Support NeoGAF

[ugaboga232]

Please, Bernie supporters here were calling Her a fake progressive or just another Republican.

And completely ignore how close her voting record is with his.

And hillary supporters/hillary call out bernie for not being a democrat or too left. Voting record is a very poor proxy for values (most things dont go to vote, you don't know what they are voting on or what that 7% disagreement is or what that 93% is).

Spoiler

not saying their values are very different but the voting record thing is a very poor proxy if you look deeper into it

Then were fucked.

But I think the youth is amenable to smarter, less doctrine progressives who understand they're not the only people on this country. Less Bernie Sanders and my way or the high way liberals. More LBJs, Obama's and FDRs progressives who get stuff done. Otherwise those youth are going to start losing.

Well eventually you are big enough of the electorate that you can elect sanders type progressives. And the "get stuff done" progressive will eventually run into problems with problems that can't be solved with slow piecemeal change (also FDR was a huge outlier in terms of political power, very his way or the highway).

 

[Makai]

For Dems? Pretty sure it's just proportional.

I know Kasich's fooled everyone but he's running for the Republican nomination

 

[Chichikov]

I read a couple random scenes from Shakespeare. Trash IMO

I'm talking about the music, you honestly don't think listening to a few songs from a musical can get you a pretty good idea about whether or not you like the music in it?

Modern Broadway is especially bad for this. I'd say Bernstein transcended this, because he was just genuinely a great 20th Century composer and musical mind. Ditto Sondheim, ditto Porter. And also, to be fair, the emotion is something that actors usually convey in a performance, and it's basically impossible to replicate that when you do cast recordings.

Yeah, I was talking about modern(ish) Broadway musicals.

https://tylerpedigo.com/category/politics-2/

If his margin of error stays under 3 percentage points or less for all of the states tomorrow, I am going to start basing my predictions off of his model.

Do you know what margin of error means?
I'm not trying to be a dick here, it's just terminology, you either learned it somewhere or you didn't, not knowing it doesn't make you stupid or anything, but you seem to be interested in statistics, so maybe you should do some reading about it, it's not super complicated.

 

[And_Gignac]

Then were fucked.

But I think the youth is amenable to smarter, less doctrine progressives who understand they're not the only people on this country. Less Bernie Sanders and my way or the high way liberals. More LBJs, Obama's and FDRs progressives who get stuff done. Otherwise those youth are going to start losing.

Pragmatism/centrism is ideology, too.

Anyway...

Burning, damaging tea.

 

[HylianTom]

24 hours from now, Rubio will be done as a candidate. Soak it in.

I'm still pinching myself that this has all really happened. This cycle has brought fear, euphoria, badassery, extreme annoyance, confusion, suspense, mystery..

Seriously - I want a miniseries of this cycle. Start from Election Night 2012, go to the authoring of the GOP's 2013 autopsy, and go from there. Once candidates start declaring for the primaries, follow a different campaign in each episode, jumping around from week to week. At the start of the general election campaign, ditch the primary formula for a more standard narrative format: conventions, debates, hiccups and surprises, dirty underhanded traffic-stopping tricks done by both sides, maybe do an episode devoted all to backroom strategy and math..

End with Election Night 2016 - a special 2-hour finale - a pivotal night where the GOP has its final spectacular implosion, losing its chance at the White House in a >350EV routing, loss of both Houses of Congress, loss of SCOTUS for the first time in a generation (to last decades), downticket carnage, violent reactions, open recriminations and meltdowns live on the air as results come in - the works.

Netflix, HBO.. any of the good production networks works. We need this miniseries.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

So, prediction time: is Trump the nominee, or is he left out in the cold at the convention after failing to clear the delegate threshold?

I think Big Poppa Trump is taking this train all the way. Cruz is the worst anti-Trump candidate possible, and the map looks pretty bad for him moving forward, even 1-on-1, because I think many moderates will just stay home if Cruz is their only non-Trump option.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Pragmatism/centrism is ideology, too.

Anyway...

Burning, damaging tea.

I'm not a centrists.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

https://tylerpedigo.com/category/politics-2/


If his margin of error stays under 3 percentage points or less for all of the states tomorrow, I am going to start basing my predictions off of his model.

Given that he's missed several states by 20+ points, I don't see why you'd put an ounce of faith in that happening. He wasn't even within 3 percentage points in Michigan.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

https://tylerpedigo.com/category/politics-2/


If his margin of error stays under 3 percentage points or less for all of the states tomorrow, I am going to start basing my predictions off of his model.

Ctrl+F, search for the word delegates, 0 results found. Probable nominee huh? Until Sanders starts coming out of this with delegates and not "momentum" whatever the hell that means in mid-March then it's hard to see how he's winning anything.

 

[Fox318]

So, prediction time: is Trump the nominee, or is he left out in the cold at the convention after failing to clear the delegate threshold?

I think Big Poppa Trump is taking this train all the way. Cruz is the worst anti-Trump candidate possible, and the map looks pretty bad for him moving forward, even 1-on-1, because I think many moderates will just stay home if Cruz is their only non-Trump option.

If he isn't the nom a 3rd party will split off.

 

[pigeon]

Pragmatism/centrism is ideology, too.

Pragmatism is not the same as centrism. I have to deal with this all the time in OT, don't bring it here too.

Also I really don't agree with this. The whole point of pragmatism is that a lot of the time stuff just needs to get done, so you do the most progressive thing that will still fulfill the aims of government. Valuing ideology over results is what led the GOP to shut down the government over Obamcare.

Saying that doing stuff is an ideology is a lot like saying that science is just another religion. If the practical outcomes differ, then the belief systems differ too just because of context, because the real world actually exists.

 

[ugaboga232]

Pragmatism is not the same as centrism. I have to deal with this all the time in OT, don't bring it here too.

Also I really don't agree with this. The whole point of pragmatism is that a lot of the time stuff just needs to get done, so you do the most progressive thing that will still fulfill the aims of government. Valuing ideology over results is what led the GOP to shut down the government over Obamcare.

Saying that doing stuff is an ideology is a lot like saying that science is just another religion. If the practical outcomes differ, then the belief systems differ too just because of context, because the real world actually exists.

Would bernie really not do the most progressive thing he can? He may be idealogical but I don't think he's that far gone.

 

[brainchild]

Do you know what margin of error means?
I'm not trying to be a dick here, it's just terminology, you either learned it somewhere or you didn't, not knowing it doesn't make you stupid or anything, but you seem to be interested in statistics, so maybe you should do some reading about it, it's not super complicated.

There are multiple definitions, depending on the context.

For surveys, presumably data that is incorporated into a statistical model for statistical inferencing, MoE indicates how likely the model's results will vary from the actual results, typically expressed by '±' preceding a given value.

For models that don't incorporate surveys, the term 'margin of error' is typically more general and refers to 'observational error', or in the case of Tyler's model, the difference between what was predicted and what actually resulted.

But you can keep acting like there's only one prescriptive definition of 'margin of error' if you want to. It doesn't change the validity of anything that I've stated.

 

[metalslimer]

How in the world can you be the probably front runner with a like 200 delegate deficit

 

[Iolo]

Green Tea Party

As my mom always said, if you're only gonna post once, make it count

There is a non-zero chance that Hillary Clinton will have a bad day tomorrow.

Tyler returns with a bold prediction.

Also, the closest person in this thread to tomorrow's results gets to be the new Tyler (including Tyler).

 

[Armaros]

Would bernie really not do the most progressive thing he can? He may be idealogical but I don't think he's that far gone.

Has he said at any point he would settle for anything less then his campaign positions?

He has publicly stated if he doesn't get his way, he will bully pulpit congress into submission by getting people to march onto DC.

Thats sounds like his way or the highway.

 

[pigeon]

Would bernie really not do the most progressive thing he can? He may be idealogical but I don't think he's that far gone.

Bernie is literally famous for letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. It's practically the entire reason he's notable enough to run. It is, in fact, an excellent summary statement for his campaign. (Except I think he's just wrong on a bunch of policy issues as well.)

 

[Krowley]

Well I for one would be happy for a more aggressive leftist movement in the democratic party. You can call it the Tea Party of the left if you want, and there may be some reasonable comparisons, but I'm not happy at all the current democratic party. I want to see an insurgent come in, someone like Bernie, and tear it to pieces, and replace it with something much further to the left and much more aggressive.

I want a democratic party that advocates for massive increase in the size of the government. Big programs, big changes. I want a democratic party that isn't in the pocket of big business. I want a democratic party that doesn't advocate for unrestricted trade deals that screw of American working people. I want a democratic party with an agenda that isn't dictated by corporate scum-bags. Because, honestly, regular people need a party that's looking out for them and keeping the elites in check. This democratic party is playing both sides of the fence, and people (some people anyway) are getting sick of it.

Assuming Bernie doesn't win, and assuming Georgia never becomes competitive in the General, I will be voting for the Green Party candidate, and I hope that a legion of Bernie supporters in non-competitve states do the same. Because, the system is rigged against the regular people, and we can't just accept it anymore. There has to be some kind of organized resistance to this bullshit.

Honestly, if Donald Trump wasn't campaigning as a fucking racist scum-bag, he might get my vote just for taking a more populist approach on issues like trade. I love the idea of tearing the political parties to pieces (either of them) so having Donald come in and fucking tear the republican coalition to shreds appeals to me on a deep, deep level. But he went waaayyyy too far for me to ever be able to support him a long time ago.

If it came down to Hillary and him, and I knew that my vote really mattered, I would swallow my anger and vote for Hillary. But if I can find a way to check the ballot for somebody further to the left, I will do so.

Anyway, I know these views are pretty different than most in this thread, who seem to be very comfortable with the way the party is heading, but I just had to air them out. I watched my whole community get decimated by trade policies advocated by Bill Clinton and Obama, and I just don't want anymore of that kind of bullshit. I want a party with a bottom-up focus. With answers to problems regular people are facing. And I am pissed about it.

As for tomorrow.----

Bernie wins Oh, MO, and IL

Hillary wins NC and Florida.

Margins will be the key. I think Bernie has a chance (maybe not a great chance, but some kind of chance) to get a more reasonable margin in NC than he has in other southern states. As for Florida, I think that's the sort of state that votes the party-line, and I think she'll beat him by about 20% there.

 

[danm999]

Green Tea Party

This got a laugh out of me I'll admit.

 

[brainchild]

Given that he's missed several states by 20+ points, I don't see why you'd put an ounce of faith in that happening. He wasn't even within 3 percentage points in Michigan.

I'm not putting an ounce of faith in anything. That's why there was a big, fat 'IF' in that post; it was a conditional statement.

Ctrl+F, search for the word delegates, 0 results found. Probable nominee huh? Until Sanders starts coming out of this with delegates and not "momentum" whatever the hell that means in mid-March then it's hard to see how he's winning anything.

He's arguing narrative, which is actually something that the media DOES care about, no matter how much you guys will try to dismiss.

It wouldn't make him the front runner, but the perception would certainly shift in that direction.

 

[royalan]

https://tylerpedigo.com/category/politics-2/


If his margin of error stays under 3 percentage points or less for all of the states tomorrow, I am going to start basing my predictions off of his model.

I'm not questioning his numbers yet, but i am wondering how he figures a win in two states tomorrow makes him the "probably nominee." Hillary in '08 won plenty of states, including some big ones. Didn't matter in the end.

 

[Armaros]

I'm not putting an ounce of faith in anything. That's why there was a big, fat 'IF' in that post; it was a conditional statement.



He's arguing narrative, which is actually something that the media DOES care about, no matter how much you guys will try to dismiss.

It wouldn't make him the front runner, but the perception would certainly shift in that direction.

Narrative means bunk without delegates to back it up.

Obama had both. And Obama had less delegate then Hillary does now.

 

[And_Gignac]

Pragmatism is not the same as centrism. I have to deal with this all the time in OT, don't bring it here too.

Also I really don't agree with this. The whole point of pragmatism is that a lot of the time stuff just needs to get done, so you do the most progressive thing that will still fulfill the aims of government. Valuing ideology over results is what led the GOP to shut down the government over Obamcare.

Saying that doing stuff is an ideology is a lot like saying that science is just another religion. If the practical outcomes differ, then the belief systems differ too just because of context, because the real world actually exists.

They are not the same but politcally and discoursevely they are used and parroted quite similarly, to the point they become difficult to differentiate.

Doing stuff is an ideology. What stuff has to be "done"? How do you prioritize? When something becomes worthy of discussion, debate and compromise and when it does not? The line is more blurry than what pragmatics would like to believe.

 

[eBay Huckster]

I'm not questioning his numbers yet, but i am wondering how he figures a win in two states tomorrow makes him the "probably nominee." Hillary in '08 won plenty of states, including some big ones. Didn't matter in the end.

Gary Hart won 7 more states than Walter Mondale and finished more than 400 pledged delegates behind.

Momentum ain't shit

Spoiler

especially when the prize for winning the nomination is getting your soul snatched from ya body by Prime Reagan

 

[stupei]

I wouldn't know, tickets are impossible to get.

Tickets on Sunday (when Lin Manuel isn't on) are always cheaper in resale, which is how I went. He is the least necessary member of the cast anyway. As long as Leslie Odom is on, you are seeing the best thing on Broadway in about a decade.

But honestly, a lot of the recording captures at least some of the greatness. It's just that a lot of the songs they choose to perform or pull selects from don't work as effectively outside the context of the overall show's arc.

But okay sorry, back to polls.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

The National Review reveals that their problem with Trump isn't the misogyny or the racism or the fascism, just that Trump says he won't let the poor die in the streets (even though his health care plan will allow that).

 

[brainchild]

I'm not questioning his numbers yet, but i am wondering how he figures a win in two states tomorrow makes him the "probably nominee." Hillary in '08 won plenty of states, including some big ones. Didn't matter in the end.

It's three states, and he's already explained it in his post. His early data for the upcoming states all the way to the latter half of April seem to be indicating that Bernie will win them all.

Narrative means bunk without delegates to back it up.

Obama had both. And Obama had less delegate then Hillary does now.

That's fine, but it doesn't change the argument that that would be the narrative.

 

[Holmes]

let me log off

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

That's fine, but it doesn't change the argument that that would be the narrative.

So it would be a false narrative?

 

[metalslimer]

No news outlet is going to presume him the frontrunner with a massive delegate gap and an even more massive ones with no super delegate movement. Well none of the reputable ones will anyway.

 

[brainchild]

So it would be a false narrative?

Sure, you could say that.

No news outlet is going to presume him the frontrunner with a massive delegate gap and an even more massive ones with no super delegate movement. Well none of the reputable ones will anyway.

There aren't too many of those.

 

[Suikoguy]

Well I for one would be happy for a more aggressive leftist movement in the democratic party. You can call it the Tea Party of the left if you want, and there may be some reasonable comparisons, but I'm not happy at all the current democratic party. I want to see an insurgent come in, someone like Bernie, and tear it to pieces, and replace it with something much further to the left and much more aggressive.

I want a democratic party that advocates for massive increase in the size of the government. Big programs, big changes. I want a democratic party that isn't in the pocket of big business. I want a democratic party that doesn't advocate for unrestricted trade deals that screw of American working people. I want a democratic party with an agenda that isn't dictated by corporate scum-bags. Because, honestly, regular people need a party that's looking out for them and keeping the elites in check. This democratic party is playing both sides of the fence, and people (some people anyway) are getting sick of it.

Assuming Bernie doesn't win, and assuming Georgia never becomes competitive in the General, I will be voting for the Green Party candidate, and I hope that a legion of Bernie supporters in non-competitve states do the same. Because, the system is rigged against the regular people, and we can't just accept it anymore. There has to be some kind of organized resistance to this bullshit.

Honestly, if Donald Trump wasn't campaigning as a fucking racist scum-bag, he might get my vote just for taking a more populist approach on issues like trade. I love the idea of tearing the political parties to pieces (either of them) so having Donald come in and fucking tear the republican coalition to shreds appeals to me on a deep, deep level. But he went waaayyyy too far for me to ever be able to support him a long time ago.

If it came down to Hillary and him, and I knew that my vote really mattered, I would swallow my anger and vote for Hillary. But if I can find a way to check the ballot for somebody further to the left, I will do so.

Anyway, I know these views are pretty different than most in this thread, who seem to be very comfortable with the way the party is heading, but I just had to air them out. I watched my whole community get decimated by trade policies advocated by Bill Clinton and Obama, and I just don't want anymore of that kind of bullshit. I want a party with a bottom-up focus. With answers to problems regular people are facing. And I am pissed about it.

As for tomorrow.----

Bernie wins Oh, MO, and IL

Hillary wins NC and Florida.

Margins will be the key. I think Bernie has a chance (maybe not a great chance, but some kind of chance) to get a more reasonable margin in NC than he has in other southern states. As for Florida, I think that's the sort of state that votes the party-line, and I think she'll beat him by about 20% there.

Please read this and get some perspective. This kind of idealism is dangerous and unsustainable in the long run.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/26/opinion/the-governing-cancer-of-our-time.html

Politics is an activity in which you recognize the simultaneous existence of different groups, interests and opinions. You try to find some way to balance or reconcile or compromise those interests, or at least a majority of them. You follow a set of rules, enshrined in a constitution or in custom, to help you reach these compromises in a way everybody considers legitimate.

The downside of politics is that people never really get everything they want. It’s messy, limited and no issue is ever really settled. Politics is a muddled activity in which people have to recognize restraints and settle for less than they want. Disappointment is normal.
But that’s sort of the beauty of politics, too. It involves an endless conversation in which we learn about other people and see things from their vantage point and try to balance their needs against our own. Plus, it’s better than the alternative: rule by some authoritarian tyrant who tries to govern by clobbering everyone in his way.

I do however appreciate that you are not for burning everything to the ground. I also understand that the Democratic party is not the primary culprit.

 

[Armaros]

No news outlet is going to presume him the frontrunner with a massive delegate gap and an even more massive ones with no super delegate movement. Well none of the reputable ones will anyway.

The most they will do is say he still has a viable path somehow.

 

[brainchild]

The most they will do is say he still has a viable path somehow.

I've seen some outlets argue that Bernie's still winning even when he's losing.

I don't know why we're giving the media so much benefit of the doubt all of a sudden, as if their headlines have ever been rational.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Didn't know Ike tried to replace Nixon as his VP his second term with a democrat lol

 

[metalslimer]

The most they will do is say he still has a viable path somehow.

Right we will probably get a bunch of articles about how Hilary was so far in the lead and how this is still a race.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

I've seen some outlets argue that Bernie's still winning even when he's losing.

I don't know why we're giving the media so much benefit of the doubt all of a sudden, as if their headlines have ever been rational.

The post you linked never mentioned anything about the media. Just said probable nominee.

 

[Macho Madness]

QUORA MAN

Is it a hate crime if I throw away the Hilary Clinton signs in my neighborhood and replace them for Bernie Sanders?

Why is Bernie Sanders losing the African-American vote to Hillary Clinton, despite having a pitch-perfect record in fighting for their rights?

What would happen if I declared myself Emperor of the United States?

What should I do if my dog ate raw pork?

Why didn't the Jews convert to Christianity to avoid persecution during the Second World War?

How can you tell if ground beef is old?

Politics: Why doesn't Obama run for president this time?

Is there any research being done in how to treat the mental health condition known as religious belief?

 

[Stumpokapow]

There are multiple definitions, depending on the context.

For surveys, presumably data that is incorporated into a statistical model for statistical inferencing, MoE indicates how likely the model's results will vary from the actual results, typically expressed by '±' preceding a given value.

For models that don't incorporate surveys, the term 'margin of error' is typically more general and refers to 'observational error', or in the case of Tyler's model, the difference between what was predicted and what actually resulted.

But you can keep acting like there's only one prescriptive definition of 'margin of error' if you want to. It doesn't change the validity of anything that I've stated.

I think you mean "error"; margin of error typically prefers to the construction of a confidence interval (or in Bayesian terms, a credibility interval). It reflects underlying uncertainty in the model or prediction. The same estimate can have wider or narrower margins of error depending on the level of confidence you want. It would be very nonstandard in statistical terms to use the term "margin of error" to refer to the magnitude of the error term in an empirical prediction.

 

[Effect]

let me log off

What is this clip from?

 

[And_Gignac]

What is this clip from?

Raw footage of Hillary Clinton after Michigan results, I think.

 

[ugaboga232]

Bernie is literally famous for letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. It's practically the entire reason he's notable enough to run. It is, in fact, an excellent summary statement for his campaign. (Except I think he's just wrong on a bunch of policy issues as well.)

What?? Hasn't he been hit on voting for flawed bills or doing good but not perfect things. At some point it comes down to our own intuitions/feelings (NOT LOGICAL THINGS) but I FEEL like bernie may be idealogically oriented but understands compromise (something something VA bill something something).

 

[johnsmith]

What is this clip from?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnxpHIl5Ynw

 

[And_Gignac]

Gary Hart won 7 more states than Walter Mondale and finished more than 400 pledged delegates behind.

Momentum ain't shit

Spoiler

especially when the prize for winning the nomination is getting your soul snatched from ya body by Prime Reagan

And Haart actually led Mondale for a moment.

Quite funny that the roles are kind of reversed. Mondale was a 70s liberal, while Hart was a proto-third way, "new left" liberal (like Clinton could be assumed to be, even when she is probably more hard-liberal than Mondale was back then)

 

[Krowley]

Please read this and get some perspective. This kind of idealism is dangerous and unsustainable in the long run.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/26/opinion/the-governing-cancer-of-our-time.html



I do however appreciate that you are not for burning everything to the ground. I also understand that the Democratic party is not the primary culprit.

They're better than the republicans. That's for sure. Republicans have become actual super villains. They're literally the party of Lex Luthor now.

But I would never call myself a Democrat either. Although these days, that's who gets my vote most of the time. I am a genuine independent.

For perspective's sake, way back in the day when I first started voting, I voted for Ross Perot. Not so much because of his policies (although he was right on Trade, and I saw the results manifest over the years in exactly the way he predicted.). I didn't really know that much about policy back then. I mainly voted for him because I felt we needed to take the reins away from the power players. I wanted more choices, and the idea of a legitimate threat from a 3rd party was very appealing to me. The fact that Bernie (a lifelong independent) is using the two party system to wage a real presidential campaign is very exciting to me. I felt the same way about Ron Paul, even though I'm only a libertarian on certain social issues these days.

If Mike Bloomberg ran against Hillary and Trump, I would vote for him without a doubt, even though I disagree with him on numerous issues.

 

[Abinash117]

So it would be a false narrative?

People like to believe in bullshit and at times don't care or know about the little details that makes a big difference. The fact if Bernie wins 3 states, it is all that matters regardless if he wins 3 states by 1 point or 2 and loses the last two 20-30%.

 

[Maengun1]

I'm going to be at work tomorrow from 4pm-midnight eastern, with no computer. Which means I'll probably be taking a lot of "bathroom breaks" with my phone because the suspense is going to be killing me.

I see that 538 still has Clinton with 90% or above to win Ohio and Illinois, which is interesting because they downgraded Missouri to a virtual coin flip. I know they botched Michigan along with everyone else but I've trusted them completely since 2008 so I guess tomorrow is the make or break.

I suppose it won't matter either way for the delegates -- it's gonna be close -- but I can't help but get caught up in the drama.

edit: and I definitely think the State Wins Narrative means a lot for Clinton tomorrow night, as it's looking like we're about to enter a month dominated by Bernie wins.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Would bernie really not do the most progressive thing he can? He may be idealogical but I don't think he's that far gone.

My problem is he's an ideologue and not pragmatic.

Liberal doctrine hates GMO thus Bernie Sanders hates GMO, regardless of any pragmatic considerations of good policy.

Liberal doctrine hates Trade Deals thus Bernie Sanders hates trade deals regardless of prgamatic considerations of good policy.

Liberal doctrine hates wall street and everything about it with no nuance, regardless of pragmatic considerations of good policy.

This is not where I want the left to go. And its not just about this issue (the issues will change). I want a progressive party that is constantly adaptive to what's going on in the world and how we can best solve problems even if those solutions change! I don't just want them applying what "liberalism" as an unchanging ideology says

I don't see that in Obama and Clinton.

I want a party who always questioning itself and its presumtions and not with purity tests and how close we can come to pure liberalism. I want a curious party, a party and one that can adapt. I don't want a part that posts the same 5 things on facebook and twitter everyday becuase its ideas are so basic and lacking nuance. Sanders is unable to re-frame and issue beyond his basic critique of a rigged system (which tells us nothing btw) and that to me is problem and why I don't want the left drifting in his direction.

Again this isn't always a policy critique with sanders (though has the primary has gone on its become more so.) Its a disposition and an attitude that's shared with the Tea Party that bother me

 

[NYCmetsfan]

The National Review reveals that their problem with Trump isn't the misogyny or the racism or the fascism, just that Trump says he won't let the poor die in the streets (even though his health care plan will allow that).

SO kevin williamson is not only a racist, he's a dick of the highest order with out any sense of human dignity

 

[ugaboga232]

My problem is he's an ideologue and not pragmatic.

Liberal doctrine hates GMO thus Bernie Sanders hates GMO, regardless of any pragmatic considerations of good policy.

Liberal doctrine hates Trade Deals thus Bernie Sanders hates trade deals regardless of prgamatic considerations of good policy.

Liberal doctrine hates wall street and everything about it with no nuance, regardless of pragmatic considerations of good policy.

This is not where I want the left to go. And its not just about this issue (the issues will change). I want a progressive party that is constantly adaptive to what's going on in the world and how we can best solve problems even if those solutions change! I don't just want them applying what "liberalism" as an unchanging ideology says

I don't see that in Obama and Clinton.

I want a party who always questioning itself and its presumtions and not with purity tests and how close we can come to pure liberalism. I want a curious party, a party and one that can adapt. Sanders is unable to re-frame and issue beyond his basic critique of a rigged system (which tells us nothing btw) and that to me is problem and why I don't want the left drifting in his direction.

Again this isn't always a policy critique with sanders (though has the primary has gone on its become more so.) Its a disposition and an attitude that's shared with the Tea Party that bother me

I agree with you on all of this post full stop (hate his lack of nuance and crap campaigning but hes a 78 year old socialist that waters down his own values so go figure).

But part of me thinks that while hillary hits all of these points (I don't doubt at all that she is progressive even when she tries to bring in the center, thats just good politcking), is that she won't try to change the basic system or even voice concern about the fundamentals of the system. There is lots of research on how laws are not crafted based on the views of the population (which is fine at some level but is at absurd levels in the republican party) and it will be hard to fix this just be waiting things out till the right of the future is the left of now.

(great post btw, gave me some pause, I do not like this values and perhaps its due to my own bubble which is a bit more nuanced in their own views that I did not fully grasp what you are worried about with the Green Tea Party)