• 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

AOC and Biden probably wouldn't be in the same party if they were in Canada.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
No he didn’t. Weld as an alcoholic has been “rumored” in Massachusetts politics forever. It’s probably one of the state’s worst kept political secrets.
Click to expand...

We don’t have to worry about Junebug stopping by again until he has to take a shit, which evidently happens like once a month (poor guy).
 
Strickland33 said:
I’m not sure where you’re seeing this anti-Biden discourse on here.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why you're only focused on what happens here. We're talking broad solutions, not just on this board.
 
Ph, you and others often move the goalposts back and forth.

birdman, for instance (and for whatever reason) basically uses my posts - and only my posts - as an example of the decline of civility and political discourse on a national level because I used the words odious and Republican to describe Pete's turn to the center-right.

If we're talking national, then sure whatever. Neither you nor I can really police odious discourse on twitter and in the pundit economy, but sure it's a solid aspiration and would be a great thing to do as the primary season continues. I think, short of being able to literally change how people communicate in the 21st century, that Kendi's "solution" makes a bit more sense as strategy, though.
 
That’s some weird victim blaming. “You made me misinterpret your posts because you move the goalposts.”

I was talking about how to engage more non-voters which was the point of the Kendi article. I think we should do that by not going scorched earth on our candidates in the primaries.

That’s a better solution overall because guess what? If there are two uber progressive young minority candidates running for the Dem nomination, each their bases will brand the other as a corporate shill warmonger centrist who doesn’t pass the purity test. A lasting solution would be to cut out the negativity altogether.

Democrats and potential democrats don’t fall in line like Republicans. So we should make sure they have fewer reasons not to vote.
 
PhDeac said:
That’s some weird victim blaming. “You made me misinterpret your posts because you move the goalposts.”

I was talking about how to engage more non-voters which was the point of the Kendi article. I think we should do that by not going scorched earth on our candidates in the primaries.

That’s a better solution overall because guess what? If there are two uber progressive young minority candidates running for the Dem nomination, each their bases will brand the other as a corporate shill warmonger centrist who doesn’t pass the purity test. A lasting solution would be to cut out the negativity altogether.

Democrats and potential democrats don’t fall in line like Republicans. So we should make sure they have fewer reasons not to vote.
Click to expand...

Victim blaming? What?

Anyway, good luck trying to herd the left on twitter and stuff. I think the left isn’t the GOP, in part, because they’re not cynical kleptocrats. I see that as a positive and a challenge for campaigns to overcome and not circumvent. Pluralism is a value worth aspiring to, in my opinion, and that means taking the good/smart with the bad/dumb, which in my experience is pretty equally distributed between moderate, liberal, and progressive factions of the party. Just my two cents. As long as we agree on the ends (and we do) diverse means are fine by me.
 
So we all agree that Warren has made her VP pick unofficially unofficial, right?
 
Strickland33 said:
Ph, you and others often move the goalposts back and forth.

birdman, for instance (and for whatever reason) basically uses my posts - and only my posts - as an example of the decline of civility and political discourse on a national level because I used the words odious and Republican to describe Pete's turn to the center-right.

If we're talking national, then sure whatever. Neither you nor I can really police odious discourse on twitter and in the pundit economy, but sure it's a solid aspiration and would be a great thing to do as the primary season continues. I think, short of being able to literally change how people communicate in the 21st century, that Kendi's "solution" makes a bit more sense as strategy, though.
Click to expand...

Not true, just the other day I gave ChrisL a hard time for using the same word, “dangerous,” to describe Bernie on one thread and Trump in another. You can play the victim if you want but all I’ve done is suggest you tone down the name calling. I actually think you’ve done that since I gave you shit for your odious and Pete is a Republican posts. Good work.

I fully agree that some of the things Pete has done and some of the positions he has staked our are weak or bad positions. I don’t really think they are defensible.
 
You can disagree with a Dem candidate while remembering they are a far better option than Trump and the Republicans.
 
Why does MSNBC treat everything as "BREAKING NEWS" ? This morning in their chyron they had an Elizabeth Warren interview as breaking news. She's on set like twice a week. It's not breaking news.
 
Technically all news has to “break” at some point biff, come on man
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top