Support NeoGAF

[The Technomancer]

The Bernie angle is honestly not even the most important part of this for me, although it is an important thing, don't get me wrong. The Democrats do need to figure out how they're going to talk about this stuff, because compromise candidates are going to be necessary but the way they're presented on a national stage has to have a very delicate touch

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Nah I'm good.

Odd thing for you to attack me on LOL.

Didn't mean any attack, just felt sad. I envisioned it happening in my mind and it actually made me feel sad.

 

[Valhelm]

Why not just hammer it home that pro-choice /= pro-abortion in red states?

The is probably best, but unfortunately Heath Mello has voted on some really disgusting shit in the past. I'm disappointed that liberal politicians, especially Sanders, are comfortable with this.

While I understand that abortion rights may be a deciding factor for some voters, the Democrats shouldn't cede ground to reactionaries on this matter. If anti-choice Democrats are elected to the house or senate, Republicans may be able to further their regressive agenda in the absence of a majority. While a shitty Democrat may be better than a shitty Republican, the party needs to stop running regressive candidates immediately. Find other ways to win.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

Well, perhaps we should put away the pitchforks and torches for now.

Because there is nothing inflammatory about the Sanders statement. At all.

Heath Mello is inflammatory, and some folks are having a go at Bernie for various reasons, which isn't simply a literal reading of his statement. You disagree? Make the case.

 

[MHWilliams]

Well, perhaps we should put away the pitchforks and torches for now.

If we are willing to seek compromise, I'd welcome the shift. And that compromise should be on social and economic issues.

Perhaps in certain situations, we should go with that which is "good enough to win", instead of holding steadfast for the dream and winning nothing, because people across the nation hold a wide range of policy views and political expediency is still a relevant thing.

Oh, so it is just a purity test.

Yes. People have issues they feel are important enough to turn their nose at an otherwise solid candidate. In this case, it's not his commentary on abortion, it's his actual voting record. They believe he will say one thing and do another. I think you take what you can get.

 

[Blader]

What voting record are you referencing? You mean the one where he's supported pro choice bills for almost his entire career? You're going to need to post some receipts if you're going to say he's trying to fuck over women.

He's talking about Mello, not Bernie.

 

[shoplifter]

Why can't we just dump the flyover states, they're holding us back.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

What voting record are you referencing? You mean the one where he's supported pro choice bills for almost his entire career? You're going to need to post some receipts if you're going to say he's trying to fuck over women.

http://feministing.com/2017/04/23/no-bernie-theres-no-economic-justice-without-abortion-access/

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/23/politics/bernie-sanders-heath-mello/

 

[benicillin]

Honestly I'm pretty sure Sanders and Perez and everyone else at the DNC would have rather had a candidate that didn't have the views Mello did, but that's who the Nebraska dems put up for vote so their choice is either don't compete for seats they need or accept Mello's word that he's changed his views.

 

[crooked spin]

The important thing is for Dems to win elections, right? Why start in with the purity tests?

 

[Trojita]

I do find it odd that people were telling people to vote for Hillary Clinton even if they didn't agree 100% with her policies, record, or candidacy because obviously the orange turd was, and is, WAY WORSE, but you mention trying to support a democratic candidate that has one personal belief different from the party line and people lose their shit.

 

[The Technomancer]

Honestly I'm pretty sure Sanders and Perez and everyone else at the DNC would have rather had a candidate that didn't have the views Mello did, but that's who the Nebraska dems put up for vote so their choice is either don't compete for seats they need or accept Mello's word that he's changed his views.

And that's where this all gets tricky. You don't stop him from running. But to what degree do you support him, financially and publicly?

 

[Abelard]

What now, we have Bernie being compared to Le Pen?

I have truly seen it all now.

For those who constantly bleat on about a 50 state strategy, well here it is. Compromise on some issues is going to be essential if you want to actually win in those southern states.

 

[Jenov]

Perfect??

What am I missing here?

Did anyone read the fucking OP? It literally says, basically word for word, that someone's *personal* view on abortion can differ as long as their political position is pro-choice. Who gives a shit what someone's personal position on something is as long as they vote in line with the party?

Maybe I'm the crazy one? What is this mini-meltdown from people on the left?

Mello's political position has historically been ANTI choice, he has voted and backed numerous anti abortion policy. Here.

I do find it odd that people were telling people to vote for Hillary Clinton even if they didn't agree 100% with her policies, record, or candidacy because obviously the orange turd was, and is, WAY WORSE, but you mention trying to support a democratic candidate that has one personal belief different from the party line and people lose their shit.

It's fine if he stopped at a personal belief, but this Mello guy has actively made policy worse for Kansas women. That's awful.

 

[Suikoguy]

Honestly I'm pretty sure Sanders and Perez and everyone else at the DNC would have rather had a candidate that didn't have the views Mello did, but that's who the Nebraska dems put up for vote so their choice is either don't compete for seats they need or accept Mello's word that he's changed his views.

While I agree with this, the problem I and others have is Sanders does not have this flexibility on economic issues.

 

[billy beane]

Abortion isn't some cut and dry issue. I honestly feel there is no right side to it. Yes women should have the right to choose whatever they want to do with their bodies, but that doesn't make abortion 100% ok. I'm for the right to abortion but I'm slightly against the idea if that makes sense. It's a really tricky subject that's hard to touch.

 

[kirblar]

What now, we have Bernie being compared to Le Pen?

I have truly seen it all now.

For those who constantly bleat on about a 50 state strategy, well here it is. Compromise on some issues is going to be essential if you want to actually win in those southern states.

Compromising on issues to suit a local environment is fine.

Being willing to only compromise on one set of issues is where the problem lies.

 

[MHWilliams]

I do find it odd that people were telling people to vote for Hillary Clinton even if they didn't agree 100% with her policies, record, or candidacy because obviously the orange turd was, and is, WAY WORSE, but you mention trying to support a democratic candidate that has one personal belief different from the party line and people lose their shit.

If you're going to compromise, compromise. If you're going to stand firm, stand firm. But you can't preach hard for standing firm on A and then compromise on B.

This is the issue folks are having and why Sanders is brought up. This is the sentiment other have as well:

Compromising on issues to suit a local environment is fine.

Being willing to only compromise on one set of issues is where the problem lies.

While I agree with this, the problem I and others have is Sanders does not have this flexibility on economic issues.

Again, I tend to vote for what I got. But folks have stated that's an untenable situation.... until it's not.

 

[Blader]

I do find it odd that people were telling people to vote for Hillary Clinton even if they didn't agree 100% with her policies, record, or candidacy because obviously the orange turd was, and is, WAY WORSE, but you mention trying to support a democratic candidate that has one personal belief different from the party line and people lose their shit.

I wonder how much Bernie is coloring the perception of this debate. I am less bothered by Mello's past stance on abortion -- which I'm not okay with as a matter of policy, but can accept as part of a 50-state strategy -- and more annoyed with the hypocrisy of Bernie or Bernie-esque thinkers who believe it's okay to compromise on social issues but totally anathema to progressive values to ever compromise on economic issues.

 

[legacyzero]

Why can't we just dump the flyover states, they're holding us back.

We can dump them like the Rust Belt. That worked well for us in 2016

 

[Father_Brain]

Are NARAL and Planned Parenthood still bitter about the primary?

I don't know, honestly. For now, I'm going to assume the best, meaning that this is a standard they'll apply consistently going forward.

Cecile Richards joined the Sanders/Perez tour, which strikes me as a good sign for all concerned.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

I do find it odd that people were telling people to vote for Hillary Clinton even if they didn't agree 100% with her policies, record, or candidacy because obviously the orange turd was, and is, WAY WORSE, but you mention trying to support a democratic candidate that has one personal belief different from the party line and people lose their shit.

The leap you have to make to compare Clinton's record to someone like Heath Mello is kinda astounding. What anti-women bills did she sponsor/co-sponsor? (bills that contained no exceptions for rape or incest)

Like, some of ya'll don't understand why people could be upset, huh? I support the 50-state strategy, because America is fucked, but I also support those that have a problem with these candidates.

 

[azyless]

If "your personal view doesn't effect your political decisions" then I don't get why mention it at all outside of a wish to further stigmatize abortions.
(This goes for every other random person who keeps going on about how they're not pro-life but they would "never ever have an abortion because it's icky")

 

[Abelard]

Compromising on issues to suit a local environment is fine.

Being willing to only compromise on one set of issues is where the problem lies.

I would imagine Sanders is willing to compromise on economic issues as well (if that's what you are referring to) seeing as he endorsed Obama, Clinton and stanned for Obamacare more than Obama did. The Bernie Sanders-likes of America have been compromising in economic issues since FDR.

Also I don't know why you are singling out Sanders for this? You do realize the party is saying this collectively, right?

 

[Maxim726X]

Mello's political position has historically been ANTI choice, he has voted and backed numerous anti abortion policy. Here.



It's fine if he stopped at a personal belief, but they guy has actively made policy worse for Kansas women. That's awful.

Well, it appears that he has changed his tune... Which I imagine he would have to if he wants support from the party. It's not likely that he would get elected on renege on his promise- Which as of today, is that he would not vote against any pro-choice measure.

 

[JordanN]

We can dump them like the Rust Belt. That worked well for us in 2016

I think he's joking. Especially since he's a Trump supporter.

 

[Galactic Barret]

What I truly don't understand is why its so important to removes everyone's right to abort solely because you don't agree with it. Its like disliking/disagreeing with anything: you avoid it yourself, live and let live (no pun intended). You never have to go to that clinic if you don't want/need to, why are you trying to stop others from doing so?

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

The Bernie angle is honestly not even the most important part of this for me, although it is an important thing, don't get me wrong. The Democrats do need to figure out how they're going to talk about this stuff, because compromise candidates are going to be necessary but the way they're presented on a national stage has to have a very delicate touch

On the plus side this may help spook Mello into avoiding the subject entirely if he wins

I still am unconvinced that we need to compromise with a Mello-type to win here though.

What I truly don't understand is why its so important to removes everyone's right to abort solely because you don't agree with it. Its like disliking/disagreeing with anything: you avoid it yourself, live and let live (no pun intended). You never have to go to that clinic if you don't want/need to, why are you trying to stop others from doing so?

I mean if you think abortion is murder it makes sense to prevent people from doing it. I don't advocate this view but the line of logic is mostly consistent until you get to whether or not to punish women who get abortions.

 

[SummitAve]

What kind of Bernie compromise are people looking for on economic issues? You don't think he is able or willing to negotiate any of the details of his economic policies? Or is it that he won't compromise on the general ideas of his economic plans, even though there may be a million fine details to be compromised and negotiated on?

 

[Bleepey]

Not really evangelicals. This move would be more towards getting support from Catholics who mostly are liberal aside from the issue of abortion.

Yeah that fair.

 

[shoplifter]

I think he's joking. Especially since he's a Trump supporter.

voting for != supporter, but yes there was a hint of sarcasm involved.

 

[Trojita]

If you're going to compromise, compromise. If you're going to stand firm, stand firm. But you can't preach hard for standing firm on A and then compromise on B.

This is the issue folks are having and why Sanders is brought up. This is the sentiment other have as well:

I will agree that Sanders concentrates on economic justice, with a blinder on how abortion works into this, over a lot of social issues he still does support. I don't see him stumping for a candidate that isn't 100% on his economics side, but needs his support in a democrat vs republican race. That is a shame.

The leap you have to make to compare Clinton's record to someone like Heath Mello is kinda astounding. What anti-women bills did she sponsor/co-sponsor? (bills that contained no exceptions for rape or incest).

You do realize I meant overall records right? Clinton is a warhawk that supported wars that have killed many children. Some people voted for her even when disagreeing with her foreign policy.

 

[Battlezone]

Heath Mello has since changed his stance on abortion rights.

Would you say his position "evolved"?

Also, I find it interesting that the same people defending Bernie on this and advocating for a 50-state solution are the first ones who want to primary Joe Manchin and Heidi Heitkamp, but whatever. Glad to see those positions have evolved, too.

 

[freeofgreed]

What kind of Bernie compromise are people looking for on economic issues? You don't think he is able or willing to negotiate any of the details of his economic policies? Or is it that he won't compromise on the general ideas of his economic plans, even though there may be a million fine details to be compromised and negotiated on?

Yeah I'm confused as well. All he's saying is that we'll work with people who don't like abortions as long as they don't vote that way. If people view that as him being flexible then he's obviously done the same in regards to economics. I don't understand the whole "he only compromises on certain issues" claim.

 

[guek]

Here's a timely reminder that Bernie did not completely agree with Clinton on economic issues yet openly campaigned for her.

 

[Red]

The issue is that if you follow this to its logical conclusion, you end up allied w/ Le Pen.

You so do not. How can you even begin to justify this to yourself?

 

[Angry Chair]

I live about an hour from Omaha and don't like either candidate. I'd vote for Mello but I wouldn't like it. Anyone that uses that much hair gel is clearly a douchebag.

And yeah, Bernie needs to think a little more before he speaks. He has no problem criticizing dems for not being fiscally liberal enough yet downplays those with troubling social conservative views. It is not a good look.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

Here's a timely reminder that Bernie did not completely agree with Clinton on economic issues yet openly campaigned for her.

It's just a shame so many of his more ardent supporters maligned her at every opportunity, in spite of what he did and said. Helpful!

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

I follow a bunch of lefties on twitter and none of them like Le Pen. They also hate Macron but I have yet to see any of them advocate for Le Pen. One shitty guy from TYT does not represent "the extreme left."

 

[kirblar]

You so do not. How can you even begin to justify this to yourself?

Because if the only thing that matters to you are "economic" issues and you're willing to sell everyone else to get your preferred policies, that's what happens.

This is why you have so many liberarians voting GOP, because while they are socially liberal on paper, they're straight white guys where the GOP assaults on minorities don't actually affect them.

I follow a bunch of lefties on twitter and none of them like Le Pen. They also hate Macron but I have yet to see any of them advocate for Le Pen. One shitty guy from TYT does not represent "the extreme left."

I said extremes. Not extreme left. Trump and Sanders were both super-populist.

 

[freeofgreed]

It's just a shame so many of his more ardent supporters maligned her at every opportunity, in spite of what he did and said. Helpful!

What a nonsense response. What does that have to do with him? If we start talking about shitty everyone's supporters were this thread will go to shit quickly.

 

[quesalupa]

Oh sweet, they're actually trying to win the next election.

 

[guek]

voting for != supporter

 

[Trojita]

I wonder how much Bernie is coloring the perception of this debate. I am less bothered by Mello's past stance on abortion -- which I'm not okay with as a matter of policy, but can accept as part of a 50-state strategy -- and more annoyed with the hypocrisy of Bernie or Bernie-esque thinkers who believe it's okay to compromise on social issues but totally anathema to progressive values to ever compromise on economic issues.

I can understand being frustrated if someone is showing hypocrisy on compromising.

Unfortunately on capitol hill compromising has become a bad word in the last 8 years because of republicans and weak spined democrats.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

What a nonsense response. What does that have to do with him? If we start talking about shitty everyone's supporters were this thread will go to shit quickly.

It has to do with his most outspoken supporters, clearly, some of which are in here decrying people being upset about Mello. How is this confusing to you?

 

[Puck Beaverton]

Oh sweet, they're actually trying to win the next election.

christ this is depressing

 

[Platinumstorm]

why

There is a sort of redistribution of voters for both parties happening right now; probably more so for Republicans than Democrats.

Wedge issues have taken surprisingly large roles in the political scene. 82% of evangelicals voted for President Trump despite President Trump being really awkward on religious grounds. Abortion is the king of wedge issues. Democrats see how they're being hurt badly in the short term on abortion in states that they otherwise could do better in. I visit a lot of Republicans discussion groups for insight, and interestingly they're also looking for abortion position adjustments, which I found really interesting, because I think Republicans have the stronger ground on the voter demos for abortion. While I don't have any proof to back it up, I think it's either a concern of long term demographic changes, or the general concern that the Republican party is splintering into three groups based on financial and social grounds.

Overall Democrats stand the most to downplay abortion and gun issues in the short term [something that mass shootings in nearly all demographics wasn't enough to influence change on]. This doesn't mean they change their positions necessarily, it just means it's de-emphasized.

Republican groups seem to feel their biggest concerns are that Democrats look like the party of fiscal responsibility; largely in part to the fiscal apocalypse parties, consisting of President Trump, but also the other extreme known as the tea party, aka freedom caucus, and [thank goodness] they're really concerned that the environmental data that continually comes out is making them look bad, and some are looking for a way to be the champions of the environment in this administration through tax reform without regulations, which I do not believe will work based on our entire market play.

Both parties are probably confused to the rise of populism in the world. They both have big donors which have played into this rise, and there is risk in upsetting the donors. This is really the meta of everything right now. The dual US shift, and world political turmoil towards populism highlights a very strained world economy that isn't being reflected in markets. Whichever party decides to buck plutocratic policies and empowers workers in the US is going to be the winner moving forward, and I think this issue is significant enough to redefine party lines by itself.

There is one big thing that would delay this move towards worker empowerment for now.

 

[freeofgreed]

Because if the only thing that matters to you are "economic" issues and you're willing to sell everyone else to get your preferred policies, that's what happens.

This is why you have so many liberarians voting GOP, because while they are socially liberal on paper, they're straight white guys where the GOP assaults on minorities don't actually affect them.

You're Lepen comparison still makes no sense. The more you explain to more confused I become. For your comparison to work you'd have to imply that Lepen actually didn't want to curb immigration, but she just said she did to win votes.

Also please explain how he doesn't compromise on economics to this degree. numerous people have pointed out that he does yet they've all be ignored.

 

[zelas]

As a Bernie-crat, I don't like this either, but I realize that this really is the best way to do it. Or we can just leave the Republicans In office.

Yeah, I don't like having to compromise either, but as a black male I can't always afford to say no and just let the Republicans have their way. This is why I don't like populism and couldn't get behind Bernie last year. Imo populist candidates generally have different priorities and are often willing to pass on minority issues. Bernie not being so concerned about aspects of this candidate's track record doesn't surprise me, I just wish he and his people were as flexible on other issues as well.

That being said I have to back Bernie here. We aren't going to pull this country left without a platform to force change in ANY branch of government. These are fights we should be having once we get control. Like social security, healthcare, civil rights, gay marriage/LGBTQ rights and so many other sweeping changes, the country generally doesn't start to change on those issues until after they're forced to live with them. We have to have power before that can happen though. So I'm willing to compromise and stand with Bernie even after some of the stuff he's said because some progress is better than no progress literal regression these days.

 

[MHWilliams]

I will agree that Sanders concentrates on economic justice, with a blinder on how abortion works into this, over a lot of social issues he still does support.

Yeah. Ain't nothing really wrong with that. Folks got focuses. Regional differences abound.

It's merely previous rhetoric and the idea of there being certain issues one cannot compromise on. You got folks salty, because compromise on other issues outside of his personal focuses being used as a bludgeon against others. Which is why he had to walk back the commentary on Ossoff.

Politics is compromise. Voting is compromise. These things are true because even on a state level, folks are rather different about what they care about.

I applaud Sanders and the DNC for being willing to do the work to get Democrats elected at a local, state, and national level. Because otherwise, we have what we got now. And that level compromise needs to extend to the voting populace, which sometimes means voting for folks you're not in lockstep with on various issues.