2016 US Presidential Election Thread Part XI - Page 10 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-25-2016, 11:36 PM   #181
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Bernie lost. It wasn't close. It never was. You can pull out your casual racism to explain, but the fact is that she was the overwhelming choice of Democratic primary voters.
I'd hardly describe winning by about a 55-45 margin to be "overwhelming" given all the advantages she had going into this and a recent CNN poll of people that voted in the primary had 46 percent preferring the nominee was Sanders compared to 49 percent for Clinton.

Sanders went from an afterthought to nearly getting half the primary votes while Clinton's stock continued to plummet to its current low. Definitely a different set of narratives there.
__________________

BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:39 PM   #182
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Except that Gore won the popular vote and it was Nader voters who took votes from Gore in critical Florida.

You'll also note that Sanders endorsed Gore in 2000.
So, Gore was entitled to the votes of people that have voted for fringe left wing candidates or stayed home in Presidential elections the rest of their political lives? Clinton is entitled to my vote even though I've voted for a Democrat exactly once, ever?

I also could give a fuck what Sanders argues people should do. If anything, the refusal to get behind Clinton by so many of his supporters shows exactly how they aren't willing to be led by power. We want what Sanders is proposing and if it wasn't him in this election, we'd have got behind someone else doing exactly the same.
__________________

BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:39 PM   #183
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,527
Local Time: 01:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
I'd hardly describe winning by about a 55-45 margin to be "overwhelming" given all the advantages she had going into this and a recent CNN poll of people that voted in the primary had 46 percent preferring the nominee was Sanders compared to 49 percent for Clinton.



Sanders went from an afterthought to nearly getting half the primary votes while Clinton's stock continued to plummet to its current low. Definitely a different set of narratives there.



Given the proportional voting, and looking at the delegate count, it's pretty overwhelming.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:42 PM   #184
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
gump's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 9,946
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Good God, these interviews with the Bernie or bust delegates are so excruciatingly bad. It seems pretty clear that most of them are voting for the 1st or 2nd time in their lifetimes. What is striking is that their view of politics is almost totalitarian. Anything less than a total agreement with their policy positions is unacceptable. No compromise. Nevermind that the choice is between a candidate that represents, say 80% of their policy preferences vs. one that represents possibly 0% (hopefully).
gump is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:42 PM   #185
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Delegate count, right...so power brokers within the party get an outsized influence, usually going against the will of the voters, and that's supposed to mean something about the intentions of primary voters? Come on.

Right now, a significant share of Clinton voters are regretting their decision. 46 percent for Sanders, 49 percent for Clinton. That means about ten percent of her voters now think they've made a bad decision while basically nobody that supported Sanders has come around to Clinton being a better candidate in November (and why would they given what we know?).
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:43 PM   #186
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,527
Local Time: 01:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
So, Gore was entitled to the votes of people that have voted for fringe left wing candidates or stayed home in Presidential elections the rest of their political lives? Clinton is entitled to my vote even though I've voted for a Democrat exactly once, ever?



I also could give a fuck what Sanders argues people should do. If anything, the refusal to get behind Clinton by so many of his supporters shows exactly how they aren't willing to be led by power. We want what Sanders is proposing and if it wasn't him in this election, we'd have got behind someone else doing exactly the same.



If your so righteous and so concerned about a Trump presidency, and if you didn't want a Bush presidency, you wouldn't have voted for Nader or Stein.

You use that word a lot -- "entitled." You are not so precious. Your vote is a tool.

These Sanders supporters on MSNBC are such credits to Bernie. Oy.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:45 PM   #187
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
That's well worth whining over.

No. If you're an adult you don't whine over anything. But now you have a glimpse into why no one takes you or your messiah seriously.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
BVS is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:46 PM   #188
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,527
Local Time: 01:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
Delegate count, right...so power brokers within the party get an outsized influence, usually going against the will of the voters, and that's supposed to mean something about the intentions of primary voters? Come on.

Right now, a significant share of Clinton voters are regretting their decision. 46 percent for Sanders, 49 percent for Clinton. That means about ten percent of her voters now think they've made a bad decision while basically nobody that supported Sanders has come around to Clinton being a better candidate in November (and why would they given what we know?).



You do know, super delegates aside, she still clobbered him.

Polls? 90% of Bernie supporters are voting for Hillary.

I imagine the tantrums tonight and idiot interviews with suicidal uninformed Marxists will sway another 5%.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:46 PM   #189
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gump View Post
Nevermind that the choice is between a candidate that represents, say 80% of their policy preferences vs. one that represents possibly 0% (hopefully).
She doesn't represent 80% of what the left wants in the slightest. I don't recall the left being big into the Iraq War, TPP, etc.

And you're still forgetting the fundamental point here. Like me, these people aren't Democrats. They aren't part of the same power structure. They want a candidate that closely fits their left-wing values which are far removed from somebody like Tim Kaine.

As this article from today was discussing, a lot of them aren't regular voters and certainly aren't lifelong members of the party. These are not votes that Clinton can easily flip.

Why Clinton Might Have A Tough Time Flipping The Sanders Holdouts | FiveThirtyEight


I mean, what you're fundamentally arguing is if a Libertarian candidate ran for the Republican nomination and barely lost, you'd feel that all those voters now need to fall in line with the Republican. But on a logical level, that doesn't make any sense because they aren't even remotely near each other on the political spectrum. Since when are socialism and free market capitalism the same? In the rest of the world, we have Socialist parties, some of which often topple the center-left groups that used to hold a stranglehold on power. And there's a wide chasm between what those sort of parties want...basically, the lack of choice in a two party system is what's generating a lot of this anger on both sides. There's significant enough political differences that there should be a major far left American party, etc.
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:49 PM   #190
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,527
Local Time: 01:21 AM
2016 US Presidential Election Thread Part XI

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
She doesn't represent 80% of what the left wants in the slightest. I don't recall the left being big into the Iraq War, TPP, etc.

And you're still forgetting the fundamental point here. Like me, these people aren't Democrats. They aren't part of the same power structure. They want a candidate that closely fits their left-wing values which are far removed from somebody like Tim Kaine.

As this article from today was discussing, a lot of them aren't regular voters and certainly aren't lifelong members of the party. These are not votes that Clinton can easily flip.

Why Clinton Might Have A Tough Time Flipping The Sanders Holdouts | FiveThirtyEight


I mean, what you're fundamentally arguing is if a Libertarian candidate ran for the Republican nomination and barely lost, you'd feel that all those voters now need to fall in line with the Republican. But on a logical level, that doesn't make any sense because they aren't even remotely near each other on the political spectrum. Since when are socialism and free market capitalism the same?



That's fine. You just don't get to complain when a Republican wins.

You also are much less representative of the people you claim to represent.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:53 PM   #191
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
They want a candidate that closely fits their left-wing values which are far removed from somebody like Tim Kaine.

Like racism, sexism, and a huge lack of economic understandings?

YOU do not represent "left wing values". Stop pretending.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
BVS is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:53 PM   #192
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Of course I get to complain. You nominate someone who can't even hold press conferences and lose to the shittiest Republican since at least Goldwater and what will be your excuse?

Trump is a garbage candidate and the only reason he wins is because of one Hillary Clinton.
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:55 PM   #193
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Like racism, sexism, and a huge lack of economic understandings?

YOU do not represent "left wing values". Stop pretending.
Right, because you call anyone a racist or sexist that doesn't support your preferred centrist candidate and that suddenly means I'm not a leftist. I guess you're the same labeler that considers Clinton to be a historically strong LGBT activist and someone who wants peace in our world as well.

But hey, by the same token, Clinton labeled Kaine a "progressive" and the party faithful has gummed it down as well. Guess whatever the dictator wants is whatever the left is and we'll just have to accept that. Standing up for decades-long held beliefs is just wrong when suddenly Clinton is the nominee. Pointing out the contradictions between her stances and long held liberal ones is just too inconvenient.
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:56 PM   #194
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,664
Local Time: 11:21 PM
2016 US Presidential Election Thread Part XI

Hey, I know a fun game, let's continue arguing the (clear) results of the primary over and over again. Let's try and make the argument that a 55-45 victory is actually a loss and a 4 million vote gap should be ignored because I prefer the loser to the winner.

