Considering there should be plenty of Dems in Nebraska that are pro-choice and pro-woman, but they're backing a dude that didn't need outside endorsements? The voting turnout is so bad in Omaha I could become mayor with some footwork. I notice Bernie didn't endorse Ean Mikale, who actually visited the minority neighborhoods when he went door knocking. Nope. Endorses the guy that already has a machine behind him.
-
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.
Top Democrats, Bernie Sanders Defend Anti-Abortion Members Of Their Party
- Thread starter KSweeley
- Start date
- Status
Considering there should be plenty of Dems in Nebraska that are pro-choice and pro-woman, but they're backing a dude that didn't need outside endorsements? The voting turnout is so bad in Omaha I could become mayor with some footwork. I notice Bernie didn't endorse Ean Mikale, who actually visited the minority neighborhoods when he went door knocking. Nope. Endorses the guy that already has a machine behind him.
You can't just sweep that under the rug.
Here's Bernie's word on Ossoff:
”He's not a progressive."
There.
Yeah, he cleaned it up AFTER he got his ass lit on fire by Democrats actually out there working to get other Democrats elected to office, but the sentiment is not wiped clean. Bernie Sanders has made it more than clear that your stances on social issues don't determine to him whether or not you're progressive.
And that's a huge problem for the party that largely represents minorities and women.
I am not arguing against the compromise, I am only arguing that it IS a compromise.
Compromise is good. It's the only way politics works, and it's especially the only way you'll get a working 50-state strategy. I am not anti-compromise.
Clinton was open to a limiting abortion past 20 weeks as of March 2016. As long as it had exceptions for health of the mother. Since these exceptions are in fact in the Nebraska law, one might infer that our last Presidential nominee could have supported the very law Mello voted for. Yet somehow, it's only a problem now that Bernie is supporting this candidate.
Edit: 20 weeks, not 29
old manatee
Banned
I wonder where Republican Jean Stothert stands on abortion.
THIS is fucking irritating, and is what should be upsetting Dems right now.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
It is a thing that is upsetting Dems.
Fuck. I don't know what to think.
On one hand, they're appeasing fuckos who are only trying to suppress women for no reason besides they're women.
On the other hand, it's a helluva wedge issue and no one who's been convinced by those people that prenatal fetuses are innocent and sacred lives no matter what is going to be easily convinced otherwise.
On one hand, they're appeasing fuckos who are only trying to suppress women for no reason besides they're women.
On the other hand, it's a helluva wedge issue and no one who's been convinced by those people that prenatal fetuses are innocent and sacred lives no matter what is going to be easily convinced otherwise.
The wedge issue you'll find near-unanimous agreement on dropping is Guns. Simply because we just saw Sandy Hook go by and we still couldn't get anything done.
The issue is that polarization is directly related to those wedge/social issues you're describing. As you see by GOPers interested in more liberal or even far left economics, they're dominating identification in a way those economic issues can't override. Because if they were able to override them, they wouldn't be GOPers!
freeofgreed
Member
Yes I can, you're acting like his endorsement would've been a magic bullet that would've allowed Ossoff to win. Like I said it was dumb but inconsequential. And who cares if he does or doesn't think Ossoff is a progressive or not? It's extremely irrelevent, as long as he endorses him.
Also where are you getting the "He's not a progressive" quote from?
the one I'm seeing is
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/329559-sanders-i-dont-know-if-ossoff-is-progressive
soul creator
Member
Sure, don't really disagree. Though as this and similar "controversies" have shown, I'm not really a huge fan of those types political labeling attacks in general anyway from any side, since they all just end up being kind of arbitrary.
That said, I do think people overestimate how "strict" people like Sanders and his supporters supposedly are on various issues, even the economic ones. He's voted for plenty of shit that "violates" his supposed purity, and he's endorsed plenty of candidates that he supposedly thinks is "not progressive". So I think the "Sanders is an extreme purist on economic issues, and not on others, he's being a hypocrite!" is kind of a false premise anyway. I think a far more boring and mundane reason why he talks about economic issues so much is simply because most Democrats in office already tend to be on the right side of social issues, and other economic issues are where national Democrats generally need pushing. So that kind of thing leads to his awkward statements about Ossof, because "Ossof is a pro-choice Democrat" is not some shocking new thing that really challenges the prevailing Democratic common wisdom.
I tend to think that's a far more likely explanation for things, and that does seem to fit the available evidence better. Of course, I think it's still fine to disagree with how he may speak on this topic (I often do), and further reminding national Democrats to not compromise on abortion rights is still a good thing, but I think that's a much more accurate starting point on this topic, especially as it relates to the Ossof thing that's supposedly this huge "gotcha".
People loudly saying that abortion rights should not be compromised is great. And I 100% agree as well, and that Feministing article makes the correct point about abortion rights being directly related to economic justice. But the fact that this only seems to become a controversy with Sanders in 2017, makes me question what is actually trying to be accomplished here. So standing by abortion rights is obviously fine, but there does tend to be a lot of "right for the wrong reasons" going on now I've noticed.
On a related note, there's been a lot written about how the capitalist class can often totally be fine with progress on social issues, as long as that same capital isn't threatened by any major wealth redistribution. Which leads to things like corporations supporting LGBT rights, yet if you were to propose programs that would actually redistribute wealth from corporations to LGBT people and improve their lives, those same corporations will turn into right-wingers real quick.
And if we want to take it even further, the Democratic Party apparatus constantly chasing wealthy donors and often neglecting state parties and right-wingers pouring tons of money into state elections, has also caused a ton of direct harm to abortion access in various states as well, so it's not like "money in politics" and "social issues" exist in two completely separate spheres anyway.
That's actually one of my main issues with Sanders is that there are tons of ways to directly connect the "economic" and the "social" side of things, but he often isn't super great at speaking about those, even though he obviously supports the right side of those issues when he votes.
Bernie "economics solves racism" Sanders also is completely ignoring the fact that women having control over their body and reproductive health is also control over their economic opportunity.
We live in a nation where women were recruited into the workforce, given high fives for doing the job, and then immediately all fired and told to stay in the households because they had embarassed the men that had gone of to war for "having" to go work and taking jobs away from men, literally excluding women from one of the biggest economic booms in history that they themselves had created the foundation of because of their genitals
Sanders doesn't vote that way though. It's turning into "Sanders is pro-life" when that is clearly not the case
DontBeThatGuy
Member
Ziltoidia 9
Member
With a title like that then maybe it would be wise to go in the direction of the most popular politician in the country.
Politicians these days get their marching orders from their party. If we got more right leaning dems in at least they would be more susceptible to side with the party platform.
And Ossoff himself says he's a moderate, and how he's going to legislate from the center. I don't think he wants to be seen as a progressive.
Angry Chair
Member
Bernie would never do what he did for Mello for a dem like Ossoff and that is the issue. Should Democratic candidates like mello get party support? Yes, but Bernie needs to stop putting his foot in his mouth when it comes less fiscally liberal democrats.
Goro Majima
Kitty Genovese Member
The logic is sound and considering it'd take a Supreme Court decision to fully undo Roe v Wade and no Democratic President or Congress would ever appoint a justice to fulfill that intent, I don't have a huge problem with a softening on abortion. At this juncture, it's more a question of degrees of regulation in various states and I can't imagine a democrat being any more awful than a republican.
If it takes being more difficult (but not impossible) to get an abortion in say, Nebraska, versus Illinois or New York means we get in exchange:
Universal Healthcare
$15/hr minimum wage
Higher taxes on the 1%
Action on climate change
Virtual destruction of the Republican party after losing their biggest wedge issue
Yeah I'd take that in a heartbeat.
If it takes being more difficult (but not impossible) to get an abortion in say, Nebraska, versus Illinois or New York means we get in exchange:
Universal Healthcare
$15/hr minimum wage
Higher taxes on the 1%
Action on climate change
Virtual destruction of the Republican party after losing their biggest wedge issue
Yeah I'd take that in a heartbeat.
