• 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 Primary

TownieDeac said:
I also think that for the most part, via experience, people over 35 think, or in some cases know the only way to achieve anything in politics is through compromise. They look at Sanders record of lack of compromise and see that isn't how things have gotten accomplished in politics during their lifetimes or otherwise. Therefore, even if they're every bit as progressive as a leftist, their theory of change is incremental by definition, and through compromise.

I think people under 35 are starved for a different theory of change, and Hillary and Biden aren't that. But things like Sunrise Movement and generally organizations who will have them suggest change can happen outside presidential politics, and that's where you see political participation outside of voting. Boomers and Gen Xers are suspicious of that theory of change for good reason, but it doesn't really do to fling shit at one another. Older voters will patronize younger voters, younger voters will get discouraged, and eventually turn into older voters who shit on younger voters. Assuming nothing ever changes, that is.
Click to expand...

What about people who are exactly 35, like me?
 
well you definitely seem to hate bernie bros and have a UNC handle, that's strike one and strike two, so i'll give you one more chance:

is climate change real?
 
It's real. I don't hate Bernie Bros. I just don't agree with them or find their reasoning/logic persuasive.

Are you going to be OK if Tlaib loses her primary?
 
TownieDeac said:
because enthusiasm doesn't get you paid time off to vote or otherwise re-enfranchise you

because young people are stupid and don't vote
Click to expand...

You can vote absentee from your couch. You don't need to get time off. Hell, OR and WA are all mail-in.

In other states, you could vote early.

It absolutely should be easier to vote, but the reality is there are tons of options
 
Jamison2Carter said:
It's real. I don't hate Bernie Bros. I just don't agree with them or find their reasoning/logic persuasive.

Are you going to be OK if Tlaib loses her primary?
Click to expand...

I mean politics isn't fantasy sports to me, it's meaningful, but I try not to fall into the trap of the cult of personality and fall in love with anyone. They're prone to either let you down or get voted out. That said, Tlaib will be a powerful force for good whether she's a US Rep or not.
 
Love and enthusiasm aren't the same thing, just ask ur mom.
 
The politics is or isnt fantasy sports for me but not you is such a soft argument. How people votes effects everyone, some people put priority in other things than you it doesnt mean its a fantasy. Each person's vote is their own reasoning that can't be dismissed just because you don't find the same reasoning. Sure you can label it dumb as shit but there's always going to be real world consequences.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
The politics is or isnt fantasy sports for me but not you is such a soft argument. How people votes effects everyone, some people put priority in other things than you it doesnt mean its a fantasy. Each person's vote is their own reasoning that can't be dismissed just because you don't find the same reasoning. Sure you can label it dumb as shit but there's always going to be real world consequences.
Click to expand...

What I mean by that, and maybe Strick means something different when he uses the term, is that we're playing Nate Silver electability/predictability/I know who can win and they get my vote game. Not that politics is a game to some and real life to others. I may have used it interchangably to mean both things in the past, but I'm not inferring that about any of you.
 
Gotcha, makes sense and I think what I was saying also goes towards how the electability/predictability/ I know who can win is nonsense anyways. Nobody really knows whats going to move someone to vote because its so deeply personal.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
Gotcha, makes sense and I think what I was saying also goes towards how the electability/predictability/ I know who can win is nonsense anyways. Nobody really knows whats going to move someone to vote because its so deeply personal.
Click to expand...

The concept of "electability" can be kind of circular or self-fulfilling. And everyone can weigh what it means exactly and how much it should impact their voting decision. There is a line where it's pretty clear though (e.g. third party candidates....Jill Stein etc.). You vote for them, for whatever reason, you know you're not voting for someone who has a chance to be president.
 
Seems like we've gone around in circles, and the fundamental disagreement seems to be that a lot of us don't foresee much material difference between a Biden presidency and a Sanders presidency. Sanders supporters seem to believe it would lead to huge differences. I don't think there's really much else to say about it other than to agree to disagree.
 
Jamison2Carter said:
Seems like we've gone around in circles, and the fundamental disagreement seems to be that a lot of us don't foresee much material difference between a Biden presidency and a Sanders presidency. Sanders supporters seem to believe it would lead to huge differences. I don't think there's really much else to say about it other than to agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

And I've been killed for saying this, but I also think there's little material difference between a Biden presidency and a Trump presidency.
 
TownieDeac said:
And I've been killed for saying this, but I also think there's little material difference between a Biden presidency and a Trump presidency.
Click to expand...

I strongly disagree, and can't imagine you actually believe that at this point. You would have to be looking at the very narrow lens of what would happen legislatively with a divided legislature to make even a laughable argument that there would be little material difference.
 
TownieDeac said:
And I've been killed for saying this, but I also think there's little material difference between a Biden presidency and a Trump presidency.
Click to expand...

That couldn't be more wrong. Hopefully, it's just cabin fever talking.

To think Biden is anything at all like Trump, other than being an old white guy, is disproven by actions. To think Biden is a virulent and unrepentant racist like Trump is pure lunacy. If you paid attention to the ACA process, Biden was for a full public option. Trump wants to kill ACA. Trump is for voter suppression. Biden is for renewing the Voters Rights Act. Biden is for choice. Trump is packing the courts to kill it. Biden believes in govenrment. Trump wants to end it.

Those are just a few of the major differences. To say Biden and Trump would show little difference is completely. totally, empirically been proven to false.
 
DeaconSig said:
I strongly disagree, and can't imagine you actually believe that at this point. You would have to be looking at the very narrow lens of what would happen legislatively with a divided legislature to make even a laughable argument that there would be little material difference.
Click to expand...

Pretty similar lens to the one Jamison2Carter was describing for the difference between Sanders and Biden. And I've been over this before, I think the legislature is a narrow view for judging a presidency. The administration stretches beyond cabinet level appointees, and if Trump has done one thing effectively, it's hollow out the administrative state. Biden would fill it back in with Obama era clones, some of whom were fine, but many of whom continued disastrous Bush era corporate welfare and Earth destruction.
 
You really cant throw out little difference and then square it with what a single term of trumps presidency has done to the judiciary. If Trump never wins think of all those 5-4 cases that are now falling the opposite way, the biggest being the end of gerrymandering. If progressives had thought long term instead of the here and now they would see that cases like those with a favorable judiciary would have advanced their progressive agenda more than anything possible. With something as simple as gerrymandering destroyed you would get a better representative government which means more progressives in power, meaning easier to push your agenda.
 
Earth destruction? Biden was one of the key people in the Paris Accords. He said that was only a beginning and would do more for climate issues. Again, you are wrong by the facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top