06:04 PM | #269 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,726
|
Okay, what Iowa did was stupid, in at least two ways;
First, they didn't consider the users. I've always that Steve Jobs "genius" was not in tech (that was Steve Wozniak, look it up), it was in the UI, and in presentation. Second, they didn't stress test their system. Apparently at the moment, they didn't test it at all. The Iowa dems are absurd. And again, don't mean the people, I mean the party... look In the long term, I doubt this Iowa mess will make a difference, but it's the sort of mistake that we should all be wary of, not just in elections, but just living generally. I don't know what will get rid of the idiot in the White House or more importantly what will get rid of Moscow Mitch in the senate. That's for dems in Kentucky to decide. What I know is, the UI is messed up, to underlying problems. The GOP as is stands now, is a group of radical authoritarians, white wing white nationalists., And we should protect our constitutional rights against them. If it means tossing out a justice on the Supreme Court, or a senator or three, then...do it. Our basic rights are in danger. It's time to destroy th GOP as it exist today. You may see this as terifying, but it's really just a nod to reality. |
7th February 2020, 06:46 PM | #270 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
|
|
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.” |
|
7th February 2020, 07:03 PM | #271 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
|
I said nothing about picking the head of a party. I'm speaking of controlling who gets to appear on the ballot. I don't know that sitting Presidents in the U.S. have ever tended to concurrently serve as chair of their national party. Doesn't seem so in my lifetime, anyways. It's usually a mix of House and Senate leadership, some prominent state-level personnel moving up, bundlers, etc.
Yes, I know they are cited as such, but that's colloquial, or as a figurehead. At the end of the day, his legislative affairs department would identify the party and underlying caucuses that are more or less of favorable disposition and the party and caucuses that will be the other thing. Like all Presidents. Even with supermajority numbers from the same party, Presidents can run into sub-committee bloat and delays. Everyone needs certain assurances. Or at least they need to wring their hands on TV for a minute until, oh, there's a check from a contributor in the leadership PAC account, ok, nevermind. |
7th February 2020, 07:49 PM | #272 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 11,901
|
|
__________________
“Knowledge is Power; France is Bacon.” |
|
8th February 2020, 10:16 AM | #273 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
|
No.
Neither is the comparison so straightforward. The arrangement of leadership in parliamentary parties is a lot more of the calculus of voting, see: Labour. Parties can become internally fractious, despite plurality or majority numbers, see: Tories. Plus you have equivalent bodies to those I referred to in pointing out where party control actually resides. Labour calls Corbyn their leader, but they have a National Executive Committee with a Chair. Sometimes they are an MP (or MEP), sometimes not. Then there's the "party chair", a fancy title until recently given more of a coordinating role for election strategy. The parties can put whoever they want in those committees, I agree to that much. But final say on head of state, executive power, what-have-you, should lean more towards people's will than party's will. It's a feature of PM models I find questionable. Perhaps easily fixed with a recall mechanism of some kind. YMMV. |
8th February 2020, 05:50 PM | #274 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 20,625
|
I have previously given multiple reasons why a 3rd party or independent candidacy for Sanders would not be a significant threat to the Democrats.
To reiterate: - Without his (temporary) association with the Democrats, Sanders would not have a significant national profile. He was an independent senator from a relatively small state, and unlike (for example) Ross Perot, he wouldn't be able to self-fund any part of his campaign. I suspect most people probably couldn't pick him out of a lineup prior to the 2016 primaries. So if he ran as a 3rd party candidate, he wouldn't be contending for the presidency end up being a spoiler, he'd end up as the answer to a question on Jeopardy under the 'political losers' category - Lets say he actually did manage to get some attention nationally.... Yes, Sanders might have stolen some votes from Clinton. But remember, a lot of BernieBros ended up voting for Trump. If Sanders was running as a 3rd party candidate, he would also be taking votes away from the Republicans, so Clinton still might have won the popular vote - Without Sanders in the race, the democratic primary would have likely gone a lot smother. Hillary probably would have clinched the nomination weeks earlier, cutting out much of the bitter primary battles and allowing the Democrats to focus on Trump much earlier. And without the whole "poor bernie was cheated" myth going around, perhaps Clinton might not have been tarred with the 'elitist' label |
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot |
|
8th February 2020, 06:06 PM | #275 |
Other (please write in)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,302
|
|
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn |
|
8th February 2020, 06:08 PM | #276 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 20,625
|
Uh, no. If a political party instituted a rule that said "You must be a member of the party for at least 1 year prior to joining the primary" that would not be a suppression of the right to join in the elections.
1) An individual wanting to participate but who wasn't a long-time Democrate still has the option of running as an independent and/or for another party 2) The act of taking on a membership and holding it for a certain time period is not a significant barrier for participation. It is not discriminatory (i.e. does not target a person's gender, race, religion, etc.) and I'm pretty sure a party membership would be affordable to even a poor candidate. If Sanders wanted to participate under such a rule, he has an easy out: Get a membership and hold on to it. And lets face it, you are complaining about the requirements to hold a party membership as somehow an excessive burden. Yet in order to run in the primaries candidates often have to pay various filing fees. And to participate in debates they have to show a certain level of funding and/or support. In theory those requirements can prevent a poor person from running for election. That seems like it is just as much of a problem as a candidate maintaining a party membership, but its seen as acceptable requirement. |
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot |
|
8th February 2020, 06:33 PM | #277 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,598
|
|
8th February 2020, 06:40 PM | #278 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,963
|
Looks like Diamond Joe is likely headed to another 4th-place finish in New Hampshire (possibly 3rd place).
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...new-hampshire/ Probably: Sanders, Buttigieg, Warren, Biden, Klobuchar. Or see here for lots of recent polls: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/ One poll actually has Buttigieg in the lead (barely), but most have Sanders. All show Biden nose-diving. |
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare |
|
8th February 2020, 06:45 PM | #279 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 20,625
|
|
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppins Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot |
|
8th February 2020, 06:54 PM | #280 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,598
|
Not necessarily. I think 2016 is more likely to inspire such a decision instead of being subject to such a decision. I can't think of any event in the past 50 years that would be more likely to inspire a "candidates had to be long-term members of the party" rule than the 2016 primaries. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|