To be clear, I don't give a crap about Bernie's endorsement. And no it didn't make or break Ossoff's candidacy. But it's hypocrisy, pure and simple. You originally asked why people claim that Bernie compromises on social issues. That question was answered. Now you're saying that its inconsequential, but that's of no use to me.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
Ossoff could probably run a clip of Bernie saying he isn't a progressive in his ads as a selling point in a district like GA-6 lol
legacyzero
Banned
Cmon. Having heard Bernie stump DOZENS of times, he has LITERALLY said verbatim what you just said. "Women have the right to chose what they do with their own bodies."
freeofgreed
Member
You can clearly see that he edited that after I made my post....
And then went and backed a pro abortion candidate instead of the one that actually cares about the minority situation and women in Omaha.
Bernie has no trouble viewing lgbt, women and minorities as cards and chips he can trade back and forth with Republicans for what he wants.
I knew in advance what the 50 state strategy called for. And it isn't my favorite thing in the world, but I knew that going in and expected it.
I however hoped that they would choose to 'compromise' on things like guns instead of immediately jumping to chucking a huge portion of the cornerstone of the party under the bus. I suppose I should have known better. They went straight for womens rights man.
I however hoped that they would choose to 'compromise' on things like guns instead of immediately jumping to chucking a huge portion of the cornerstone of the party under the bus. I suppose I should have known better. They went straight for womens rights man.
Father_Brain
Banned
Yup, Sanders is simply not good at speaking the language of intersectionality, and that's the strongest and most valid criticism of him.
As I said above, a huge percentage of the criticism he gets is not made in good faith, but that doesn't absolve him of responsibility when he plays directly into those critics' hands.
What does the Democrat 50 state strategy calls for exactly?
Yes, I mean that instead of people aiming their outrage at this topic, that Bernie's purity tests for other Dems running for office is what should be angering Democrats.
This is exactly the problem.
Almost nobody would care about the candidates Bernie went out to support if he just kept his damn mouth shut about the ones he didn't. Our job is hard enough as it is, and Bernie feeling the need to sound off on Democratic candidates that don't meet his standard can't continue.
benicillin
Banned
There was no candidate on the ballot for that. This is the guy the Nebraska dems wanted.
freeofgreed
Member
What did he do for Mello? Make a speech endorsing him? He's done that for plenty of candidates.
No it wasn't. If you're saying a simple action like saying "we'll support you as long as you separate your personal beliefs from policy" is him "compromising" on social issues. the he's clearly done the same in regards to economic issues. Like others have said he threw his support behind Clinton despite disagreeing with her economic principals. So I'm failing to see the hypocrisy.
Again
If you do not support abortion, you do not support economic justice for people who can get pregnant, only for those who can't.
You would think. But the reality of the situation is that democrats constantly start with the purity tests and somehow are baffled as to why we can't get our shit together and continuously lose elections.
What is with this line you keep repeating that criticism of him "is not made in good faith". People who don't like Sanders have a right to an opinion as well! I'm not seeing people deliberately slagging off on Sanders in order to push some nefarious secret agenda.
Ean Mikale is self-made black entenpreneur after having to grow up with having his dad get gunned down in Omaha, everything against him, the definition of bootstraps.jpg, actually gives a shit about North and South O. He's sponsored and worked with neighborhood action and mentoring programs.
Heath Mello pretty much ignored all the voter information questionaiires because he already had money and the machine behind him and didn't feel he needed the "help".. Bernie could have endorse Mikale, who lines up exactly with "fresh progressivism", and got Mello to move more left, instead he jumps straight to the safe white anti-woman candidate in a heavily Catholic town. lmao
I'm fine with pro-life Dems. Talking with my mom, she abstain or votes Repub based on abortion but supports basically everything else in the Dem platform. Not to be mean to her or cynical but most people I know that are like this are just apathetic and would vote Dem if they changed their messaging. They don't actually follow politics, they just have their head in the sand about this issue. Frustrating for sure.
freeofgreed
Member
Hmm I wonder why he did that...
Jean Stothert 43.99% 24,887
Heath Mello 41.10% 23,251
Taylor Royal 10.86% 6,144
Ean Mikale 3.01% 1,702
This was an extremely tight race. Why would he support the candidate who had 0 shot of winning over the dem who had a legitimate chance of doing so? Also you said it yourself it was a heavily Catholic town and Catholics tend to not be a fan of abortions. These are the kinds of sacrifices we're going to have to make.
No offense, because your mom is hardly the only who thinks/votes this way, but if voters like your mom really cared about being pro-life, they'd be throwing their support behind the party that actually gives a damn about PP, birth control, sex education and other measures that make it harder to have unwanted pregnancies.
Lord of Ostia
Member
Not sure why this is an issue, they all basically said that there is a difference between personal beliefs and the party line, and that Democrats can hold whatever personal beliefs about abortion they wish, so long as they support a woman's right to choose. It's so that they don't alienate groups of people who would otherwise support them on practically every issue, like Catholics.
Feel like this is just the natural progression of what comes with taking a Sanders type progressive on the road to help stump a 50 state strategy.
This was as inevitable as it gets. Sanders type ideology on its face isn't compatible with a 50 state strategy without major caveats for heavily conservative slanting states. Better the Dem party deal with this shit now than closer to 2018.
This was as inevitable as it gets. Sanders type ideology on its face isn't compatible with a 50 state strategy without major caveats for heavily conservative slanting states. Better the Dem party deal with this shit now than closer to 2018.
Goro Majima
Kitty Genovese Member
Except right now you still have that happening and you're getting nothing else in return because abortion is the single biggest wedge issue for the entire evangelical voting block and the republicans have control of so many levels of government.
Evangelicals make up 26% of all voters based on exit polls from 2016 and 81% of whom voted for Trump. How much better does the map look if even 25-50% of that voting block is suddenly in play?
legacyzero
Banned
That's just not true. Absolute bullshit.
Show me the other options that are gaining the proper traction in that state versus the Republican option.
It's like your just hating on Bernie for the sake of it, without even knowing anything about him. Simply asinine.
It's silly to suggest that even if economics and corruption are his main platform, that social issues aren't important to him.
Strange too, because how did we lose the election? Economics, and corruption. Well, and of course Dumb and racist America.
a) Because that has not been Mello's position, historically. This isn't a Birden/Kaine/Kerry/etc situation.
b) Because Bernie made it an issue when he full-throatedly endorsed Mello and another anti-abortion Dem but said "he didn't know" if Ossoff was a progressive. The juxtaposition of the two things immediately sent up red flags. He tried to fix the Ossoff stuff w/ a statement but lots of people had already noticed and were pretty pissed.
Bernie endorsed before this open primary was run - Mello's percentage is specifically becaue Bernie flew in and stuck his nose into it. He had thousands of dollars of money from local groups to help pay for Bernie to show up (yeah, Bernie also wasn't going to show up without being paid to do it)
Bernie could have endorsed Mikale which would have helped push Omaha politics to more progressive side, it wouldn't have hurt him at -all-, and even if Mikale lost it would have put a fire under Mello to care more about the other parts of town. Hell, Mikale visiting North and South O made Stohert come down to South O in person to ask us to vote for her. She hasn't even been seen down here before. He had the GOP shook. Then Bernie swoops and goes "here's an easy endorsement for my ego", swoops out, runs back to his safe little state as he always does.
.. are you trying to tell someone that actually lives in Omaha how one can be successful in Omaha? The city regularly trades back and forth between Republican and Democrat mayors. It isn't a grand achievement to elect a Democrat to office in Omaha.
EatinOlives
Member
Realistically speaking, the Democratic party isn't going to start pushing pro-life legislation, so I don't see this altering their platform in any meaningful way. Here's to hoping this is the beginning of the end of bullshit purity tests from Berniecrats.
freeofgreed
Member
Bullshit. Bernie's endorsement would not have gotten Ean 22K more votes then he had. That's fucking ridiculous. Plus Mello had a strong political machine behind him. Even if Bernie did endorse Ean and got him a couple more votes all that would've accomplished was splitting up the Dem vote even more, and seeing how narrowly Mello lost,
that would've been a catastrophe.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked