The New Hampshire Primary |Feb 9|: Live Free or Die

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can promise free blowjobs, a $25 minimum wage, free health care, and 3 months of paid time off from work per year. Would it make your life better? Sure. Does it have a chance of happening? No, it's fantasy just like Bernie's plan.

I love this assumption that Hillary would accomplish all of her plans, some of them, or even more of them than Bernie would of his.

Congress is geared to obstruct. I think Bernie will do a better job than Hillary of inspiring progressives and mobilizing voter turnout out during mid terms, and "actually get things done" when it comes to changing the makeup of congress. Of course this is all speculation - but the patronizing "fantasy!!" Defeatist attitude towards proposals that many would find preferable needs to be toned down.
 
Fucking This.

Let me spell this out for that particular junior member.

Minorities have had white politicians floating in promising them the moon since before the civil rights era, and the vast majority of said politicians are full of shit. Naturally, minority voters- especially black voters- are extremely skeptical.

Black Voters backed Clinton right up until Obama proved he wasn't Jesse Jackson 2.0 by getting white voters to carry him to victory in Iowa.

Bernie's entire rhetoric of "dismantle the banks", "free college", "revamp the tax structure", etc etc has been met with a resounding "oh yeah? how?" from every single minority voter I can think of, and there is not one single valid explanation as to how any of what bernie wants to do gets past a republican congress.

Until he manages to prove he's more than just talk, he's going to strike out with minorities as he has been for months. As it is, Bernie's rhetoric isn't any more realistic than Trump claiming to put up walls to keep out mexicans.

I want to hop in on this. Minorities support for clinton represents an experience most clinton supporters have gone through (not trying to say all these groups have it as bad as minorities) they've lost.

Clintons supporters are older and remember a pre-00s era where cultural liberalism wasn't ascendant. They know the insidious of the rights attacks on the disprivleged and powerless and know how much has been gained and lost.

MInorities can't just hope for a better world, the know racism will be here tomorrow and they're likely to continue being disadvantaged for years and decades to come. Preserving hard won victories isn't defeatism, its progress.

Unions at least insitutionally support clinton because they've been beaten back by right to work laws and attacks on workers. They have gone from representing 25% of workers to 10%. They know progessive issues aren't unidirectional they can and have been undone. Preserving hard won victories isn't defeatism its progress.

Womens groups support hillary because they've seen GOP dismissive at the the everlasting presence of sexism and attacks that have crippled a women's right to her body in the south and midwest. They know abortion and womens issues isn't some oneway street. Preserving hard won victories isn't defeatism its progress.

Young voters by and large don't realize this because they've won most fights they've been in and their peers share their values (this is amplified by cultural segregation both online and off). They've won gay marriage, a black president and the acceptance of identity politics They had the bush years but by and large most of sanders supporters were not that adversely effected by them. They've not lost something they've won.

This is amplified by white voters and white young voters. Who even when they lose don't really lose. Who doubts that by and large most of the white students in Iowa's and NH's universities are going to be relatively fine? They might have large loans and living with their parents but they have their parents to support them in both cases. It might be a case of arrested development but its not existential. Meanwhile black and other minorities face existential problems daily. From police brutality to economic disparities these problems are very life and death.

This doesn't summarize the entire race and I don't mean to lambast bernie supporters as idiots or people oblivious to other things but their desire to brush aside realism complains reflects by and large the fact they can afford to, the clinton coalition can't
 
Self defeatism is not a reason to accept status quo.

which means what, exactly?

understanding that congress as it stands (and will likely stand for the next decade) will simply obstruct literally everything bernie proposes exactly as they do to Obama isn't being "self defeatist" it's being realistic.

none of that will come anywhere close to passing a vote much less getting out of committee. It's borderline insulting to even bring it up. Preferring a candidate that doesn't treat voters like children and tempers the rhetoric to the "possible" rather than "wishful thinking" isn't "defeatist", this is maturity.

Any change that's coming will be long, hard, and incremental, and NOT on the backs of a revolution Sanders doesn't have the political will to pull off. If it existed, Occupy wall street wouldn't have flamed out into nothing, now would it?
 
When do they play the music and give this guy the hook already holy cow!

this is his first win for the season so i guess he wants to get his whole spill out. they should be much shorter weeks from now

I guess but sometimes more is less and people just tune out or start making fun. There is a sweet spot for a speech and he is way past it.
 
Seriously. The Clinton supporters who come by to shitpost on practically every page in these threads about 'how Sanders has no chance and Hillary is more realistic and pragmatic' is really kind of insufferable.

I mean, god forbid that people be actually mildly happy for one evening that a politician like Sanders won a presidential primary in the United States. We should instead probably want more years of always-moving-right Democratic Party and be content with that.

Dems have been moving left as a party, though...
 
gFBafrc.jpg

LMAO!
 
You act like Clinton being a corporate shill isn't a known thing? Wow you really trapped me there!



To the 2nd part of your post:


And there it is. Typical Clinton supporter not wanting to push for hard things because they are hard.

Bernie supporters:

Well, we failed, but it's the message that counts right? Right? Moral victory and all.

Bernie better make sure the DNC doesn't stab him in the back come November.
 
If thats your attitude then you should vote for the policies you want, not talk about how they are "too hard to pass". Great attitude. Nothing will change with that line of thinking.

No, things are compromised and changed slowly.

It's much more harmful to have a 'my way or the highway' mentality. Change comes slowly, and there's also the possibility that Sanders isn't an electable national candidate.
 
Democrats
Voting percentage reported 43%

Bernie Sanders 59%
Hillary Clinton 38%

Republicans
Voting percentage reported 42%

Donald Trump 34%
Marco Rubio 10%
John Kasich 16%
Ted Cruz 12%
Jeb (John E. Bush) 11%
Chris Christie 8%
Carly Fiorina 4%
Ben Carson 2%
 
I suspect the fact that she will be the first female nominee for president for either party makes her perspective sort of fresh no matter if her last name is Clinton or not.
To a certain extent, absolutely.

Ok Bernie, we got it. Let the Trump roll.
 
I love this assumption that Hillary would accomplish all of her plans, some of them, or even more of them than Bernie would of his.

Congress is geared to obstruct. I think Bernie will do a better job than Hillary of inspiring progressives and mobilizing voter turnout out during mid terms, and "actually get things done" when it comes to changing the makeup of congress. Of course this is all speculation - but the patronizing "fantasy!!" Defeatist attitude towards proposals that many would find preferable needs to be toned down.

Absent any perceived differences on their platforms otherwise, Is it defeatist to prefer the agenda that relies significantly more on executive actions over the agenda that relies significantly more on legislative actions?
 
I can promise free blowjobs, a $25 minimum wage, free health care, and 3 months of paid time off from work per year. Would it make your life better? Sure. Does it have a chance of happening? No, it's fantasy just like Bernie's plan.

It's possible to have Bernie's plans. No it's not easy, but it's his ideas are based off of other countries. The only thing stopping him is the congress/senate. Even if he compromises and only some of the ideas end up working I'd be fine with it.

Bernie needs to end this speech like 5 minutes ago, jfc
 
Seriously. The Clinton supporters who come by to shitpost on practically every page in these threads about 'how Sanders has no chance and Hillary is more realistic and pragmatic' is really kind of insufferable.

I mean, god forbid that people be actually mildly happy for one evening that a politician like Sanders won a presidential primary in the United States. We should instead probably want more years of always-moving-right Democratic Party and be content with that.

Is it more annoying than people insinuating that your race votes for Hilary because they're uninformed?
 
Liberal and young voters sit out the midterms. A lot of Bernie's base wouldn't show up in 2018. So what you're saying is, you'd put up with two years of Bernie getting nothing done for another two years where he continues getting blocked.

I'm saying I hope were he elected that he could get those voters to actually show up in 2018. Yes, Obama struggled in 2010 keeping the momentum going, but it probably didn't help that outside of 2008 and 2012, most of the Democrats running pretended they didn't even know who he was, and rather than campaigning on their strengths, ran as Not-Obama Democrats. I think if Sanders got blocked for the first 2 years, we'd have had 10 years where Republicans in Congress refused to pass legislation that was meaningful, and people would start to get motivated to replace them.

It's optimistic, I know, but I choose to believe people aren't stupid enough to just keep letting these things happen. Don't get me wrong, I will vote for Hillary over anyone in the Republican field, but in the Primary I'm voting for Bernie, and I hope he gets the nomination.
 
Do we know who writes his speeches? He should hire someone new to work with him. His campaign ideas are pretty clear at this point, it's time to freshen things up.

The thing is, a lot of people are probably tuning in for the first time. He has to hit all his important points. If you all have seen the speech, then the speech is probably not for you.

This is my first time watching a Bernie speech. It's pretty epic, seeing it for the first time. His most basic points are radical. He's saying things that other candidates are not. That is enough.

There's no doubt that some of the other candidates are better speakers, Hilary included. However, He is saying things so straightforward and clearly, that it resonates really well.
 
It must be sobering to settle for genuine mediocrity.

But that's just the American way, right? Being "realistic" with substandard states of affairs.

Lol. It's weird how opinions work, huh?

If you don't agree with me, you prefer mediocrity and the failure of the American way! YEAH!
 
which means what, exactly?

understanding that congress as it stands (and will likely stand for the next decade) will simply obstruct literally everything bernie proposes exactly as they do to Obama isn't being "self defeatist" it's being realistic.

none of that will come anywhere close to passing a vote much less getting out of committee. It's borderline insulting to even bring it up. Preferring a candidate that doesn't treat voters like children and tempers the rhetoric to the "possible" rather than "wishful thinking" isn't "defeatist", this is maturity.

Any change that's coming will be long, hard, and incremental, and NOT on the backs of a revolution Sanders doesn't have the political will to pull off. If it existed, Occupy wall street wouldn't have flamed out into nothing, now would it?
Congress will obstruct any Democrat. Why not back the Democrat that won't attempt to compromise just for movement? There is no honor or reason in reaching out to the side that continuously moves the goalposts just to prove a point. The right does not want compromise, they want capitulation. Pragmatism in this case is knowing that the right is controlled by the freedom caucus.
 
All eyes on the winner right now so why not have a long speech about everything you propose to correct.
Kinda long for my taste, but i aint even mad.
 
It's possible to have Bernie's plans. No it's not easy, but it's his ideas are based off of other countries. The only thing stopping him is the congress/senate. federalism, the supreme court, the consitution, people who don't agree with him, racism, etc

Bernie needs to end this speech like 5 minutes ago, jfc

ftfy
 
Doing pretty well down here in Atlanta. The black middle class in this city isn't where it was before the recession, but its gone really well.

Has things got worse for black americans where you are at?

I'm glad that you're doing well in Atlanta, but nationally black American wealth decline has outpaced wealth decline among white Americans. And, here in Maryland, the economy hasn't fully recovered from the great recession.

It's more complicated than "Obama/center-left politics haven't benefited black America" and I accept that, but some of the blame is on those politics IMO.

I'm black and I support Hilary, wanna fight?

Nah but we can discuss it.

Recently I have been able to understand a bit better Hillary's appeal to minorities- she's pragmatic and she's the "safe bet" in the general election. We'd have the most to lose under a GOP president, so gambling on Bernie seems risky. I just don't agree with that logic.
 
I love this assumption that Hillary would accomplish all of her plans, some of them, or even more of them than Bernie would of his.

Congress is geared to obstruct. I think Bernie will do a better job than Hillary of inspiring progressives and mobilizing voter turnout out during mid terms, and "actually get things done" when it comes to changing the makeup of congress. Of course this is all speculation - but the patronizing "fantasy!!" Defeatist attitude towards proposals that many would find preferable needs to be toned down.

It boils down to Dems being more likely to take back the Senate and pick up more seats in the House with Hillary as the nominee than Bernie. There are a lot of moderate/conservative Dems in red/red-leaning states who would get killed in their elections if they were running down ticket from Bernie.
 
Man... Finally catching up and watching the Hillary Concession Speech. Is anyone else annoyed by her essentially taking Bernie's talking points?
 
Congress will obstruct any Democrat. Why not back the Democrat that won't attempt to compromise just for movement? There is no honor or reason in reaching out to the side that continuously moves the goalposts just to prove a point. The right does not want compromise, they want capitulation. Pragmatism in this case is knowing that the right is controlled by the freedom caucus.

Because the president does other things?

Because politics is more than simple negotiations based on abstract principles, and Hillary has show much better adeptness at that/?
 
Lol. It's weird how opinions work, huh?

If you don't agree with me, you prefer mediocrity and the failure of the American way! YEAH!

It's one thing to say "I like his ideas, but this ain't the climate" or "I want practicality in an age of Regressiveism."

But calling a more humanistic society a dream can't really be anything else than settling for mediocrity, really.
 
Absolutely baloney.


http://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/de...nie-sanders-keeps-his-pragmatism-under-wraps/

In interviews, current and former staffers of Sanders described him as “rude, short-tempered, and, occasionally, downright hostile,” according to Seven Days.

“He’d yell in meetings all the time,” said one of Sanders’ former Senate staffers. “I don’t think he’s a very nice man.”

In his book Making History in Vermont, Steve Rosenfeld, Sanders’ former press secretary, quoted Sanders himself as admitting there may be “some truth” to descriptions of him as “nasty” and as having difficulty getting along with people.
 
Man... Finally catching up and watching the Hillary Concession Speech. Is anyone else annoyed by her essentially taking Bernie's talking points?

She's trying to say "what he can do I can do too. Join me! I can do what he asks!" when you clearly realize she's just saying it to say it.
 
Is it defeatist to prefer the agenda that relies significantly more on executive actions than the agenda that relies significantly more on legislative actions?

Seems to me you should prefer the legislative process for getting things done. Executive Action was never intended to be used as you are suggesting. On top of that Executive action simply takes a new President to make disappear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom