She'll be the perfect excuse for Republicans to defend their decision to vote Trump again. Please note, they'll find an excuse either way.
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
His voters don't matter if Democrats vote the Democrat nominee, and the majority of Independents go for the Democrat nominee (which I believe they will go for if Warren is the nominee). Clinton was disliked from more than half of the people who are eligible to vote, and a lot of Democrats weren't excited about her.
Last edited:
I agree with this which is why Hillary Clinton is always the wrong option. I just don’t agree with the narrower point that the presidential debates are that significant. Anyway Trump is wrong so often I think there’s almost a law of diminishing returns on the effectiveness of pointing out how wrong he is-I have nothing to back this up by the way
America is still sexist as feck though, and Warren can sound quite intellectual at times. Whether she’ll resonate with the whole country is still up for debate.
I've heard this a few times, but why being intellectual is bad and it is seemed as a disadvantage?
Why do American pundits keep asking ‘which candidate would you prefer to go for a beer with’? There’s a reason for that.
It's kind of weird why being smart and a professor at one of top universities is a disadvantage. Something you would expect from Soviet Union or China after the cultural revolution when it was cool to be a peasant, but not an intellectual.
Because bulk of voters don't know / don't care. They might vote for a simplistic solution (that won't solve anything) rather than a proper one which might make their life better. Religion, Race and other beliefs (guns, environment) do not accommodate for intellectual discussions.
The USSR and China were very far apart on that. The USSR and its bloc in particular put a lot of propaganda value on STEM - the flag of East Germany had a compass on it, and they were scientifically and technologically pretty advanced. There was a big expansion of higher (and basic) education within the Soviet Union in the very impoverished and isoalted 1920s, as an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ioffe_Institute#Founding_of_the_institute
The suspicion of *all* intellectuals is Maoist.
edit - speaking personally, I had to use a Soviet physics questions book to prepare for an exam and found it fascinating: https://www.amazon.com/Problems-General-Physics-I-Irodov/dp/8183552153
It is weird. But this is a country that in less than 20 years elected George W Bush and Donald J Trump to the presidency.
So many Americans have an inferiority complex and will interpret intellectual vibes as elitist.
ive been watching the climate forum for only 3 minutes but biden has cut himself off a half dozen times already. he cant finish a though without launching into something different
also his hair game is the opposite of on fleek
heres a small sample...
"ive been involved in everything from making sure we uh go with uh...back in the 90s"
he cant even finish a sentence
When does Sanders come on?
Adlai Stevenson II.
Climate change causes cancer in children?
I want to go back in the 90s too; the last time I was truly happy.
we must defend this culture and if the rest of the world is underwater from rising sea levels...well you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette
its wild that chris cuomo threatened to throw a man down a flight of stairs and said "fredo" was equal to the n word and faced absolutely no consequences
buttchug was asked a specific question by a climate professional who recently lost her home to a wildfire about 1) what his plan is and 2) how he is going to accomplish it and he spent 4 minutes of just talking about nothing before closing with "we all need to come together to fight this"
the guy is an empty suit
the guy is an empty suit
Follow the money.
Its that simple.
I listened to Bernie's answers and he simply speaks to the facts and the truth.
Killed it
This plays
This thread just convinces me Trump will get reelected. All conservatives will vote for Trump while all liberals are busy throwing mud at each other for not agreeing on exactly 100% of everything.
also, I'm quite convinced Bernie Sanders is Johnny Knoxville in old man make up.
also, I'm quite convinced Bernie Sanders is Johnny Knoxville in old man make up.
Whoopi Wakes From 4-Year Sleep, Asks Bernie To Tax Amazon
Oh dear.
Oh dear.
That’s precisely what Trump is banking on - Dems who are so dogmatically uncompromising that they stay home if the opposing faction win the nomination.
Thank you Comrade Bennet
Joe Biden's Entire Platform: Nothing will fundamentally change for people (especially the rich people he made that comment to), the GOP will compromise with me because trump has gone, just swallow your policy positions and vote for me.
What position exactly would progressive compromise to? Accepting that Biden will screw over democrats in congress (like he did to Harry Reid), so he can win over GOP votes?
You won’t see substantial change from any one of them since they don’t have the votes in congress to move any substantial policies. The closest thing to change anyone can realistically hope for is a reentering of the Paris climate deal, reentering the Iran deal, stabilizing relationships with allies to where they were under Obama, some form of fix to Obamacare to where premiums go down etc. These are things that would happen irrespective of which of them get in since even Sanders and Warren would be blocked from Medicare for all and would be reduced to groveling for small incremental Obamacare fixes.
God she is sooooo shite compared to Bernie
and the counter to that...is Joe Biden would START from a position of groveling for small changes to the ACA and then compromise on that position, leaving the ACA no different and achieving nothing more than before biden. So what would progressives compromising achieve? The compromise to elect a lame duck?
If Bernie, Warren, Biden can get Paris, Iran Deal, stabilising relationships, the only thing left is healthcare (in this example) and the positions are: fight for medicare (Bernie / Warren), make changes to the ACA...but compromise with the GOP on those changes (Biden).
What's the upside to that for progressives? Compromise to sit around for 4 years and do nothing...but at least the authoritarian orange man is gone? If that is the only goal of politics and legislation in the USA, they might as well pack it up and turn towards anarchy.
Progressives (especially the hardcore ones) are generally out of luck. Sanders wouldn’t have the votes to move his signature policies and would be reduced to lame duck status from the beginning. Warren wouldn’t fare much better. If both of them run on an uncompromising Medicare for all or bust type position, there’s a pretty strong case to be made that voting for them would be a vote for a continuation of the current Trump status quo, where there is no realistic healthcare policy that can be implemented.
Whoever wins on the Dem side, there will be immense pressure for an Obamacare fix that can be implemented quickly and is very possible with a narrow Dem Senate ( or even a 50/50 one). Sanders and Warren, in the absence of support for M4A, would be left with no choice but to pursue that.
- Status