General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis is a must read - "The coming GOP plot to sabotage a Biden presidency"
The Plum Line ~ Opinion
By Paul Waldman ~ April 21, 2020
We are in the midst of the most significant national crisis most of us will ever see. By the time its over, Americans feelings about government will be transformed, as they come to understand that the question isnt whether government should be big or small but whether it can do its job well and create security and opportunity.
Or this crisis will change very little, and a year or two from now well be right back where we started, with all the weaknesses and pathologies we had before, as we find ourselves in the midst of a new conservative attack on government that succeeds in making us less secure and more unequal.
Neither one of those futures is assured. But Republicans have already seen the threat the coronavirus pandemic poses to their long-term political project and have begun working to fend it off.
<snip>
Which is why Democrats also need to begin planning now not once the crisis is behind us, not once the election is over, but now for how theyre going to defeat that Republican effort. They need to devise policy plans for Bidens first year in office that not only help the country but are hard for Republicans to reverse, such as creating automatic stabilizers to make economic sabotage more difficult.
And they need to mount a rhetorical assault not just on Trump but on small-government philosophy itself. It would be a terrible mistake to assume that the public will naturally come to realize that its foolish to leave the country without a strong safety net and a public health infrastructure ready to respond to a pandemic.
<much more at link> (my bold)
elleng
(130,156 posts)After the 2008 election but before Barack Obama took office, Time magazine put him on its cover photoshopped as FDR, under the headline The New New Deal. But while he did pass a string of significant legislation utilizing government power early in his presidency a large stimulus bill, Wall Street reform, saving the auto industry, ending bank profiteering on student loans, the Affordable Care Act two years later Republicans took back the House and ground it all to a halt.
That is precisely what Republicans are planning to repeat, especially if Joe Biden becomes president next year.
You can see it in the Lets all come to the state capitol and infect each other protests against stay-at-home orders that are attracting small crowds but huge media attention. Like a miniature version of the tea party, its a phenomenon of genuine sentiment that is shaped and organized by right-wing elites, promoted relentlessly by Fox News, and in this case, validated by President Trump himself.'
bronxiteforever
(9,287 posts)They are going to launch tea party two as soon as they lose the election. When they do that, we have to be ready to counter protest and continue to vote or else we will have trump two.
certainot
(9,090 posts)ignorance of rw taalk radio, the only unique advantage they have
that is all the more tragic considering how vulnerable talk radio is now, with the ad industry unsure of when limbaugh will croak from lung cancer, unable to replace him on 600 radio stations, and the fact that artificial intelligence makes s a stoprush boycott event 100x easier faster and cheaper
not to mention that all those stations spent the first 2 months lying about COVID and calling it a hoax and are now pushing to reopen and that podcast record is proof those radio stations have gotten thousands sick and killed and any advertiser and university supporting them is also responsible - like global warming - it is not a political issue, political free speech - it is yelling HOAX in a covid theater
the ad industry is going to have to break up the monopoly before any serious boycott starts
BadgerMom
(2,766 posts)erronis
(14,955 posts)And the opposition (rwnj, libertarians, plutocrats, [r]epuglicons) will be sure to be screaming a lot of this in the next few months.
DownriverDem
(6,206 posts)what can we do?
OAITW r.2.0
(23,862 posts)Step 2 - Expand Federal law to assure election integrity and take the corporate money out of elections.
Step 3 - Sic the RICO act on Organized Crime, focus on the USA syndicate of the Putin Oligarch International Crime Syndicate.
Caliman73
(11,694 posts)They do not want small government. They want whatever size government will accomplish their goals.
They want a large government to restrict immigration and round up undocumented workers while simultaneously turning a blind eye to large corporations who exploit undocumented workers for cheap labor.
They want a large government apparatus to police women's bodies, restricting abortion and even contraception.
They want a large government to restrict the rights of LGBTQ+ people in practicing their rights and civil liberties.
They want a large aggressive military.
Bottom line: They want a government large enough to enforce the hierarchy of Rich White Protestant Christian Men.
What they want to shrink, is any type of government that helps poor, working, and middle classes ascend the ladder of social mobility.
Pantagruel
(2,580 posts)expensive policy and don't mind saddling their kids and grandkids with the bill.
Anyone remember the purported raison d'etre of the Tea Party?
Caliman73
(11,694 posts)Lower taxes for the rich.
The Tea Party, like these stupid anti-safety protests, were funded by rich people who want to get back to the business of having the poor and working class make money for them.
Like I said, Republicans DO NOT want smaller government. They want government that protects the interests of the rich while controlling the actions of the poor, working, and middle class. They want government that "enforces the natural order of things" however big government has to be to do that.
certainot
(9,090 posts)the teabags were an attack on GOP establishment, which limbaugh had turned on in at least 2008, forcing mccain to pick palin. the russians had their guy manafort in as mccain campaign cochair. GOP establishment, like in 2016 wanted establishment candidates.
in 2011 limbaugh pushed the teabag debt default - how many american billionaires would want that?
kochs gave them bus passes, rw radio announced them 24/7, and wasn't that an early eg of social media activism?
erronis
(14,955 posts)I'm sure they'll have lots of ways of insulating their little darlings from the horrors of taxes, mingling with the commoner, etc.
Odawg
(37 posts)world wide wally
(21,719 posts)Caliman73
(11,694 posts)McConnell has not been reducing the power of Congress, nor has he been trying to reduce the number of judges in the Federal system. He has been filling the Courts with right wing fanatics.
THEY DO NOT WANT SMALL GOVERNMENT.
They want government to promote their version of the natural hierarchy. They want government strong enough to protect the interests of the wealthy, to reverse all gains made by women and people of color through the Civil Rights Movements. They want government strong enough to enforce the social control they prefer.
It has NOTHING to do with size of government and EVERYTHING to do with what government is used for.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)bluestarone
(16,722 posts)JHB
(37,132 posts)...the Gilded Age. A government big enough to grant land and mineral rights, and provide protection for their interests, but small enough that it won't interfere with those interests on behalf of the general public.
See also: banana republic.
Buckeye_Democrat
(14,847 posts)They need a strong central government.
Republicans and their wealthy interests just want to convince everyone else, the commoners, that a Federal government that's helpful to people like them is bad.
A poor and insecure populace is generally good for business. Fewer options, greater willingness to work for meager pay and benefits, etc.
Ive seen many managers at my workplaces, over the years, lament how employees are spoiled and expect too much, being complete hypocrites given their own higher pay and easier jobs... and those guys werent even CLOSE to the top of the economic-class food chain. They were more like minor vassals in a system of serfdom.
The propaganda has been in place for a long time:
Caliman73
(11,694 posts)Which is why I said that we need to stop framing it as "Big Government" v. "Small Government". We need to frame it as Government as help to the vast majority of the people v Government protecting only the rich.
Buckeye_Democrat
(14,847 posts)wryter2000
(46,016 posts)I don't know how we capture messaging when they have Fox News and the"mainstream" media are fascinated by astroturf mini-tea party protests. At least, Limbaugh won't be around much longer.
I hate posting that last, but it's a fact that his voice is a major contributor to the mess we're in now.
Metro135
(359 posts)When Reagan abolished the Fairness Doctrine in the 1980s, it opened the floodgates to the right wing media blather. Unless this is reinstated, the message of Democrats and progressives will be drowned out with lies and half truths.
SharonAnn
(13,767 posts)certainot
(9,090 posts)monopoly is an expression of free speech and the FD would apply to internet etc, and would scream in support of putins best propaganda tool.
1500 radio stations owned by different companies and owners basically follow limbaugh, who's on 600.
limbaugh's dittoheads keep all the local blowhards in line cause they could never get through the call screeners to kiss limbaughs ass so they call in and make sure all the local dumbasses follow the limbaugh script
all dems have to do is show the ad industry artificial intelligence makes stoprush x 100 inevitable and it will have to break up and democratize the monopoly that's been yelling HOAAX! in a covid theater. right now limbaugh, a guy with possible terminal cancer who never leaves the mansion or studio or luxury golf course, has pivoted from hoax to telling 15 mil a day that we need all the lockdowns to end, death rates shouldn't include elderly, and ignore covid until the vulnerable get it so we can all move on.
anyone who's sitting at home with a computer who wants to do something can help destroy republican talk radio by giving those advertisers and universities and pro sports teams hell until the ad industry is forced to break up the putin/trump radio propaganda monopoly
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,041 posts)handmade34
(22,755 posts)Jake Stern
(3,145 posts)- Increasing the number of SCOTUS justices, otherwise all Biden and the Dems will have to show for their hard work is a string of 5-4 decisions in Republican's favor. Say bye-bye to DACA, ACA, any hope of reviving the Voting Rights Act and say hello to legalized discrimination, virtual blanket immunity for those who claim to act with their religious beliefs, and stealing more civil rights from people of color.
Even under Dubya I would have opposed such a proposal but these are desperate times and they call for desperate measures.
- Adding slots to the Federal Courts, especially in hyper-conservative appeals courts like the 5th to break the stranglehold the right wing has on the judiciary and make filling those seats a priority.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)throughout all 50 states.
Otherwise, it would more likely contribute to a Democratic downfall if such things were attempted without a thoroughly and permanently weakened GOP.
It was FDR's attempt to increase the number of Justices on the Supreme Court that led, in part, to the imposition of terms limits on the Presidency.
totodeinhere
(13,037 posts)When FDR tried it it set back his agenda. And I'm afraid that history would repeat itself if it's tried again. But if we can get Joe Biden elected he might have a chance to nominate two justices and tip the balance the other way. Of course we need to send Moscow Mitch packing as well.
dmr
(28,321 posts)Wounded Bear
(58,440 posts)It's the only way to get past Repub obstructionism.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)And keep the House, of course!
SouthernCal_Dem
(851 posts)They will demand cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. It doesn't matter that budget deficit was falling under Obama and exploded under Trump thanks to the tax cuts for the wealthy. They don't care about hypocrisy.
If necessary, they will try to use the debt ceiling as leverage again.
Republicans are pretty obvious and anticipating their moves isn't difficult.
Dems need to prepare now.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)crickets
(25,896 posts)I want the "party of fiscal responsibility" lie to die right along with the Republican party itself.
Wounded Bear
(58,440 posts)theaocp
(4,223 posts)We will preconcede to conservative desires and shrug when the legislation is watered-down. May as well prepare for it now.
Shipwack
(2,138 posts)Already Biden is talking about how well he is going to be able to "work" with the Senate Republicans. He learned/remembers nothing from how they stonewalled Obama.
Then again, maybe he does remember, and just says that to lull them into a false sense of security... but I doubt it.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,355 posts)but I imagine that if he's trying to draw some Republicans and Independents into the fold, he's going to push that message and not some exclusionary "won't work with Republicans come hell or high water" statement. Frankly, I'd be surprised if any Democratic nominee would go that far, because, until the results roll in on Election Night, they won't know who they're going to have to be working with. Besides, Independents supposedly eat that sort of talk up.
cp
(6,543 posts)Defense is always too late. Fight!
OMGWTF
(3,901 posts)JudyM
(29,122 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)The fact that the author had to push this, implies Democrats have had a problem with this.
And he's right.
I have never understood why, if we are smarter, more educated, more sane, scientific, and are for the most part on the right side of history, Democrats are abysmal at "info wars". The right wing have even co-opted that phrase.
For too too long, the plan is to ASSUME that all Americans are completely neutral, like a perfect jury, who if they simply lay out the facts to, in a calm detailed manner, (none better than Adam Schiff) and those facts bolster the Democratic position and damn the R position, everyone will nod their heads in agreement. No preplanning to counter the BS coming, because, "history will show we were right"
Meanwhile, the R's are huddled in rooms thinking of every devious way possible to cripple Democrats. To get ahead of them. One way is to accuse the Democrats of the something that they are guilty of BEFORE any Democrat brings it up. Takes the sting out of any revelations and feeds the "both sides" myth, and the MSM are glad to go along with it if its handed to them.
But the R's have multiple ways. Just like stealing elections on the ground with polling stations closures, ID laws, voter rolls culled as well as vicious propaganda 24/7 on RW talk radio. And they will always come up with new creative ways that Democrats at the time are not anticipating.
Liberals have the best comedians, the most creative artists (baby Trump!) and all the facts, but the one area where Republicans are way more creative and daring....is getting power. They focus on that alone. They don't seem to know what to do once they get it other than make sure they and their donors all get a big tax break, and deregulate as much as possible for them, to feed their campaign coffers. Of course one main reason to gain power of government is simply to deny Democratic power over government. So while we are laughing along with SNL, John Oliver, Stephen Colbert etc at some clever dig, and they may be momentarily annoyed, its nothing that prevents them of carrying out their crimes.
With all of Trump's awful behaviour in the last 3+ years, all of his scandals, all of his incompetence, we BETTER be on the offensive. And a lot more than last time. I hope that Joe has that kind of fight left in him. Or will he be too cautious in his desire to win over Never Trumper R's and resist any appearance that he is criticizing the Republican party as a whole. The party that has tongue-bathed a corrupt orange pig for 3 years.
erronis
(14,955 posts)scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)We watch the Rs pull off dirty trick after trick, and the Dems just end up shell-shocked.
We have GOT to go on the offensive. It seems like we've already missed innumerable opportunities during the course of the daily trump show - why aren't there big ad buys on all the networks and cable channels about the whole truth of trump's incompetence and lies, every damn day?!?
Trump shouldn't be able to get away with a single lie without a hard-nosed Democratic rebuttal.
As you say, it's not enough to sit back and let our comedians and WaPo opinion writers do all the fighting back.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)Yup.
I know there is the excuse that the MSM favours Republican guests. And I think there was a study even that proved that. So they don't have enough opportunity. Or that the MSM is led by the mantra of false equivalence. Which is also true.
But those just sound like more excuses at this point. If Democrats really wanted to get on the front page, have MSM news networks call them for interviews, they'd stage something. Or make accusations that we all know are true, but can't be proven yet. Give then insulting nick names to drive home a point and stick with it. Have them scrambling to defend themselves. Every . Fucking . Day.
One person I really miss is Michael Avenatti. Somehow I just knew it was too good to last. Obviously he had his faults, but its like Trump had no answer to him. And when Avenatti said "Trump should have hired ME!" he wasn't far off. But its almost as if we need someone outside the party apparatus to be unfettered enough to go on the attack properly. But why is that? Is there some edict from above to play nice if you are representing the party? Franken also would be valuable to have about now. A witty comedian + Democratic politician.
Instead its Democrats scrambling to defend themselves daily, taking up whatever airtime they are granted on the defensive against another bogus invented charge by some half wit Republican. Turns into a shouting match, while the host puts their hands up and rolls their eyes to the camera. Nothing gets resolved, least of all the truth. And everyone falls back into their respective camps.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)I wish one of us had the ear of the DNC - or the ear of a pro-Dem PAC of some kind.
It's so frustrating being an observer only, watching all the gaslighting going on from the repugs, with no strong counter message coming from our side.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)ha ha. Thanks for that. But if certain members here ever saw that statement they'd reel back in horror.
OMGWTF
(3,901 posts)In September of 2016 I took an interesting road trip that started in Washington, DC, then to Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, Memphis, Nashville, and New Orleans. I saw giant Trump signs everywhere, especially in the country (usually near a shithole trailer house). I didn't see one Hillary sign until I got to New Orleans. Along the way I made a habit of checking out the local radio stations and reading the local newspapers.
I understand why so many of our countrymen are hypnotized by the Reicht-winged daily bullshitnado. Most towns had a plethora of Xitian and hate radio stations to chose from and the newspaper editorials skewed right. Of course, Fux News is on in many places. These people believe the lies that are designed to turn them an ignorant, angry MAGAt.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Well, saving those of us that live under a competent Governor I suppose.
standingtall
(2,785 posts)a public health infrastructure are required, but it would be foolish to think that there are not many who take these things for granted and many others will begin to take these things for granted again and as well as not recognizing the threat to these things from republican ideology.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Republicans are nothing but a front group set on usurping all the powers of government to solely serve the desires of the oligarchy.
BamaRefugee
(3,476 posts)will NEVER LET UP.
He will be under attack more than any President in history. Non stop.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)They ramp it up every time. Bill's infidelity. Obama never did make any major mistake, but that didn't stop them from proliferating all kinds of conspiracy theories and racist insults when they could. Or blow up what they could, like mom jeans, tan suites, or his wife's open arm sleeves. They were in heaven when they found out an actual operation went awry like the so-called "Fast and Furious".
Forgetting about policy for one minute, I would have felt more comfortable with Sanders at the helm and his team of attack dogs from the left, Nina Turner, and others from his staff and add on AOC, and other smart quick allies. If you hated them when they were shilling for Bernie, imagine that force against the Trumpublicans. Along with Sanders relatively clean set of baggage, and his reputation as honest and principled. But I digress. sorry sorry. I just hope Biden welcomes help from the younger, more energized left wing of the party to help him.
He can either court the left in his own party, who have the energy and wit, and passion to fight, and fight dirty if need be, or court whatever "moderate" Republican that's left and proclaim how he is looking forward to working with McConnell and Graham to "get things done". I think it seems like the obvious choice is the latter, at least that is the "sensible" approach which will be heavily promoted on the MSM. And it would be maybe 30 years ago. But the GOP have long abandoned any reciprocal response.
Its so fucking obvious, or should be by now, they just laugh at us with their fingers crossed behind their backs. It was painful to live through eight years of Obama playing Charlie Brown to the GOPs Lucy. The "strong silent type" was once admired. being noble, taking the high road. Michelle spoke a beautiful phrase "when they go low, we go high" And in a fair world this would and should work. But the GOP are criminals who will do everything, and I mean everything, to retain power. Democrats must develop their own Michael Avenattis. Run up to the ball and kick Lucy in the fucking head before she gets the chance to make you look like a gullible idiot again. (hey, its a cartoon analogy)
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)All politicians are human, and those with long careers on the Hill have more opportunities for blemishes than those with shorter careers.
But I digress. sorry sorry. I just hope Sanders actually encourages his the younger, more energized left wing of the party to finally get out and vote, and vote for Biden, because many have decided to thow a hissy fit that he suspended and endorsed Biden, and proclaimed that they are "Bernie or Green Party" which will only harm any possibilty of Democratic party policies, most of which Bernie has been amplifying for years, from actually moving forward.
I just hope they're not beyond the reach of reason, and Bernie is willing to put out that extra effort.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)You know, all the Bernie bashing that went on here, which you should be all too familiar with, one of the angles of attack was that he was some kind of messiah to his followers, some kind of cult of personality. Even though I, and others, tried to get through we were supporting Sanders (and Warren) because of their platform, their principles, their not taking corporate donations, basically because we believed that the more progressive push was what is desperately needed after decades of moving to the right. Even if just to reach a more moderate position in the end. Not center/right again.
The fact that a lot of his supporters are angry with him now, some like Jimmy Dore have totally gone off on him, is kind of proof, isn't it, that it wasn't the man at all, it was what he could have brought to the country and moved it ahead on different fronts that they supported, not the man himself? But I digress.
That's a works both ways moment, here's another:
Sanders supporters, the most diverse base of delegates, are understandably bitterly disappointed America missed yet again an opportunity of a lifetime. And twice in a row. I don't know if some of you who were never behind him can appreciate that or even care. It's not the man himself we are mourning, its the chance Democrats, and America let slip through their fingers, as far as what kind of country you want to build for the future. That is how we view it.
Sanders himself did the right thing last time for the party, a reported 39 rallies he helped her with. Many I'm sure showed up to see him. Without that effort, she may not have even won the popular vote, who knows? He helped to convince many supporters to let it go and vote D. He was emphatic, forceful, in those speeches on the need to win with Hillary and defeat Trump.
And he will do the same for Joe. Why would you even doubt Sanders would not? He has already started. He didn't let booing against his praises of Hillary from ex-supporters shake him then, and he won't this time.
Now its up to those ex-supporters, especially those most bitter, to embrace a candidate that to them is the epitome of status quo center/right top down politics. Sanders is doing his part.
So now, its more up to Joe to win those voters over now. As I outlined in my previous post, he can woo the left or the right. Its his choice. (or more likely its not just his choice but the party leadership) as to what group of voters will garner him the best chance. But more than that, who he chooses will obviously be reflected in his first term policies. But even forgetting policy, IMO, it would be a disaster for him to move right and thumb his nose at the left in his own party to try and win over any moderate Republicans left in America.
I just hope his campaign is not beyond the reach of reason, and Joe is willing to put out that extra effort. Works both ways.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 23, 2020, 04:33 PM - Edit history (13)
reveals an uncomfortable truth. And tarring any and all observations of some of Sanders more devout and extreme supporters with the broad brush of ridiculous overstatement is both an unsubtle attack on a strawman combined with a false dilemma.
And no, it's not a false equivalence to point out that your assesment of Sanders' lack of baggage is not quite accurate.
Is that clearer?
I sincerely hope he does much more in the way of actual support of Biden than he did for HRC, as when he started out his lukewarm "We can't have Trump in the WH" or "This is the only way that the good ideas Obama had will survive" endorsment at her rallies with a recitation of his delegate count. It gave the appearance that he was still making the case for his candidacy, even after it was impossible, as if he was preparing for an external event to remove the candidate that defeated him by a clear majority, and so a full throated endorsement of HRC (like HRC's endorsement of Obama) might conflict with endorsing oneself as a prefereable substitute. I certainly didn't hear him counter, rebut or even mention the false smears against HRC and the DNC (which you should be all too familiar with) being spread on social media by many of his supporters at and after the convention, nor did he admonish his supporters for the "Lock her up!" chants at the convention, the booing of speakers and harassing of HRC delegates for not changing their votes by many of his supporters and delegates during the convention, nor the online petitions by his supporters that HRC 'step down immediately and tell the DNC to give the nomination to Bernie' when she fainted. The burden is on Sanders to show that he can do better this time than simply "not being shaken" by that open hatred of the Democratic nominee and have the grit and courage to speak directly to those in his base who continue to try to block the success of his successful primary opponent using right wing smears.
So many of those more devout supporters are gleefully sharing the rightwing, Russian based smears that Biden is a "rapist" and "senile," as well as a "war criminal like HRC" for voting for the Iraq War Resolution. There is zero chance that those ex-Sanders voters are going vote for Joe, unless Bernie addresses and clearly debunks those smears as such. Perhaps you have heard of Bernie doing that? Please share if you have. So now, its more up to Bernie to win those voters over now. As I outlined in my previous post, Bernie can woo his supporters on the far left or or woo those on the left who don't consider it beneath them to vote for Biden. Its his choice, but more than that, what he chooses to have the courage to do to support Joe will obviously be reflected in his words and actions to sincerely support the nominee. But even forgetting policy, IMO, it would be a disaster for him to thumb his nose at the leadership in the Demcratic party to try and keep the support of any "Never Biden" or "Bernie or Green Party ONLY!" fanatics.
I just hope his most devout followers are not beyond the reach of reason, and Bernie is willing to put out that extra effort. Works both ways. After all, Joe's ideas were the ones that won the majority of support from Democrats. I hardly think you would be suggesting that Bernie move to the right to reach out to Joe's supporters if Bernie had won. You'd be talking about how Bernie had a mandate to the majority of Democrats, especially if he had won by the margins that Joe and Hillary did. Yes?
Also, just a reminder, insults and baiting aren't a good look no matter how florid and passively phrased the delivery.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)Whatever. semantics again.
BTW, one can have an angle of attack and it be based on facts as well. Those two are not mutually exclusive. In fact, facts are more potent of an angle of attack than something that can be proven wrong later.
Which is why I pointed out that yours and others angle that Sanders followers worshipped the man more than the progressive platform, is now proven wrong, with those ardent supporters turning on him for caving in on supporting now someone who does not share the same goals.
Sanders worked very hard for Hillary. 39 rallies wasn't enough? His efforts got more percent of his former supporters to vote for Hillary, than Hillary's efforts to convince her former supporters to vote for Obama. So there's that.
https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/545812242/1-in-10-sanders-primary-voters-ended-up-supporting-trump-survey-finds
Fully 12 percent of people who voted for Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries voted for President Trump in the general election.
........
And according to one 2008 study, around 25 percent of Clinton primary voters in that election ended up voting for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in the general.
So please stop with the Bernie bashing, insinuating he won't help Democrats, when the past evidence proves the opposite
Your second point,
A minority of Clinton supporters were also ugly-mean to both Obama and Sanders. But one difference is that the more insulting, offputting critics of Biden, are not Democrats. Many were Russian and GOP trolls whose purpose was to rile up folks like you, but of the legitimate American voter more extreme critics, misdubbed Bernie Bros, as Sanders had the most diverse base of any candidate,...are independents, young people, new voters, many of who were never going to vote for a Democratic establishment candidate anyways. So there will be a very small percent of actual ex-Sander Democrats voting for Trump.
But, we need the majority of those votes. Whether you like or even understand those folks or not. ( I certainly cannot fathom someone who could be "undecided" at this point) You have to separate logistics from emotion. Someone else made the point that if you, for the sake of argument, divide D and R loyal support traditionally 45% - 45%. Its that 10% we are fighting for. That 10% IMO would have shifted more towards Sanders than will towards Biden. Which is why Sanders not only had the most positive exciting platform IMO, but he also had the best shot at beating Trump.
Not that we cannot win with Biden of course. We can and damn right should. And Sanders and his ex's have to swallow their disappointment and as usual, try and work change from within. We are used to it. It was vote blue no matter who last time, and its the same this time. Be sure great to have a little empathy, for the twice bridesmaids, honey instead of vinegar, but we're not counting on it.
Why does presenting a strong argument back be defined as "baiting"? Where do you see that? I present links to my assertions. But don't worry, I've never alerted on anyone. Because I don't believe in trying to silence a debate partner from an argument that way. I don't "bait" because I don't alert anyways. What would be the point? Alerting because it looks like one is being out debated, or has a thin skin, is not a good look either.
You called my writing "florid"? Gee thanks ehrnst. Honestly, I just enjoy writing and debating. And I gather you do too Its never my intention to do anything other than that. I just enjoy and respect folks like yourself with passion and chops to have it out. Instead of just lurking. Its never personal BTW
cheers.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 23, 2020, 06:38 PM - Edit history (3)
Baiting, passively worded insults, attacks on poor strawmen, "concern" about Democrats potential for treating Sanders and his supporters like trash, false dillemas, red herrings and careening goalposts aren't personal at all? Whatever, "just semantics," again, I guess.
Logical fallacies is the correct term.
You know, that's using an awful lot of words to say something one is trying to be coy about, and could be said in far fewer... somewhere else though, obviously. The strained calm in the carefully worded assurance that "you" personally "don't alert on people" to "silence them" doesn't disguise a warning. One needs to distinguish between logic and emotion, yes? Didn't you just say being "thin skinned" isn't a good look?
Relax.
cheers.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)Here I thought I was just expressing my opinion. Who knew?
I guess I am baiting. Baiting you with facts, as I see them, to get your response to my opinions. That's it though, honest. I don't know why I keep trying with you ehrnst. I guess you also bait me back. When the other person, you feel, is so off the mark, some of us, like you and me, take the bait, willingly, every time. I'm okay with that. I keep running into you, and you me, and that's fine.
I look at it like this:
I believe passionately in the opinions I have formed in my life based on my experiences. As do you I'm sure. In a nutshell....I believe the right wing, all over the world, has only increased its power, ownership, and influence and locked down dissent. With more and more right wing authoritarianism, even now in the US. During that time the rich have gotten richer, and the poor poorer. That divide is getting larger and larger by the day. That will eventually lead to violence and maybe the end of the planet, with a world wide "French Revolution"
So I feel that the pendulum must swing back the other way to adjust a better balance. I'm not thinking ahead to some socialist revolution, simply to move the goalposts back to the center. And then, if we work hard, to the center/left to favouring workers over profits. Which is why I was supporting Sanders or Warren. IMO we have to push hard to the left, just to get back to a more central position when the dust settles. Love to see Warren appointed as VP, or Treasury Secretary! Wall Street would be quaking in their Guccis. I don't see that happening with Biden though. We'll see.
Anyways, that's the general base of where I'm coming from. I just react, or overreact at times, to OPs that I think conflict with my world view. I think its natural in some ways to bait and to be baited for anyone with a passion for political discussion. Not in the sense to get caught breaking a rule and banned, just in a general sense of peaking others interests. And that's not a bad thing. In the end don't all of us on DU want Trump gone, Moscow Mitch gone, and Democrats back in charge? All branches would be nice. Back to sanity.
cheers
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)I think you keep on "trying" because it seems very important to you that I either say you are right and I am wrong, or derail off into a tangent on which you have a treatise prepared, or lash out after numerous passively worded insults, the unsubtle smearing of the Democratic Party and all who don't agree with Sanders on any issue whatsoever as being complicit in trying to "silence" or "smear" him as well as rejecting any and all liberal policies in the service of capitalism and corporate interests.
Some people don't have many conversations with people who don't agree with them, and when they do, they are able to wear their target down with a wall of verbose arguments to the point where the target gives up, and see a victory in the making the target loose it or go silent.
Just ask Uncle Joe, DanTex or Brutus Smith. They'll tell you that I don't derail, and don't take bait, and just won't "submit" or "lose it," even under a barrage of imperious lecturing.
I call 'em as I see 'em.
Is that clearer?
cheers.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)And who wouldn't like the other person in a debate, not to say, "Gee, you know, I see your point and actually agree with it" But no, I don't expect that from you. A lot of times its the other readers, lurkers, I have in mind. I just want the other side of an argument that I think is being misrepresented, to be out there. My hope is more that other readers will compare the two positions, and yeah, agree with me, that would be great! But really, just to make sure to have the other side of the story out there, for others, is my basic goal. Or to defend those in the left of the party from unfair smears. Amazing how many here are so antagonistic towards AOC. Some Sanders supporters are pissed at her for stopping campaigning for Bernie, when the writing was on the wall, and then to endorse Biden. She can't do anything right I guess. I think she's a brave smart talented rep, the future of the party. And of the few that knows how to fight back, sometimes immediately if its a Twitter attack. Sad to see us eat our own like this.
Anyways, whatever reason you "think" I write on here, I told you the best I can, my general position on the world in general, and why I take the positions I do. I guess you can choose to disbelieve me. It would be interesting to hear your overall view on the state of the world as well, and where its going, and how you want to see the political direction going.
We both call 'em as we see 'em. Just behind different windows. Its all good.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Like this red herring/ attacking strawman twofer:
I also notice that you have avoided comment on this, which I shared:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287135339#post63
Clearly, you have deep seated and varied grievances to air with many here on DU, and the Democratic Party in general. That's not my problem. I'm not obligated to take the bait and defend a strawman you set up and attack, no matter how many times you try to get me on the defensive as a proxy for those who you think are the "enemy" of Bernie and all that is progressive, and continue to deny that you are doing that.
It's all good.
cheers.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)I was giving reasons for why I would make a comment. One of which is when I see is a lopsided attack on a Democrat rep, who just happens to be regarded as in the leftwing of the party. I used AOC as an example. I can admit I made a mistake in that I thought there were examples of this in this very thread, but it was another DU thread where this was going on that I had just visited. So I apologize, if bringing up AOC seemed out of the blue. No pun intended.
Its really not as complicated as you make it out. No need to get so defensive. Like I said, my comments are not to "bait" anyone. Its just to get "the other side of the story" represented for other readers, if I see a need for that. It is a discussion board after all. And in fact I get along with most people here. I've had terrific interactions. And in other groups. Its only a handful I keep running into and getting myself in trouble with. You make a great sparring partner. That's a compliment. I'm trying to back out of this nicely. Reiterating that we both want Trump out, Democrats in. I thought Sanders had the best shot to do that. You don't agree, that's fine. We move forward with Biden. Nobody's perfect, not even AOC or Sanders. Go Blue Go!
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)You see, I'm not on the defensive, no matter how many times the effort is made. I am simply not taking bait, defending strawmen, nor going down a rabbit hole, and continue, time and time again, I just point out the obvious.
So there isn't a real attempt to communicate with me, but to display a list of grievances for others who are reading, who you think might be more receptive to the talking points.
That doesn't really square with your statement: "Its really not as complicated as you make it out. No need to get so defensive."
"Backing out nicely" doesn't include telling someone that they are not actually sparring, but getting irrationally defensive (which shows this is clearly a goal, as I pointed out) and failing to understand how "simple" things are, as you have so sagely deemed they are, which seems to involve avoiding acknowledging certain uncomfortable examples you've been presented.
Also, "sparring" does not include veiled references to "silencing" someone with "alerts"
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=13336391
Sounds more like, "Nice post you got there. Be a shame if it got removed," than actual regard for a sparring partner, or genuine debate.
Backing out nicely would involve saying, "Nice sparring with you. Have a great evening."
Cheers.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,154 posts)I'm trying to end this on a good note. I am resisting reacting back to your insinuations. I'm not sure what you think you may inadvertently say in response that will get alerted on. I think your positions more reflect the admin here than mine do. I think you are safe.
I will make a vow right here an now ehrnst. I promise I have not and will NEVER alert on a post you make. I appreciate your passion. Unlike some others, you go out of your way to present your opinions. I respect that. Even if we don't see eye to eye
Have a great weekend
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Last edited Sat Apr 25, 2020, 10:39 AM - Edit history (1)
Accusations (including one aimed at the admins), more insults and the most blatant attempt at baiting so far...
Somebody's posts certainly are wrought with "passion," aren't they?
Have a great weekend.
totodeinhere
(13,037 posts)The Republicans are going to try to use this health emergency for cover to steal the election if they can. I really do believe that.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,355 posts)Of course, what we really just have to do is GOTV in overwhelming numbers, so that they can't rig it. Their resistance to alternative forms of voting (i.e. mail in voting or absentee voting) is going to have to be fought to the greatest extent possible. Hopefully, by the time November rolls around, it will be safer to stand in a line and cast a ballot if necessary but we should definitely be talking about and planning contingencies and pressuring our lawmakers to figure out ways to ensure ballot access and our health and safety. What people did in Wisconsin was commendable but nobody should have to sacrifice one for the other.
totodeinhere
(13,037 posts)I don't have any reason to think they will stop now. And yes they will fight any effort to increase or facilitate mail in ballots or any other alternative voting methods because they know that the easier it is for people to vote the harder it is for them to win. I'm sorry for being so pessimistic but that's just the way i see it. And they control the White House, the Senate and the courts so it will be hard to stop them.
NNadir
(33,368 posts)You won't be able to find anyone who was a Trumpster - or confesses to being one - in 2022.