Support NeoGAF

[jtb]

You misread my post, but fucking LMAO at the notion that Sanders hasn't been subjected to a smear campaign by the Democratic establishment and institutions affiliated with it.

[citation needed]

I mean, Sanders doesn't even have shit on the Obama/Clinton quasi-racist blood fued.

I don't want to go full ~both sideszzz~ but most of the innuendo and "smear" in 16 on, well both sides, was self-inflicted foot-in-mouth syndrome. I love a good smear campaign when I see one. By all accounts, both sides kept their gloves on for the 16 primary race.

(Also, you don't invite Bernie to do a fucking 50 state tour to single-handedly save the party if you're smearing him at the same time)

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

It's the context with him talking shit on Ossoff at the same time.

This strikes me as people looking for things to shit on Bernie about, tbh.

 

[Slayven]

I wonder if the willingness to "evolve" on the issue is mainly due to it mostly effecting women?

 

[jtb]

This strikes me as people looking for things to shit on Bernie about, tbh.

He just needs to learn the eleventh commandment. If he doesn't want to give an endorsement, then just shut the fuck up. Save everyone the excuse and the pain, himself most of all.

It's like my mama used to tell me...

 

[Vanillalite]

I'll probably get shit for this but whatever. I'm all for Planned Parenthood and think we need national healthcare in part to cover women's health.

On either side of the abortion issue though it's such a weird hill to die on with so much other shit going on in the world.

And yes I realize we can focus on more than one issue at a time.

Still always felt weird to me that this is the political hill people choose to die on or have a purity test on no matter your leaning and for both major parties.

 

[jtb]

I'll probably get shit for this but whatever. I'm all for Planned Parenthood and think we need national healthcare in part to cover women's health.

On either side of the abortion issue though it's such a weird hill to die on with so much other shit going on in the world.

And yes I realize we can focus on more than one issue at a time.

Still always felt weird to me that this is the political hill people choose to die on or have a purity test on no matter your leaning and for both major parties.

Do you have a vagina?

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Bernie's stance here is 100% rational and smart politics, btw. You ain't gonna solve the abortion divide for at least a few generations, but there is a large pool of commonality to be exploited in the realm of economics. It's actually surprisingly lucid from someone so bad at actually politicking.

 

[Slayven]

I'll probably get shit for this but whatever. I'm all for Planned Parenthood and think we need national healthcare in part to cover women's health.

On either side of the abortion issue though it's such a weird hill to die on with so much other shit going on in the world.

And yes I realize we can focus on more than one issue at a time.

Still always felt weird to me that this is the political hill people choose to die on or have a purity test on no matter your leaning and for both major parties.

Cause it's just not abortion, it's women health in general. Especially birth control which sometimes is used to treat other things

 

[jtb]

Overturning Roe v Wade has, historically, polled very poorly (70/30). The problem is abortion energizes the GOP base and is a key primary issue, while the Dem base shrugs their shoulders because... well, just look anywhere in this thread for your answer.

It's an easy issue to give up on because it doesn't impact 50% of your base. "Well, we wouldn't have won that fight anyways. Might as well give up and go home. #SpinelessDemsLOL" Whee.

 

[aeolist]

I wonder if the willingness to "evolve" on the issue is mainly due to it mostly effecting women?

raising the minimum wage mostly effects women

universal healthcare mostly effects women

 

[Pryce]

That's a curious thread title given this forum.

Anyway, I don't think Democrats needs to go pro-life, but taking a stance ala Biden or Kaine is perfectly fine.

 

[Slayven]

raising the minimum wage mostly effects women

universal healthcare mostly effects women

How will you achieve such things if you tell a pillar of your voting block we might opt out of your issues?

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

im sure you cracked the code.

Well, yes.
Free college doesn't work when your university landscape relies largely on private universities.
A post-industrial economy also doesn't require more than 25-35% of its workforce to be college educated. The US is already at around 30% and the economy doesn't need more. I never heard Sanders propose a plan how he wants to restrict access to free colleges to keep this number at around 30%.
Even if private universities would kind of take a step back and a free public system would take over, you'd still need an alternative education route to educate the other 70% of the population who wont go to college. High school alone won't suffice. All those people will lose their jobs to machines and AI.

9 out of every 10 jobs lost since the year 2000 were lost due to automation.
Yet, in 2016 the US had a record number of job openings.
The issue is blatantly obvious: The education system is designed for the economic realities of the 1950s, but the world has moved on.
And now you have an education system that produces workers the economy doesn't need anymore, and the economy is struggling because of a lack of skilled workers.


Secondly:
Universal healthcare won't work unless you have public nonprofit insurance companies, operating nationwide. Health insurance also has to be mandatory.
Sanders proposals were incomplete.

 

[O Canada Our Home and Native Land]

And...? Clearly I think that's a fucking horrible thing and a travesty.

Every dem in congress voted for the ACA. When push comes to shove, even with their jobs on the line, sometimes we can do the right thing. And often, it's worth it.

I don't really understand what your point is. You don't mind big tent politics. However you also don't think women's rights and poc issues should be messed with if you're calling yourself a progressive. So your main problem is labelling, not the actual issues or the politics behind it?

 

[aeolist]

How will you achieve such things if you tell a pillar of your voting block we might opt out of your shit?

well sanders has more support from women and minorities than men and whites so he seems to be doing something right

 

[Prologue]

Sanders is the most wishy washy, spineless Democrat to ever get a movement of people following him. Never stands up for what's difficult, always finds ways to sell out the weak.

So...... Hillary?

 

[jtb]

I don't really understand what your point is. You don't mind big tent politics. However you also don't think women's rights and poc issues should be messed with if you're calling yourself a progressive. So your main problem is labelling, not the actual issues or the politics behind it?

Labels are politics. The Democratic Party is a label. There is literally no reason reason whatsoever to shift the Overton window to the right on reproductive rights.

In fact, it's inexcusable.

 

[Slayven]

well sanders has more support from women and minorities than men and whites so he seems to be doing something right

Link to polls?

 

[Atilac]

Do you have a vagina?

If they did does that somehow disqualify their opinion?

 

[aeolist]

Link to polls?

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...nders-countrys-most-popular-active-politician

 

[old manatee]

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...nders-countrys-most-popular-active-politician

There should be a bar on that graph for poligaf.

 

[kirblar]

This strikes me as people looking for things to shit on Bernie about, tbh.

It's not when Ossoff is heading to a runoff and we literally cannot afford to turn off a single voter. An offhand statement like that giving tantamount permission to people to sit out the election is not cool whatsoever. Bernie has a history of this crap (see: not relenting in the primaries) and him getting pushback on it is a good thing.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

This strikes me as people looking for things to shit on Bernie about, tbh.

It's not. It was terrible reaction on his part and shows where's his head is instinctively at. It's not about someone not deserving a label, it's about not supporting someone because of it. It's strange that anyone can read in context:

Sanders was less interested in the Ossoff race. "He's not a progressive," he said. He was endorsing Democrats based on their economic populism; they could differ from progressives on social issues but not on the threat of the mega-rich to American politics.

as anything other than some kind of dreaded purity test. Him getting shit for it and walking it back was well earned.

 

[Keri]

Honestly, if "compromising" on women's rights becomes a larger trend in the Democratic party, I might as well start voting Republican and save money on my taxes. I think compromise from Democrats is really the death knell for access to abortion and birth control. It won't be immediate, but it means the fight is ending and women have lost.

 

[Slayven]

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...nders-countrys-most-popular-active-politician

Interesting, makes him dismissing the south odd

 

[aeolist]

Interesting, makes him dismissing the south odd

i'd imagine the numbers were different a year ago, but the more people hear from him the more they like him

also i think the southern electorate skews older and that's where the real split in the democratic party is

 

[jtb]

If they did does that somehow disqualify their opinion?

"The government should totally restrict what people can and cannot do with their vaginas," said a person without a vagina. "I mean, what's the fuss about anyways? doesn't really seem like a hill worth dying on from my point of view."

I'd say it's less "disqualified" and more "completely lacks any sense of self-awareness or empathy."

i'd imagine the numbers were different a year ago, but the more people hear from him the more they like him

also i think the southern electorate skews older and that's where the real split in the democratic party is

Agree on both accounts. Name recognition was Bernie's biggest challenge in 2016.

Also minorities skew Democratic significantly more than whites anyways, so it's possible Hillary had higher favorables (comparably) among some of these groups to Bernie.

Finally, and probably the most likely scenario, Jeff Weaver is an idiot.

 

[boiled goose]

Sanders also has a super high rating from women's rights organizations. 100 percent in many cases. But hate away lol.

If Sanders suddenly didn't support less pro choice candidates like Biden then the same people would pile on him too. Guess Bernie shouldn't have supporter Hillary in the general. Given she supports some restrictions on abortions while he does not.
http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/hillary-clinton-late-term-abortions

The hypocrisy by some on this forum is outstanding.

Don't care about an issue? PURITY TESTS!
Care about an issue enough to be ok with the issues of your candidate of choice when the alternative is better on the issue (but campaigns with candidates who are less good on the issue). No problems here!

I really really don't understand some people...

 

[digdug2k]

That's my point. He's fighting for Democrats. And he's STILL a demon to Hillary-crats. The guy just can't win. And HILLARY is widely considered a Moderate. But they'll deny that.

I haven't been following this, but I just think it's funny to see the purity test candidate try to flop on it. The guy can't win here because he's been a dick to anyone who didn't think exactly like him for 30 years. And his quote up there is just fucking awful. He might as well have just said "whatever it takes to win I guess".

But Dems gotta move further than this to actually win prolife support. "We don't like abortion" has to actually be in the platform. Who likes abortion? Who likes people who are cheering for abortions?

 

[O Canada Our Home and Native Land]

Honestly, if "compromising" on women's rights becomes a larger trend in the Democratic party, I might as well start voting Republican and save money on my taxes. I think compromise from Democrats is really the death knell for access to abortion and birth control. It won't be immediate, but it means the fight is ending and women have lost.

The best strategy going forward is to fight it in the courts. There already is Roe vs Wade on the books. Democrats only need to sneak in liberal judges to enforce the law everywhere. Fighting it out in the open in front of the media and public opinion is a mess. We need to make fundraise cases to overturn laws in every state.

 

[guek]

Interesting, makes him dismissing the south odd

Not really. This is a post-2016 poll and Hillary dominated the South as a familiar figure to minority communities but that doesn't mean Bernie was disliked. Voting for Hillary did not mean voting down Bernie.

That's not to say he didn't fuck up after South Carolina.

 

[KingV]

Good. Tired of purity tests when the Democrats need to fucking win. I don't want a defacto one party system because dems need everyone to be absolutely flawless on every issue.



This. The hell lol. Welcome to reality.

If the Republicans weren't currently some kind of tax-cut death cult. But they have become such a terrible party, as a whole, that we need a broad-based coalition just to keep them out of power.

If the Republicans were just "kind of shitty" instead of treasonous racist, thieves, I would be more comfortable having a hard line on any single issue. Basically as long as you believe in a fair society, in general, and aren't a white nationalist or a Russian stooge, then I think there's room in the Democratic Party even if you are not 100% on economic issues, and certain social issues, or gun control.

I'm not sure exactly where to draw the line, but it's hard when you know the alternative is "at least as bad as your conservadem + also evil"

 

[royalan]

Sanders also has a super high rating from women's rights organizations. 100 percent in many cases. But hate away lol.

If Sanders suddenly didn't support less pro choice candidates like Biden then the same people would pile on him too. Guess Bernie shouldn't have supporter Hillary in the general. Given she supports some restrictions on abortions while he does not.
http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/hillary-clinton-late-term-abortions

The hypocrisy by some on this forum is outstanding.

Don't care about an issue? PURITY TESTS!
Care about an issue enough to be ok with the issues of your candidate of choice when the alternative is better on the issue (but campaigns with candidates who are less good on the issue). No problems here!

I really really don't understand some people...

...it's like you didn't read the thread at all. Nobody cares about Bernie's support of anti-abortion candidates in and of itself.

 

[kirblar]

Honestly, if "compromising" on women's rights becomes a larger trend in the Democratic party, I might as well start voting Republican and save money on my taxes. I think compromise from Democrats is really the death knell for access to abortion and birth control. It won't be immediate, but it means the fight is ending and women have lost.

Women are a majority of the Dems. That is pretty much never going to change. One of the issues w/ online discussion (and heck, offline due to the way people socialize) is that men are over-represented in discourse. By a lot. Was about to post this up as an article- but Emily's List went from 900 candidates reaching out in 2016 to over 11K in 2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...9_story.html?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.75357484f721

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

i'd imagine the numbers were different a year ago, but the more people hear from him the more they like him

also i think the southern electorate skews older and that's where the real split in the democratic party is

No, age is not the "real split" in the Democratic Party. It's both race and age, by about 20 points each way.

Ex: Young PoC voted for Bernie by 20pts more than older PoC, young whites voted for Bernie by 20pts more than young PoC, young whites voted for Bernie by about 20pts more than older whites, older whites voted for Bernie by about 20pts more than older PoC

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

I haven't been following this, but I just think it's funny to see the purity test candidate try to flop on it. The guy can't win here because he's been a dick to anyone who didn't think exactly like him for 30 years. And his quote up there is just fucking awful. He might as well have just said "whatever it takes to win I guess".

But Dems gotta move further than this to actually win prolife support. "We don't like abortion" has to actually be in the platform. Who likes abortion? Who likes people who are cheering for abortions?

I'm wonder what difference it actually makes for this candidate, considering salivating anti-choice voters aren't actually getting anything that they want, if he's keeps his promise to fall in line with Party policy.

Hillary won Omaha, but candidates who have a complicated past on women's reproductive rights are a necessity? He's also pro-gun control, so that should help win those other voters over...

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Love to see Sanders called out in the title, after all the grief over his purity tests. Do you want the blue dogs to get his support?

Do you want him to throw people who want him to support the whole party like Pelosi a bone in who he shows up for? Or do you want to play 8th dimensional Connect Four to make leftists look bad at every opportunity, in the absence of any consistent ideological reasoning?

This is where I'll fully admit to a purity test personally. Not happy to see the most popular progressive supporting these people. I'm 100% against pro-life candidates. Period. But I see you all. I see how you play this like a game.

I think we just want him to stop calling anti-choice Democrats like Mello "true progressives" while saying candidates with center-left economic views like Ossoff aren't progressive. And to maybe think about what he says before he says it. That's all.

 

[jtb]

The best strategy going forward is to fight it in the courts. There already is Roe vs Wade on the books. Democrats only need to sneak in liberal judges to enforce the law everywhere. Fighting it out in the open in front of the media and public opinion is a mess. We need to make fundraise cases to overturn laws in every state.

Actually, there's a decent amount of literature that suggests that this is what got us in this hyper-polarized environment to begin with. The reason why the right has managed to create so much grassroots energy on this issue is precisely because it went through the courts - there's never been an up/down Democratic "vote" (so to speak) on the issue.

The perception that this decision was "made for them" by the elites has created the huge energy/enthusiasm gap between the two sides - the GOP is the perpetual underdog, while the Dems are the complacent status quo. Polling suggests that Roe v Wade, Planned Parenthood, etc. have 60+ majority support. But the pro-life movement, with its energy, is the majority of the minority, and has a vice grip over the GOP primaries.

Of course, plenty of debate on this. But that's the way the argument goes. I have no idea how you "solve" this problem.

Love to see Sanders called out in the title, after all the grief over his purity tests. Do you want the blue dogs to get his support? Or no? Because that's all I heard about him and other progressives until the last few days.

Do you want him to throw people who want him to support the whole party like Pelosi a bone in who he shows up for? Or do you want to play 8th dimensional Connect Four to make leftists look bad at every opportunity, in the absence of any consistent ideological reasoning?

This is where I'll fully admit to a purity test personally. Not happy to see the most popular progressive supporting these people. I'm 100% against pro-life candidates. Period. But I see you all. I see how you play this like a game.

I mean, if he's gonna do purity tests, that's fine. Just go full purity test! There's no reason for reproductive rights to not be part of his progressivism purity test.

 

[Keri]

The best strategy going forward is to fight it in the courts. There already is Roe vs Wade on the books. Democrats only need to sneak in liberal judges to enforce the law everywhere. Fighting it out in the open in front of the media and public opinion is a mess. We need to make fundraise cases to overturn laws in every state.

Roe v. Wade is already in trouble. If Trump is able to make one more Supreme Court appointment, while in office, it's likely done.

 

[old manatee]

Love to see Sanders called out in the title, after all the grief over his purity tests. Do you want the blue dogs to get his support? Or no? Because that's all I heard about him and other progressives until the last few days.

Do you want him to throw people who want him to support the whole party like Pelosi a bone in who he shows up for? Or do you want to play 8th dimensional Connect Four to make leftists look bad at every opportunity, in the absence of any consistent ideological reasoning?

This is where I'll fully admit to a purity test personally. Not happy to see the most popular progressive supporting these people. I'm 100% against pro-life candidates. Period. But I see you all. I see how you play this like a game.

I agree with all of this.

 

[KingV]

Honestly, if "compromising" on women's rights becomes a larger trend in the Democratic party, I might as well start voting Republican and save money on my taxes. I think compromise from Democrats is really the death knell for access to abortion and birth control. It won't be immediate, but it means the fight is ending and women have lost.

I think the grassroots needs to work on changing hearts and minds and less on pressuring politicians. NARAL doesn't really have great messaging to the people. It's mostly just "support this candidate and not this one".

The forced northern do well because they make a strong emotional argument, even if it's wrong. They have fleets of bible thumpers rolling around handing out little gold baby feet pins that are like a 1/4 inch long and saying "this is a precious baby's feet at 24 weeks and some people just want to kill them." And a lot of people fall for it, because it doesn't affect them and they don't think critically about it.

There is no one really doing the flipside of that messaging in an effective way. Heck, Planned Parenthood spends most of its time talking about all of the other great stuff it does. Which makes sense for them, but there needs to be a grass roots full-throated endorsement of abortion rights with an emotional appeal to get people to care.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Did he say Ossoff wasn't progressive?

Yes. This has been covered on numerous occasions in this thread.

And honestly, he's right! Ossoff probably isn't a progressive. But Heath Mello sure as shit isn't either, so Bernie probably shouldn't call him one. All it does is send a message that women's' rights can be compromised on.

 

[boiled goose]

I think we just want him to stop calling anti-choice Democrats like Mello "true progressives" while saying candidates with center-left economic views like Ossoff aren't progressive. And to maybe think about what he says before he says it. That's all.

So this is a semantics and labels issue?
If he had said true progressive on economic issues there wouldn't be a thread?

Somehow not buying it.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Roe v. Wade is already in trouble. If Trump is able to make one more Supreme Court appointment, while in office, it's likely done.

I would not be surprised if the vote for this ended up being different than people assume, or if the court chooses not to hear a case that could overturn it even with a conservative majority.

 

[KingV]

Love to see Sanders called out in the title, after all the grief over his purity tests. Do you want the blue dogs to get his support? Or no? Because that's all I heard about him and other progressives until the last few days.

Do you want him to throw people who want him to support the whole party like Pelosi a bone in who he shows up for? Or do you want to play 8th dimensional Connect Four to make leftists look bad at every opportunity, in the absence of any consistent ideological reasoning?

This is where I'll fully admit to a purity test personally. Not happy to see the most popular progressive supporting these people. I'm 100% against pro-life candidates. Period. But I see you all. I see how you play this like a game.

I came full circle on purity tests post election. Y'all can have that shit. It's dumb strategy and the Republicans are too terrible to get picky

 

[Slayven]

I would warm up to Sanders if he just stayed talking econ, and left the social issues to like Warren or someone able to talk about them with some foresight and care

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

So this is a semantics and labels issue?
If he had said true progressive on economic issues there wouldn't be a thread?

Somehow not buying it.

I think he probably should have just not called Heath Mello a "progressive" period, especially with the way he talked about Ossoff. That's literally why this is even a big deal and why NARAL/Planned Parenthood got pissed off. It's not just "people bitter from the primary" as some people like to say. Pissing off those two orgs is not a good thing to do!

 

[excelsiorlef]

Did he say Ossoff wasn't progressive?

Yes.

And the link to the quote is in this thread

 

[jtb]

I think the grassroots needs to work on changing hearts and minds and less on pressuring politicians. NARAL doesn't really have great messaging to the people. It's mostly just "support this candidate and not this one".

The forced northern do well because they make a strong emotional argument, even if it's wrong. They have fleets of bible thumpers rolling around handing out little gold baby feet pins that are like a 1/4 inch long and saying "this is a precious baby's feet at 24 weeks and some people just want to kill them." And a lot of people fall for it, because it doesn't affect them and they don't think critically about it.

There is no one really doing the flipside of that messaging in an effective way. Heck, Planned Parenthood spends most of its time talking about all of the other great stuff it does. Which makes sense for them, but there needs to be a grass roots full-throated endorsement of abortion rights with an emotional appeal to get people to care.

I completely agree on this. We're playing defense, and the conversation is entirely on the Republican's turf and messaging. It's fucking idiotic.

Of course the sole argument for reproductive rights shouldn't be the economics of it. But it clearly matters. We need to broaden the conversation. We need to go on the offensive, and stop relying on Roe v Wade (which is in a horribly precarious position and one justice away from being fucked).

"If we're interested in winning this election, we can't live in fear of losing it." Can't remember which obscure politician had that line...

We shouldn't have to wait for Roe v Wade to be overturned for the left to mobilize on this issue. But... just look at Donald Trump. That's probably what it'll have to take.

Yes.

And the link to the quote is in this thread

To be fair, I believe he said "I don't know."

Eleventh Commandment, people. Bernie, it ain't that hard. It'll save you the pain in the long run.

 

[uncelestial]

bernie can, and should, do better.

counterpoint: bernie doesn't get to claim to be an economic progressive while ignoring policies that DIRECTLY economically affect literally half of this country's population every. single. day.

What do you actually think is the net result of opposing what Bernie is saying? Play out for me what having the opposite viewpoint of Bernie is and how that works in the elections he is referring to? Who do you think would be the mayor of Omaha if we followed your idea of how to handle that race? What is your strategy for getting more Democrats in power in Republican strongholds? Do you have any ideas about that at all?

[citation needed]

Read things. It's good for you.