• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees

deactherunner said:
No, that's the media. Neither person is showing any interest in using the conversation or non-handshake as a part of the political campaign. I like how the audio is "breaking news" as if you couldn't have reasonably guessed what was said based on the debate.
Click to expand...

no, that's politics. you can't blame the media for the existence of human emotion.

she claims he called her a liar. so either she said that hoping for a hot mic or she was genuinely pissed b/c he called her a liar on tv
 
deactherunner said:
No, that's the media. Neither person is showing any interest in using the conversation or non-handshake as a part of the political campaign. I like how the audio is "breaking news" as if you couldn't have reasonably guessed what was said based on the debate.
Click to expand...

So something isn't news worthy unless one of the campaigns wants to use it as part of their messaging? That's some Donald Trump level control the narrative there.

Again, if Joe Biden had done the same thing to Kamala Harris, it would be newsworthy. I might not like it, but I don't live in an alternate reality.
 
It's tabloid newsworthy. But of course it will be covered on mainstream media sites because that's what gets the clicks. I would hope we could all just move on and talk about actual, meaningful stuff?
 
i'm afraid that's the point - these sorts of dumb foibles are meaningful in elections. that's why trump is talking about toilets in his rallies
 
wait, some of y'all think politics is what the media covers? genuinely confused by this philosophy.
 
ChrisL68 said:
I didn't even provide commentary about the event. I simply repeated an apparent fact that is a very prominent news story about the current nomination.

This apparently triggered you to insult me in a desperate attempt to control the narrative.
Click to expand...

Just re-read it again and couldn't find an insult.
 
tiltdeac said:
It's tabloid newsworthy. But of course it will be covered on mainstream media sites because that's what gets the clicks. I would hope we could all just move on and talk about actual, meaningful stuff?
Click to expand...
Tabloid newsworthy is like when townie posts some Twitter feed about how Joe Biden isn't even going to try to win Iowa or New Hampshire according to "unnamed sources". This happened up on a Democratic primary debate stage. You're still in the public eye when you're up there even after the official debate is over.
 
Townie’s post exemplifies why the criticisms of Biden’s record fall flat. Those criticisms are blatantly linked to getting Bernie elected. If they were about Biden himself, they would have been prominent during his 2008 run or when he was picked as VP or any time before he declared.
 
TownieDeac said:
Remember when Biden said day care centers were monuments to our growing unwillingness to accept personal responsibility? Or how he interrogated Anita Hill and made her say a porn star name and then said he wished there were something he could have done to stop the line of questioning she got? Or the score of women who accused him of inappropriate touching which he made light of? Or his support of the Hyde amendment? Or the Mexico City Policy? Or his vote for the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act?

His one piece of legislation that was pro-women was the Violence Against Women Act, but that's just part of his tough on crime schtick. His own arguments for it were about harsher sentencing, not about protecting women. He's a fucking dinosaur when it comes to women's rights, and has only been reluctantly pulled left to stay viable.

Meanwhile, Bernie has a 40+ year track record of fighting for women's rights. After Hillary's campaign in 2016 cast aspersions about unequal pay on Bernie's campaign (though records showed her campaign was far worse), Bernie is running the first ever unionized campaign for presidency. His staff have a unionized contract with guaranteed equal pay, addressing discrimination and workplace harassment. He's got a 100% rating from NARAL and Planned Parenthood (Biden is 75% and 40% respectively). He cosponsored the 93 Freedom of Choice Act (Biden opposed). He's always been against the Hyde amendment. He's voted several times to allow women to travel interstate for abortions, voted to increase access to women's health organizations (Biden absent each vote for these), and supported the Prevention First Act for funding access to contraception.

Bernie wants to raise teacher and nurse pay as a way to close the equity gap. He's a cosponsor of the Paycheck Fairness Act of 2019. He cosponsored the FAMILY Act (paid family leave). He again cosponsored ERA. Equal pay is one of his 12 points on his economic agenda in 2020. He's voted to reauthorize VAWA and ERA every time it has come up. His record has been uniquely consistent over the decades.

Who owns the majority of student debt and medical debt? Women of color. Who makes up the majority of minimum wage workers in America? Women of color. His policies are uniquely tuned to help women and communities of color.

And above that, his voting coalition is 60% female as is his donor list.

But let's make this about a handshake and a closed door meeting.
Click to expand...

But if you say anything negative about Bernie, Townie will cry.

The reality is if you think this election is 80/20 or 75/25 policy/Trump you will lose. This election needs to be 90/10 or more Trump/issues. You make it about issues and Trump will win. If you make it about Trump, he can lose and lose the Senate.

Don, Jr., runs a criminal company. Jared and Ivanka work in the WH. All three are fair game. People understand that they can't get a loan to start a luncheonette in Aliquippa, but when running US Middle East policy, the Bank (government) of Oman gave Jared a $1BILLION loan on a building that no other bank in the world would touch. They talk about Hunter Biden making $50K/month when Jared and Ivanka, while working in the WH, made $10MILLION/month. To not make this a major issue would be gross political malpractice.

You can drink your $4-6 coffee. You can talk all the principles you dream about, but this election ain't about them. It's about getting rid of an existential threat to our nation and the world.
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
Townie’s post exemplifies why the criticisms of Biden’s record fall flat. Those criticisms are blatantly linked to getting Bernie elected. If they were about Biden himself, they would have been prominent during his 2008 run or when he was picked as VP or any time before he declared.
Click to expand...

Cmon man. This is so ridiculous.
 
If I read Townie correctly, there is some level of unbalanced/unfair media coverage btw Bernie and Biden, which you replied was a fundamentally political problem ("that's politics, man."). I only disagree with such a totalizing take on politics. I know it's campaign season, and it's easy to conflate media (journalism/production/distribution) and politics (governance/civic practice) but the issue here is frankly awful journalistic practice. The original CNN story (a supposed Warren source never in the room vs. Bernie who denied the story) should never have run. This is a issue with American media and priorities/coverage.
 
tiltdeac said:
It's tabloid newsworthy. But of course it will be covered on mainstream media sites because that's what gets the clicks. I would hope we could all just move on and talk about actual, meaningful stuff?
Click to expand...

I agree, in theory. But what is the actual, meaningful stuff to talk about between Warren and Sanders?

I mean, its clear to anybody who looks objectively at this stuff that Sanders isn't a misogynist under any reasonable definition of the word. Its also reasonable to believe that Sanders told Warren that he was concerned that the American electorate would not elect a woman (or something along those lines). That was the message Warren received. The statement doesn't make Sanders a misogynist, although saying it as a way to attempt to persuade Warren not to run is not a particularly altruistic way of doing things. I think it is also fairly clear that Warren and Sanders are friends/professional acquaintances who do not have any real personal animus towards each other. But they both are fucked up enough that they want to be President, and you don't end up in that spot without a pretty wide competitive streak. Given where we are in the race, its not surprising that nerves would get frayed a bit, for their staffs if not the candidates themselves.

But do we really need to learn more about either person's healthcare plan at this point? Or their approach to foreign policy? Or how they would differentiate themselves from Trump? They've both been running for a damn year at this point, there is nothing left to be said.

So you end up with the bullshit that is out there.
 
Robert M. Pirsig said:
If I read Townie correctly, there is some level of unbalanced/unfair media coverage btw Bernie and Biden, which you replied was a fundamentally political problem ("that's politics, man."). I only disagree with such a totalizing take on politics. I know it's campaign season, and it's easy to conflate media (journalism/production/distribution) and politics (governance/civic practice) but the issue here is frankly awful journalistic practice. The original CNN story (a supposed Warren source never in the room vs. Bernie who denied the story) should never have run. This is a issue with American media and priorities/coverage.
Click to expand...

i guess i disagree that "politics" is simply 'governing/practice', especially in a democracy
 
Maybe Bernie thinks a woman shouldn't be POTUS because he has spent 40+ years helping them and has become convinced that they still need assistance from the men who are and always will be in charge.

Or, maybe he just thinks a woman can't win because the most qualified woman in the history of American politics couldn't defeat Donald Fucking Trump, and maybe he shared that belief with Warren. (Maybe he is right).

Or, Warren is lying about the whole thing.

Or, maybe they just misunderstood each other or forgot what the other said because they are so fucking old and dementia is creeping in on one or both of them.

Those are really the only options. Second option is by far the most likely, and Bernie should have just embraced it and said "it is a terrible shame that women are at a disadvantage when running for POTUS, but if 2016 shows us anything, it shows us that, and winning this time around is just so extremely important that we should take the gender argument away from the GOP. I hate that that is the case, but that is the case."

Of course, after saying that he should just quit the race because he is a fucking self-described socialist, and that label is going to put him at a much bigger disadvantage against Trump and a booming economy than any of the other options. Bernie has no chance.
 
DeaconSig said:
I agree, in theory. But what is the actual, meaningful stuff to talk about between Warren and Sanders?

I mean, its clear to anybody who looks objectively at this stuff that Sanders isn't a misogynist under any reasonable definition of the word. Its also reasonable to believe that Sanders told Warren that he was concerned that the American electorate would not elect a woman (or something along those lines). That was the message Warren received. The statement doesn't make Sanders a misogynist, although saying it as a way to attempt to persuade Warren not to run is not a particularly altruistic way of doing things. I think it is also fairly clear that Warren and Sanders are friends/professional acquaintances who do not have any real personal animus towards each other. But they both are fucked up enough that they want to be President, and you don't end up in that spot without a pretty wide competitive streak. Given where we are in the race, its not surprising that nerves would get frayed a bit, for their staffs if not the candidates themselves.

But do we really need to learn more about either person's healthcare plan at this point? Or their approach to foreign policy? Or how they would differentiate themselves from Trump? They've both been running for a damn year at this point, there is nothing left to be said.

So you end up with the bullshit that is out there.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think this is a fair take.

Not to speak for him, but I think what set Townie off here is by legitimizing this story (as more than tabloid clickbait), there is some implication that this says something about Bernie the candidate, or that Bernie is somehow bad for women. This is plainly, objectively nonsense. And we can see that based on Bernie's historical track record and current policy preferences. (I'll quickly add here that I think some of the Mayor Pete criticisms, like the implication that he will be a shill for pharmaceutical companies despite clear evidence in his policies to the contrary, are similarly dumb). So, again we are left with the reality, that the public loves petty squabbles between celebrities, and antagonism drives more clicks than cooperation.

So this last point i agree with in theory
But do we really need to learn more about either person's healthcare plan at this point? Or their approach to foreign policy? Or how they would differentiate themselves from Trump? They've both been running for a damn year at this point, there is nothing left to be said.

So you end up with the bullshit that is out there.
Click to expand...

On one hand, this feels like it drags out forever, and we should all know everything we need to know about the candidates at this point, which opens the door to dumb bullshit. But I also think the reality is that most people actually don't know those things. Obviously we on this board are not representative of the public, and it's a pretty informed bunch on here in general, but there's plenty on the policy side that I still don't understand. I think the median citizen knows very little about their policies, and the subtle differences between them, despite all the time and opportunity. And part of that is that people just don't give a shit, which we can't really control. But part of it is the media, too. They do a great job of sensationalizing, and a shit job of teaching. It would be a public good if we could figure out a way to flip that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top