Your guy lost. Your guy also worked to make the democratic platform the most progressive platform in the history of the party. If you are interested in furthering progressive causes, there is only one logical vote this November, because the alternative would be a devastating blow to progressivism that could take decades to recover from.
Diemen is offline  
Old 07-25-2016, 11:57 PM   #195
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,527
Local Time: 01:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
Of course I get to complain. You nominate someone who can't even hold press conferences and lose to the shittiest Republican since at least Goldwater and what will be your excuse?

Trump is a garbage candidate and the only reason he wins is because of one Hillary Clinton.


You've done a bang up job of convincing people otherwise.

You voted third party in 2000. You don't get to complain about Bush.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-26-2016, 12:01 AM   #196
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,728
Local Time: 11:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
Hey, I know a fun game, let's continue arguing the (clear) results of the primary over and over again. Let's try and make the argument that a 55-45 victory is actually a loss and a 4 million vote gap should be ignored because I prefer the loser to the winner.

Your guy lost. Your guy also worked to make the democratic platform the most progressive platform in the history of the party. If you are interested in furthering progressive causes, there is only one logical vote this November, because the alternative would be a devastating blow to progressivism that could take decades to recover from.


I feel a certain song from 'Frozen' coming on...
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 07-26-2016, 12:01 AM   #197
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
If you are interested in furthering progressive causes, there is only one logical vote this November, because the alternative would be a devastating blow to progressivism that could take decades to recover from.
1) No, Trump winning would further progressive causes since it would leave a wide open field for someone like Warren or Gabbard or whomever to easily coast to victory with what the left actually wants given that their won't be any establishment picks in the way. And that would give us the most progressive platform in the party's history.

2) It wouldn't take decades to recover from a four year Trump Presidency, especially when you just kick his ass out when the time comes. The courts will have more Republican-leaning justices, obviously, but we'd all have Clinton to thank for that, so whatever.
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 07-26-2016, 12:02 AM   #198
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
You've done a bang up job of convincing people otherwise.

You voted third party in 2000. You don't get to complain about Bush.
I wasn't old enough to vote in 2000, so there's that. Nor did I know where I stood politically.
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 07-26-2016, 12:05 AM   #199
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,527
Local Time: 01:21 AM
2016 US Presidential Election Thread Part XI

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
I wasn't old enough to vote in 2000, so there's that. Nor did I know where I stood politically.


I believe you've said you voted for Nader.

But your age explains plenty.

I wouldn't want to pin beating Trump on:

1. A self-described socialist fighting for the political middle

2. His "base" being made up of very young, very white people who, a) usually don't vote, and, b) are notoriously unreliable when it comes to actually voting
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-26-2016, 12:05 AM   #200
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 12:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel View Post


I feel a certain song from 'Frozen' coming on...
I'm all for letting it go and came around to Sander's loss after New York when he was mathematically eliminated. I'm just making the argument that nobody on the far left is to blame if they don't vote for Clinton in the fall...that's on the party apparatus and the ill informed voters that made a poor decision. You get the votes you ultimately deserve, all things considered.

And the entitlement over votes from Non-Democrats needs to stop. Immediately. If someone is a lifelong party member and then becomes Bernie-or-Bust, fair enough. You've got an argument that they're just being a baby, especially when they've propped up the structure for so long. But why does Clinton automatically deserve votes from people who aren't party members? It's completely illogical. Suddenly the comrades who are printing Socialist Worker newspapers and have never voted for a D must starting voting for Democrats because of a weak candidate problem cooked up by the DNC and its voters? um, no.

The problem is that the preemptive blame is already starting to seep out. I'm already getting sick of "but it's your responsibility!" comments and hearing "But we must strop Trump!" instead of why we should vote for Clinton. Trump really isn't any different from the previous Republican nominees except he doesn't mute his dog whistles as much. If we weren't willing to go out on a limb, we'd have already had President Clinton for the last eight years thanks to people just buying into fear.

This is John Kerry all over again. A cold politician that generates no excitement and gets themselves into hot water with the left for poor decision making in the past and constant flip-flopping of positions argues that they should become President because the other person is so heinous. And look how that turned out.
__________________

BigMacPhisto is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×