Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
Not only that but Clinton made LGBTQ equality a staple of her platform. Yeah, Sanders has a platform on his website that lists things he will do, but Clinton is actively campaigning on it.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT6| Delete your accounts
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
Not only that but Clinton made LGBTQ equality a staple of her platform. Yeah, Sanders has a platform on his website that lists things he will do, but Clinton is actively campaigning on it.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I thought that was Hillary's job
http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Both the above are true if you're playing an iterated game, but we're not. Sanders isn't going to be relevant in four years, he doesn't have a 'reputation' for rationality to conserve.
Unlike Sanders, I probably will still be posting in PoliGAF in however long, so I do have an incentive to conserve my reputation.
That said, I have to admit it is sometimes awfully tempting to try and convince you I'd genuinely want him to run as an Independent. It would be fun, for sure.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Forgive me a wry smile at this post, if I may.
excelsiorlef
Member
Macho Madness
Member
While it's obviously not a good sign for her favorability to be that low among Sanders voters, it does suggest that the current close Trump polls are a combination of 2 factors.
1. Republican voters coalescing around Trump. Even non-Trump ones. (What were they going to do? Vote Hillary? Hah!)
2. Bernie supporters feeling despair and desperation as the Bernie campaign turns on the "Fasten your seatbelt" sign and captain Bernie prepares for landing. The landing may be very important because this is where Clinton can make up ground (and will likely anyway).
It should be very interesting to see the next month play out.
1. Republican voters coalescing around Trump. Even non-Trump ones. (What were they going to do? Vote Hillary? Hah!)
2. Bernie supporters feeling despair and desperation as the Bernie campaign turns on the "Fasten your seatbelt" sign and captain Bernie prepares for landing. The landing may be very important because this is where Clinton can make up ground (and will likely anyway).
It should be very interesting to see the next month play out.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
I think the gist of the article is right, but it's not comprehensive.
Consider that the unions went for Hillary, when Bernie's message is probably most potent with white-working-class union members who aren't all that liberal on social issues. That's probably a bigger one than the LGBT endorsement, but both are merely examples of a larger trend. There is an "establishment" which favor Hillary. This issue with that statement isn't it's truth, it's the loaded connotations of the word "establishment." Democrats aren't hippies, and "establishment" shouldn't be a dirty word. It's not surprising that it resonates most with youth voters.
"Establishment" is a good thing. It means organization, GOTV infrastructure, coordination of effort behind key initiates. It's why parties exist. It's only a bad thing if it's co-opted by people with the wrong people (see Chicago Machine). Bernie calling PP "establishment" as an insult pissed me off a lot. It's such an immature, old-hippie criticism, and indicative of lazy thinking.
Retromelon
Member
And here's me thinking fuckorina was the nadir of your creativity
Donnybrook is a hilarious term to me.
Fuckorina is a masterpiece and you will dealAnd here's me thinking fuckorina was the nadir of your creativity
The bright side is that she's still winning at least 50% of his voters (well, it's better than 20%), and that she's still winning against Trump.
I've been thinking there is a danger for Sanders here. If Hillary still wins in November _despite_ many of his supporters being disaffected, and without a strong endorsement by Bernie, his legacy basically evaporates. So from a purely calculating perspective, it makes sense to torpedo her image enough that she can't win without him. But if he tries this and she loses, he becomes a pariah; if he tries it and she wins, he becomes a nobody. The only way out is through intense diplomatic negotiation with both Clinton and the DNC, and so far I haven't seen anything resembling a diplomat in Sanders.
I've been thinking there is a danger for Sanders here. If Hillary still wins in November _despite_ many of his supporters being disaffected, and without a strong endorsement by Bernie, his legacy basically evaporates. So from a purely calculating perspective, it makes sense to torpedo her image enough that she can't win without him. But if he tries this and she loses, he becomes a pariah; if he tries it and she wins, he becomes a nobody. The only way out is through intense diplomatic negotiation with both Clinton and the DNC, and so far I haven't seen anything resembling a diplomat in Sanders.
Hillary "I have a lifetime of experience I will bring to the White House. Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech in 2002." Clinton.
Mind you, she said that in March of 2008.
Hillary "I don't buy the party unity argument, because, again, I've been around long enough. You know my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California" Clinton.
May 23rd, 2008. You know. The equivalent of yesterday.
And everyone freaks out about Bernie being over the top and hurting Clinton.
Sad!
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
I don't get how Sanders believes the system is rigged against him when the goddamn system started with 2 gift-package states and half of the states he won are from caucuses.
BlastProcessing
Member
But you said that American politics where incredibly stable. Substantial change in the landscape in 3 and a half months seems pretty fluid to me...
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Different things. Ideologies are stable, by and large. The broad undercurrent of the positions the Democratic and Republican parties believe in have stayed the same - the only difference is that the Republican party's elite lost control of their party. People, though? They come and go. Nobody remembers McCain.
If you want to influence ideology, you need to make sure there are people after you in positions where drip by drip by drip, they can change institutions.
User 463088
Banned
I mean, I don't see these as the same? Obama was incredibly inexperienced as compared to Hillary and McCain. I don't think that's really in question, is it? Doesn't mean he was totally unready for the job, but to pretend that he was as qualified and experienced as McCain or Hillary a la 2008 is a bit of a stretch. Personally, I didn't think he was ready to be President on day one. He beat the shit out of my expectations, though.
I won't defend her Kennedy comments because they weren't okay. I didn't like them then, and I don't like them now.
But, the difference between Bernie 2016 and Hillary 2008 is quite obvious, to me at least. Bernie is running against the entire Democratic party. It's not just Hillary that's corrupt...it's the DNC, DWS, the process of the nomination, etc. He's saying things that could be harmful to the entire party not just Hillary's candidacy.
Also, Bernie has little incentive to unite the party. He's 74. He's been an independent his entire life. He can go on back to Vermont whenever he wants, and continue to yell at clouds. His reputation is as an outsider not as a partisan, so if the party turns against him it's a feather in his cap.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
The 550 dislikes are priceless.
And we all said Hillary was a turd for doing this turdie stuff in 2008.
We will know that things are following the same path if, 3 days after CA, Bernie gracefully concedes and begins the long hard work of unifying the party.
in 2008, people were praising Hillary for doing what she did?
No? No.
So Bernie should get criticized for doing the same.
Deal with it.
Edit: Also Hillary didnt demand control of the plateform various other concessions to hop on board, she immediately went to bat for Obama. So much for Bernie Unity.
It's quite remarkable how little Hillary is ever ahead of the curve. She seemingly never does something or says something that doesn't haunt her later.
This seems to be our major point of disagreement, and it's basically, like, an actuarial question. My assumption is that Bernie wants to go back to being the Senator from Vermont after this is over, and presumably that he'll keep doing that until he can't any more.
Bernie's senate seat was, for a long time at least, a client state of the Democratic Party -- they explicitly endorsed him and refused to run against him. Obviously he's got a lot of national presence at this point and maybe he could win even if they did run, but the country is pretty polarized now! If Bernie wants to have a calm and productive Senatorial career, antagonizing the DNC too much is probably a bad idea.
If you're right and Sanders's focus is on creating a better future/#yoloI'm80, then clearly this won't be a concern for him.
Unlike Sanders, I probably will still be posting in PoliGAF in however long, so I do have an incentive to conserve my reputation.
We have enough Sanders trolls around here already.*
* We don't, they all got banned.
nature boy
Member
TYT is going to go (even more) nuts:
BlastProcessing
Member
Exactly. People come and go in American politics so politicians cash in the second that they can. That was my entire point. Sanders can either, fade away like McCain and get nothing for it, or he can get a sweet, sweet chairmanship.
Polls like this really showcase how much the undecided vote are people who are going to break for Clinton.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
People come and go, institutions don't, and they're incredibly slow-moving. Getting enough people in the DNC drafting process to influence that is far more significant than a budget chairmanship for what, two years until the Democrats lose the Senate again, because after Sanders and those people are gone, the rules remain.
I also doubt they'll take the budget chair away anyway. He can quite easily have both.
A) Imagine if Sanders gave Trump an attack line like that in March. It's not that she made the comment - it's that she flat out handed an attack line to McCain all the way in March. For all of Sanders' comments; he hasn't handed out an attack line praising himself and Trump at the expense of Clinton.
B) Even outside the Kennedy part - Clinton herself is all "party unity whatever" even late into May...which is precisely what Sanders is saying (and being criticized by Hillary-GAF for) at the same time in the primary, down the same amount, and it looks like Clinton is going to clinch the nomination the same time Obama did (first week of June). Even worse, Clinton's been part of the party at this point for so long, so it could be seen as more jarring that she's dropping the "party unity whatever" line this late into the game.
C) Sanders is doing the Dems a bit of a favor by running a little more against the party now and bringing the divide to the forefront rather than letting it simmer and having the Dems go up in flames ala the GOP's current path. I'd rather have it out at the convention at the most winnable election we've had in decades instead of pulling a GOP 8 years from now and having the party go crazy.
D) Sure he does - he still has his core principles that he fights for and the Dem party is far more aligned with many of them than the GOP.
I think he will take it to the convention so he keeps his leverage, they will give him his speech time / policy time, he'll give his soapbox speech and talk about how they're going to make the Democratic Party a bigger tent to include younger voters and their concerns, etc etc, vote Hillary, go team. He'd be an idiot to give up his leverage until the convention. After the convention there will be months and months for the Trump / Clinton war to resume. Barring major scandal, nothing that happens until post Convention will matter in the general election.
That's because context is important, and stripping sentences of their context can drastically change their intended meaning (see: Obama's "you didn't build that").
The "unity argument" was the narrative that the longer she stuck around, the harder it would be for the party to unify. Similar to the one about Bernie now.
She was responding to a question about whether she agreed with the argument that party unity is being hurt by her sticking in the race at that late juncture, despite having no clear (albeit, still infinitely better than Bernie) chance at winning the nomination.
She then utilized two examples - one that showcased that the party unified fine after her husband's primary as late as that ended (implication being she approves of and thinks the party will have unity after she or Obama conceded), and the other being an inarticulate way of saying that she could also potentially be nominated if something serious happened to Obama. Thus her "been around a long time" schtick - she has seen the extremes. And the party will unify.
She deserved criticism for the poor second example given the nature of his candidacy, but this was by no means some outrageous comment. I don't know why it keeps getting brought up. I have to imagine it makes a easy soundbite point scorer while being far more exhaustive to actually dismantle.
gutter_trash
Banned
LOL, Sanders has been untouched by Republicans besides a few quips from Marco Rubio.
Trump called him Crazy Bernie but then goes off saying how he is being unfairly treated by the Dems
If a hypothetically Sanders were to win the nom, a swath of red banners, soviet anthems with hammers & sickels woudl flood the internets
Trump called him Crazy Bernie but then goes off saying how he is being unfairly treated by the Dems
If a hypothetically Sanders were to win the nom, a swath of red banners, soviet anthems with hammers & sickels woudl flood the internets
NYCmetsfan
Banned
That Dawkins thread is pure trumpism from so called liberals.
Cornel West will get nothing. Waste of a pick by Sanders.
Not sure if anything, but figured here would know better than I
https://twitter.com/KThomasDC/status/735145865891876867
Macho Madness
Member
It's essentially a machine recount and is fairly common in Kentucky.
This is my take as well. Unlike hillgaf, Clinton knows she needs Sanders' supporters -- she knows it's best for the party and the GE for her to bring them into her camp, so she's not going to intentionally try to push them out. She doesn't want to get petty revenge on Sanders or his supporters, she wants them to work for her and she's going to embrace them. She knows primaries can get ugly but people can come together afterward. She's done this before -- she's even been in Sanders' shoes.
I don't think people object to her saying it. People object to the hypocrisy of her supporters when they were, or at least should have been, ok with her staying in the race but not ok with Bernie staying in the race. Pointing out that quote is essentially saying "Hillary herself is fine with the idea of someone staying in when they don't have a probable chance of victory, so you should be fine with it too" -- afaik, this time around Hillary hasn't really pushed for Bernie to exit for the sake of party unity either. This isn't her first rodeo -- she knows how this stuff works.
BlastProcessing
Member
We have radically different ideas on how the American Political process works. Especially if you think that fighting for incremental changes to a convention platform is more substantive than only two years controlling the freaking Senate Budget committee. The DNC has already signaled that he can have both, he just needs to play ball. He will.
If Sanders goes nuclear, not only will they take his Chair away, they will Primary his ass. He is quite popular in his home state, so he could fend it off, it will wound him and effectively end his career. They will shut him out.
I wanted Hillary out by that point in 2008, and I want Bernie out now. Both have no clear path. There needs to be better accounting of which posters people are referring to then if we are to point out that sort of specific hypocrisy.
But this comment was posted with this:
But the comment was not over the top, and is nothing like what Bernie is doing now. Bernie's campaign has suggested the entire DNC is against them, refuses to help most downticket races, has named numerous bullshit conspiracies about why the process is unfair, has outright fabricated allegations and perilously misleads his supporters about what's going on. Hillary for whatever one thinks of her always maintained she would unify with whoever the nominee is, was always helping the DNC, and continued her clear working-within-the-system strategy. It was not some outrageous hat being hung on nonsense.
In that comment, Hillary was merely saying she's been around a long time and understands the party will unify when all is said and done.
RustyNails
Member
Yup. New Atheists and Trumpets are cut from same cloth.
I wonder when we're going to get someone doing a poll with Sanders as the third option.
theprodigy
Member
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
A lot of the people who want Bernie to drop were Obama supporters. Me, for instance.
I wanted the race over, I don't recall any deep denial about chances. I did not like Clinton feeding the criticism of Obama longer than necessary.
As I recall, the race ended essentially when Obama flipped superdelegates to cement his lead.
If you are fishing for some hypocrisy, I don't see it here. I wanted the race over then, I want it over now. I don't like the infighting that helps the opposition. I don't like Benrie's attack on the whole party.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Yeah Trump barely gains at all. It's Sanders supporters who keep telling themselves their guy is still in it and won't admit yet that they'd vote for Clinton over Trump.
Someone (Nate Silver?) posted that 75% of Sanders supporters have a favorable opinion of Obama. His endorsement as well as Sanders' will swing a lot of support her way. There will certainly be some "If Sanders doesn't win I'm not voting" people, but I don't think they'll add up to much in the end. No more so than usual.
Once party unity kicks in Hillary's polling numbers will look more like Bernie's. And frankly the fact that she's still leading is encouraging.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked