The 2016 US Election (Part III)

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Locked
User avatar
maraxus2
Padawan Learner
Posts: 340
Joined: 2016-04-11 02:14am
Location: Yay Area

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by maraxus2 »

Terralthra wrote:I owe maraxus2 lunch, but I'm also satisfied with the reasons why. Sec. Clinton's platform has moved significantly left on two key issues (higher ed and public option/Medicare for all) in courting Sen. Sanders' endorsement.
Agreed. I'm happy with the Dem platform, though their cowardice on Palestine was slightly disheartening.

Bernie to Endorse Hillary on the Stump tomorrow
(CNN)Bernie Sanders is poised to endorse Hillary Clinton at a campaign event Tuesday in New Hampshire, provided that final disagreements in the Democratic platform can be resolved during a weekend party meeting in Orlando, people familiar with the talks say.

For three weeks, Sanders has been steadily walking closer to throwing his full support behind Clinton, but has been withholding a formal endorsement until the platform is written. He repeated his pledge to help defeat Donald Trump again Thursday in an interview with Bloomberg View's Al Hunt.

"We have got to do everything that we can to defeat Donald Trump and elect Hillary Clinton," Sanders said. "I don't honestly know how we would survive four years of a Donald Trump as president."

Sanders has been seeking policy concessions from Clinton on college tuition -- which happened Wednesday, as Clinton rolled out a proposal to make tuition free at in-state public colleges and universities for those earning less than $125,000 per year for a family of four.

Also on Sanders' wish list: A commitment on health care to allow those aged 55 and older to buy into Medicare, and concessions in the Democratic platform to oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a 12-country trade deal negotiated by President Barack Obama's administration, even in a lame-duck session of Congress before a new president is sworn in.

If the Orlando meeting goes smoothly, people familiar with the talks say, Sanders and Clinton appear to be on track to a joint appearance in New Hampshire on Tuesday.

Plans for that joint appearance could still fall apart, and patience is running thin among some -- with Sanders insistent on policy concessions and Clinton aides feeling he's lingered in the race too long after Clinton became the presumptive Democratic nominee. Sanders was booed in a meeting with House Democrats on Wednesday for failing to support Clinton.
Democrats are set to meet Friday and Saturday in Orlando to finalize their platform ahead of the party's convention in Philadelphia later this month.
Some of his supporters, on the other hand...
‘Fraud, Sell Out’: Some of Bernie Sanders’ Supporters are Now Turning on Him
by Allen Clifton July 9, 2016 6 min read original
While I have been somewhat critical of Bernie Sanders for a few things he’s done over the last year or so, most of my issues have been with a certain group of his supporters (a small, but very vocal minority) who have been rather hostile, aggressive, and often flat-out irrational. Many of these folks are the far-left’s version of radicals who are driven by blind ideology, often rejecting any factual information that doesn’t confirm whatever it is they want to be real.



Again, I would like to point out that these people make up a very small (though very loud) percentage of Bernie Sanders’ supporters. Most of the people who supported him who I’ve dealt with are great, rational people who are ready to work together in the extremely important months ahead for our country.

Well, with news breaking that Sanders is set to endorse Clinton next week in New Hampshire, some of his supporters have already turned on him, bashing his decision on his Facebook page — with some even calling him a sellout.

Here are a few of the comments I found:

There are many reports that Bernie will endorse Hillary next week. This is unacceptable. Bernie, I thought this was campaign was #NotMeUs? We are begging you not to endorse her corruption. Please run 3rd party and save us from oligarchy and fascism!

Bernie Sanders, do not endorse someone who does not speak out against racial injustice. Please join Jill Stein.

Bernie will be the only Bernie Sanders supporter that endorses her, …lol… everyone I know would rather die then vote Goldman/Sachs president puppet.

Bernie, I’m already feeling crushed and defeated at the idea of not taking this all the way to the convention. I already feel like giving up. You cannot endorse Clinton. You just can’t. Think of how hard all of us have worked for you. We will never back Hillary, and neither should you. Show these posts to the democrats. #NeverHillary

[snip]

I could literally post hundreds of these — because there are hundreds (if not thousands by the time some read this article) all along the same lines of the comments I just listed.

To be honest, I’ve never really seen anything like what I just witnessed gathering these comments in a very long time. There were seemingly countless people claiming that he can win the nomination at the contested convention; that if he ran as a third-party he would win; or that he should join Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s ticket. And many of these comments were the most “liked” in the entire thread, with hundreds of people who seemingly agreed with them.



It’s all ridiculous based on simple, rational facts.

Why do I say a lot of what I read was completely ridiculous? Well, it’s very simple:

Bernie Sanders has maintained from the very beginning that he was going to endorse the eventual Democratic candidate. He’s said it countless times over the last year and has never hidden the fact that he was going to do so. So, I’m not sure why him doing exactly what he said he was going to do “shocks” his supporters.
If he ran as a third-party candidate, all he would do is split the left vote and hand Donald Trump one of the largest presidential victories in U.S. history — and anyone who doesn’t get the very simple, indisputable math in why that would happen really shouldn’t ever discuss politics again.
Why would he run as an independent, or Green Party candidate? Clearly if he wanted to do that, he would have simply done that in the first place.
Also, why would he choose to be the VP to Jill Stein when he’s much more qualified to be president than she is?
It’s hilarious how the person who started all of this is now being called a “sell out” by many of the same people who are so obsessed with him that even when he doesn’t tell them what they want to hear he’s not “pure” enough for them.
The fact quite a few people commenting here still think he’s going to win a “contested convention” only goes to show that they’re living inside some sort of pro-Sanders bubble where fools like H.A. Goodman are seen as “credible” and they’re rarely exposed to factual information.
While this was predictable, I still find it ironic — and slightly funny.

It’s one thing when these folks bashed and attacked Sen. Elizabeth Warren, it’s quite another when they’re calling the individual who started this “revolution” a sell out simply because he’s doing exactly what he has always said he was going to do — though that’s not what they want him to do. Again, I’m really not sure why these people are angry as Sanders has been forthright from the beginning that he was never going to run as an independent and he was always going to endorse the eventual Democratic nominee.

Once he actually endorses her in a few days, the backlash he’s going to see online from the very people he worked up into a frenzy to begin with, is going to be absolutely insane.
link
What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
User avatar
Dalton
For Those About to Rock We Salute You
For Those About to Rock We Salute You
Posts: 22637
Joined: 2002-07-03 06:16pm
Location: New York, the Fuck You State
Contact:

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Dalton »

Bernie Sanders is right now giving a full-throated endorsement of Hillary Clinton
Image
Image
To Absent Friends
Dalton | Admin Smash | Knight of the Order of SDN

"y = mx + bro" - Surlethe
"You try THAT shit again, kid, and I will mod you. I will
mod you so hard, you'll wish I were Dalton." - Lagmonster

May the way of the Hero lead to the Triforce.
User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 2131
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by FireNexus »

Can we go back to ignoring him like the kookie communist he is?
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.
User avatar
Dalton
For Those About to Rock We Salute You
For Those About to Rock We Salute You
Posts: 22637
Joined: 2002-07-03 06:16pm
Location: New York, the Fuck You State
Contact:

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Dalton »

:roll: :roll: :roll:
Image
Image
To Absent Friends
Dalton | Admin Smash | Knight of the Order of SDN

"y = mx + bro" - Surlethe
"You try THAT shit again, kid, and I will mod you. I will
mod you so hard, you'll wish I were Dalton." - Lagmonster

May the way of the Hero lead to the Triforce.
User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 2131
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by FireNexus »

I'm pretty serious about that. I came to the conclusion his constant stump-speechifying is more of an evasion than a lack of preparation when I saw him do the exact same thing during an interview with Chris Hayes where he was asked if he was planning to endorse Clinton. Same return to stump speech as he did whenever he was asked to clarify his stance on an issue.

I think the guy is a communist (and he certainly wasn't shy about supporting communist regimes in be past), but also a realist who gets that communism won't play in America. He might just be an idiot, but I don't think that's all it is anymore.
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.
User avatar
maraxus2
Padawan Learner
Posts: 340
Joined: 2016-04-11 02:14am
Location: Yay Area

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by maraxus2 »

Sanders Endorsement
Clinton picks up progressive endorsements ahead of joint appearance with Sanders in New Hampshire
by John Wagner And Abby Phillip July 11, 2016 1 min read original

Bernie Sanders arrives for a news conference at his Washington, D.C., campaign headquarters in June. (Matt McClain/ The Washington Post)
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday acknowledged what had already been widely reported: He plans to join presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail in New Hampshire on Tuesday.

An advisory sent out by the campaign of Sanders, the runner-up for the Democratic nomination, said he would join Clinton at a morning rally previously advertised by her campaign at a Portsmouth high school.

Although aides to both campaigns have said an endorsement is coming, the Sanders advisory allows only that he and Clinton will discuss “their commitment to building an America that is stronger together and an economy that works for everyone, not just those at the top.”

Meanwhile, two progressive groups that had backed Sanders in the primary but have held out on supporting Clinton are formally moving into her corner.

"The Communications Workers of America announced Monday morning that it would "wholeheartedly" endorse Clinton.

The union warned that if Donald Trump is elected president, union workers would be "watching our backs for years."

"Hillary Clinton is thoughtful and experienced. Donald Trump is reckless, unthinking and much more likely to cut a deal with his billionaire colleagues than look out for working families," the union said in a statement. "The choice is clear."

And another group that had backed Sanders, the Congressional Progressive Caucus Political Action Committee, also endorsed Clinton on Monday.

"“Hillary Clinton shares our ideals and has worked to improve the lives of Americans her entire adult life – as an activist, a litigator, a First Lady, a Senator, and then a Secretary of State," the PAC said in a statement. "Members of PAPAC unite behind her now, and we will work to ensure Secretary Clinton is the next President of the United States."

The organization is led by two of Sanders's biggest congressional endorsers, Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva (who has already endorsed Clinton) and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.).

Both endorsements signal that progressive groups are urging their supporters to get behind Clinton ahead of a likely endorsement by Sanders.

[Sanders secures health-care promises from Clinton before expected endorsement]

Although Clinton effectively clinched the nomination more than a month ago, Sanders has been slow to formally endorse her fall bid against presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump. He has instead maneuvered to win commitments from Clinton and the Democratic Party to incorporate portions of his agenda into theirs.

Last week, Clinton announced revamped policy on college tuition and health care that did just that. And at a meeting on the Democratic Party platform, Sanders successfully pushed for liberal positions on an array of issues, including the minimum wage and climate change.

A statement put out by Sanders on Sunday called the platform the “most progressive in party history.”

This post has been updated.
FireNexus wrote:I think the guy is a communist (and he certainly wasn't shy about supporting communist regimes in be past), but also a realist who gets that communism won't play in America. He might just be an idiot, but I don't think that's all it is anymore.
I see no evidence for this. Bernie's hardly the first left-winger who despised the establishment and spent his entire political career out in the cold.
What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
User avatar
Dalton
For Those About to Rock We Salute You
For Those About to Rock We Salute You
Posts: 22637
Joined: 2002-07-03 06:16pm
Location: New York, the Fuck You State
Contact:

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Dalton »

Breaking news on the VP front: the Clinton campaign has vetted Adm. James G. Stavridis. This is probably in response to Donny Jingles vetting Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn
Image
Image
To Absent Friends
Dalton | Admin Smash | Knight of the Order of SDN

"y = mx + bro" - Surlethe
"You try THAT shit again, kid, and I will mod you. I will
mod you so hard, you'll wish I were Dalton." - Lagmonster

May the way of the Hero lead to the Triforce.
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22459
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Mr Bean »

Dalton wrote:Breaking news on the VP front: the Clinton campaign has vetted Adm. James G. Stavridis. This is probably in response to Donny Jingles vetting Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn
Small world, one year old me was bounced on the knee of Admiral Stavridis (then commander Stavridis I believe) at one of my grandmothers officer parties she held following my grandfathers recovery from his dramatic heart attack.

I say dramatic as he was giving a speech and not feeling at a DC charity event went forward to shake hands with the front row at the end of his speech when he collapsed at the feet of basically the entire senior Walter Reed National Military Medical hospital medical team who was attending the fundraiser they were hosting. According to my grandmother when he collapsed he slumped into the lap of one hospital administrator and slapped the senior on call surgery director.

Picking the good Admiral is a really interesting pick on Secretary Clinton's part and say many bad things about her foreign policy. You don't pick an Admiral if you intend to stay home Madam Secretary.

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
User avatar
Eternal_Freedom
Castellan
Posts: 10403
Joined: 2010-03-09 02:16pm
Location: CIC, Battlestar Temeraire

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Eternal_Freedom »

Mr. Bean, I really shouldn't laugh at such things, but that is a pretty hilarious tale. Though if you're going to pick a bunch of officers to do that in front of, Army medics and doctors is a good bet.
Baltar: "I don't want to miss a moment of the last Battlestar's destruction!"
Centurion: "Sir, I really think you should look at the other Battlestar."
Baltar: "What are you babbling about other...it's impossible!"
Centurion: "No. It is a Battlestar."

Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22459
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Mr Bean »

Eternal_Freedom wrote:Mr. Bean, I really shouldn't laugh at such things, but that is a pretty hilarious tale. Though if you're going to pick a bunch of officers to do that in front of, Army medics and doctors is a good bet.
To quote my dearly departed grandmother on my departed grandfather. "I have never forgiven him for having that heart attack when he did. Why could he not have it when he was finished shaking their hands, it was quite rude of him. If he knew something was wrong and gave a speech the least he could do was have the common curtsy to not try and crowd surf his way back to his seat"

This joke steaming from a long running dream of my grandfather who as a former Navy Captain often attended fundraisers and shindigs had often talked about his dream of attending a Kennedy center event and successfully crowd surfing his way out after giving the intro speech or being the man in uniform prop during a charity event. My grandmother half jokingly often told this story and finished up with "I can see my husband thought that it was the end for him so went for it and thankfully he ended up slapping Doctor John instead of ending up dead back at his seat"

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

Picking the good Admiral is a really interesting pick on Secretary Clinton's part and say many bad things about her foreign policy. You don't pick an Admiral if you intend to stay home Madam Secretary.
Alternatively: democrats have a reputation for being "soft" on defense. Even today. A navy admiral would be a good option for shoring that up, and we dont exactly live in a world of unicorns and fluffy bunnies. Plus, the guy is ridiculously well qualified in his own right for the post. PhD in international affairs, dean of the Fletcher School.

Were I running for president and fully intended to stay home, I would give someone like that a long and careful look.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12797
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Flagg »

Dalton wrote:Bernie Sanders is right now giving a full-throated endorsement of Hillary Clinton
I'd say, his deep throating endorsement is very long in cumming.


I'm sorry I know, but god damn Dalton you set me up! Entrapment!
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to
Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan

He who can,
does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
Ziggy Stardust
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3114
Joined: 2006-09-10 10:16pm
Location: Research Triangle, NC

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Ziggy Stardust »

FireNexus wrote: I think the guy is a communist (and he certainly wasn't shy about supporting communist regimes in be past), but also a realist who gets that communism won't play in America. He might just be an idiot, but I don't think that's all it is anymore.
Even if he was a communist (which there is precisely 0 evidence of), why would it matter? The fact that you seem to be using "communist" as if it were a dirty word is pretty telling.
User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12797
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Flagg »

I'm not a fan of former military officers as POTUS or VPOTUS as they don't make great presidents in general. Good presidents (Eisenhower, Kennedy, meh Truman) but I can't think of one from the last 70 or so years that did great things (though Eisenhower and the Interstate System, while a mixed blessing I guess could be considered great, had foresight that few others did, mainly because he was always a political and logistical minded as opposed to combat officer). I'd cheer if she at least had Gore on her short list as a fuck you to the crazy side. But honestly, if I had to pick a VP for her it would be Howard Dean. I mean he's got the liberal cred, the political cred, and I don't think he'd run in 2024. But I'm crazy, so bleh.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to
Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan

He who can,
does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12797
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Flagg »

Ziggy Stardust wrote:
FireNexus wrote: I think the guy is a communist (and he certainly wasn't shy about supporting communist regimes in be past), but also a realist who gets that communism won't play in America. He might just be an idiot, but I don't think that's all it is anymore.
Even if he was a communist (which there is precisely 0 evidence of), why would it matter? The fact that you seem to be using "communist" as if it were a dirty word is pretty telling.
Better dead than red? I find using communist as a pejorative adorable. It's like when 90 year old well meaning white people without a racist bone in their body call black people "coloreds".
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to
Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan

He who can,
does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
maraxus2
Padawan Learner
Posts: 340
Joined: 2016-04-11 02:14am
Location: Yay Area

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by maraxus2 »

Flagg wrote:I'm not a fan of former military officers as POTUS or VPOTUS as they don't make great presidents in general. Good presidents (Eisenhower, Kennedy, meh Truman) but I can't think of one from the last 70 or so years that did great things (though Eisenhower and the Interstate System, while a mixed blessing I guess could be considered great, had foresight that few others did, mainly because he was always a political and logistical minded as opposed to combat officer). I'd cheer if she at least had Gore on her short list as a fuck you to the crazy side. But honestly, if I had to pick a VP for her it would be Howard Dean. I mean he's got the liberal cred, the political cred, and I don't think he'd run in 2024. But I'm crazy, so bleh.
Dean would be a TERRIBLE Veep. He doesn't really bring anything to the table and he's been more-or-less out of politics for eight years. Relative to someone like Warren, who admittedly looks less likely to become the Veep, I'm not sure what advantage Dean would have.

I do agree with you on the former military officers point though. With a single notable exception, they have a pretty shitty track record as candidates and Veep nominees.
What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22459
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Mr Bean »

maraxus2 wrote: Dean would be a TERRIBLE Veep. He doesn't really bring anything to the table and he's been more-or-less out of politics for eight years. Relative to someone like Warren, who admittedly looks less likely to become the Veep, I'm not sure what advantage Dean would have.
I agree Dean would be a terrible Veep but not for the reasons you mention. You forget it was Dean's leadership and fifty state strategy that helped secure the 2006-2008 wins that netted the 60+ Democratic Senate as opposide to the current Democratic leadership which oustide Dean and told Democrats don't align yourself with the leader of our party pretend he does not exist oh wait you lost. Well lets try that again next year and... oops you lost again, third times the charm?

However Dean can't be Veep because he's firmly in the money collection phase of the politician to lobbyist pipeline meaning he's already been lobbying for horrible horrible people and he's already on tape saying many terrible things for large sums of money.

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12797
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Flagg »

maraxus2 wrote:
Flagg wrote:I'm not a fan of former military officers as POTUS or VPOTUS as they don't make great presidents in general. Good presidents (Eisenhower, Kennedy, meh Truman) but I can't think of one from the last 70 or so years that did great things (though Eisenhower and the Interstate System, while a mixed blessing I guess could be considered great, had foresight that few others did, mainly because he was always a political and logistical minded as opposed to combat officer). I'd cheer if she at least had Gore on her short list as a fuck you to the crazy side. But honestly, if I had to pick a VP for her it would be Howard Dean. I mean he's got the liberal cred, the political cred, and I don't think he'd run in 2024. But I'm crazy, so bleh.
Dean would be a TERRIBLE Veep. He doesn't really bring anything to the table and he's been more-or-less out of politics for eight years. Relative to someone like Warren, who admittedly looks less likely to become the Veep, I'm not sure what advantage Dean would have.

I do agree with you on the former military officers point though. With a single notable exception, they have a pretty shitty track record as candidates and Veep nominees.
Yeah, Deans a stretch more I think about it. Warren is not going to happen. It's almost definitely going to be a STRONG male candidate. I almost want to say General Wesley Clark, but like Dean he's been out of politics as far as I know.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to
Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan

He who can,
does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 2131
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by FireNexus »

Ziggy Stardust wrote:
FireNexus wrote: I think the guy is a communist (and he certainly wasn't shy about supporting communist regimes in be past), but also a realist who gets that communism won't play in America. He might just be an idiot, but I don't think that's all it is anymore.
Even if he was a communist (which there is precisely 0 evidence of), why would it matter? The fact that you seem to be using "communist" as if it were a dirty word is pretty telling.
"Even if he was an adherent to an economic and political philosophy which has never been used as the basis for a humane society and which has, in fact, exclusively been the founding philosophy of governments guilty of various gnarly human-rights violations, why would it matter?"

That is essentially the question you're asking. Governments inspired by communism have, to a one, rapidly turned into command-economy nightmares. This is a man who praised not one, but two of those governments (both of which were either known at the time or later shown to be awful in their treatment of their citizens).

I'd consider someone who I believed was a right-libertarian to be disqualified from polite political society, as well. Or a fascist. Or a feudalist. I may be wrong in pegging Sanders that way, but I'm not wrong in being hostile to anyone who subscribes to that philosophy being given power. When we build Minds and develop post-scarcity means of production, then I'll be cool with Communism. Before then, I'll consider subscribing to it dangerous and stupid.
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.
User avatar
maraxus2
Padawan Learner
Posts: 340
Joined: 2016-04-11 02:14am
Location: Yay Area

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by maraxus2 »

Mr Bean wrote:
maraxus2 wrote: Dean would be a TERRIBLE Veep. He doesn't really bring anything to the table and he's been more-or-less out of politics for eight years. Relative to someone like Warren, who admittedly looks less likely to become the Veep, I'm not sure what advantage Dean would have.
I agree Dean would be a terrible Veep but not for the reasons you mention. You forget it was Dean's leadership and fifty state strategy that helped secure the 2006-2008 wins that netted the 60+ Democratic Senate as opposide to the current Democratic leadership which oustide Dean and told Democrats don't align yourself with the leader of our party pretend he does not exist oh wait you lost. Well lets try that again next year and... oops you lost again, third times the charm?

However Dean can't be Veep because he's firmly in the money collection phase of the politician to lobbyist pipeline meaning he's already been lobbying for horrible horrible people and he's already on tape saying many terrible things for large sums of money.
I do not forget. Credit where it's due - Dean did a fantastic job putting the state Democratic Parties in a position to take advantage of a +6 and +10 national swing against the Republicans. But he did not recruit the House candidates that put Nancy Pelosi in charge (that would be the much-reviled Rahm Emmanuel), nor did he recruit the Senate candidates that (barely) took back the Senate (that would be the uber-establishment Chuck Schumer). He certainly did not have anything to do with the chief reason why the Dems won in 2006 and 2008, namely Bush's stupendously low approval rating.

I agree with you that keeping Obama out of vulnerable states in 2010 and 14 was stupid, but it is by no means clear to me that Dean's advice would have worked any better than what the Democrats did. 2010 and 14 wasn't just a defeat for them; they saw long-standing Democratic Parties collapse across the South and Midwest in a way that would have been extremely difficult to prevent. In fact, spending money on a 50 state strategy might have made their losses worse, since the Dems would not have had the financial resources to contest the few state legislatures they managed to keep.
FireNexus wrote:That is essentially the question you're asking. Governments inspired by communism have, to a one, rapidly turned into command-economy nightmares. This is a man who praised not one, but two of those governments (both of which were either known at the time or later shown to be awful in their treatment of their citizens).
Source please.
What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

Flaggs latest shitpost just got flushed.

Have a nice day.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12797
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Flagg »

I think the thick meaty line between "mockery of stupid people" (in light hearted joke form) and "shit posting" has become deeply fuzzled.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to
Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan

He who can,
does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 2131
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by FireNexus »

FireNexus wrote:That is essentially the question you're asking. Governments inspired by communism have, to a one, rapidly turned into command-economy nightmares. This is a man who praised not one, but two of those governments (both of which were either known at the time or later shown to be awful in their treatment of their citizens).
Source please.[/quote]

I've looked around briefly. I can go deeper later if I you insist so I'm not posting a Wikipedia article, but at the moment I lack time to pull and vet anything I'd be comfortable using as a source. I did find that a single state (Nepal) currently has a communist party with noteworthy political power in a multi-party government. Are there any states which professed an end goal of communism that weren't command economy one-party dictatorships? If so, I'll need to reexamine my views on the subject.
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.
User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 2131
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by FireNexus »

Maraxus2 wrote:
FireNexus wrote:That is essentially the question you're asking. Governments inspired by communism have, to a one, rapidly turned into command-economy nightmares. This is a man who praised not one, but two of those governments (both of which were either known at the time or later shown to be awful in their treatment of their citizens).
Source please.
I've looked around briefly. I can go deeper later if I you insist so I'm not posting a Wikipedia article, but at the moment I lack time to pull and vet anything I'd be comfortable using as a source. I did find that a single state (Nepal) currently has a communist party with noteworthy political power in a multi-party government. Are there any states which professed an end goal of communism that weren't command economy one-party dictatorships? If so, I'll need to reexamine my views on the subject.
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.
User avatar
Iroscato
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2360
Joined: 2011-02-07 03:04pm
Location: Great Britain (It's great, honestly!)

Re: The 2016 US Election (Part III)

Post by Iroscato »

Sanders is a Democratic Socialist, not a Communist.
Yeah, I've always taken the subtext of the Birther movement to be, "The rules don't count here! This is different! HE'S BLACK! BLACK, I SAY! ARE YOU ALL BLIND!?

- Raw Shark

Destiny and fate are for those too weak to forge their own futures. Where we are 'supposed' to be is irrelevent.

- SirNitram (RIP)
Locked