DSilva
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#21
Report 3 weeks ago
#21
(Original post by Rakas21)
You’d prefer grey Biden or Commie Sanders?
You were complaining about the use of the word far right and you're calling sanders a communist? Pah, Sanders wouldn't be considered socialist in the UK.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#22
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#22
(Original post by DSilva)
You were complaining about the use of the word far right and you're calling sanders a communist? Pah, Sanders wouldn't be considered socialist in the UK.
That particular post was satire playing on the Haddock’s own comments.
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#23
Report 3 weeks ago
#23
(Original post by Rakas21)
Democrats has released 62% of the result and it confirms the surprise..

Buttigieg: 26%
Sanders: 25%
Warren: 18%
Biden: 15%
Worth pointing out that strong Sanders counties (the ones that went for him in 2016 like Scott and Black Hawk) are less than 50% in for these partial results. Expect Sanders to pull ahead of Mayo Pete once everything is in. Big outcome from this is simply the implosion of Bidens campaign - talk of him finishing 4th or even 5th behind Klobuchar
0
reply
NotNotBatman
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#24
Report 3 weeks ago
#24
(Original post by Napp)
In fairness Biden has a much better chance of beating Trump than the crusty old Sanders who whilst having a dedicated base has little appeal beyond that, especially in America where the word socialist is rather akin to calling someone a ****.
Sanders is only 10 months older than Biden.

Biden has no chance of beating trump. Which wouldn't matter much because he is one smidgen of an iota better than Trump.
This is because Biden offers nothing progressive, a lot of that "dedicated base", will not vote for Biden over Bernie. On top of that Trump is waiting to use Biden's creepy encounters against him in the same way he did with Clinton.
Also, you're underestimating Sanders appeal massively; he won 43% of delegates in 2016 despite awful treatment from the media, huge amounts of Bernie blindness and less than 7% of the superdelegates (which shouldn't be a thing anyway). Sanders would absolutely decimate Trump in the debates, because there isn't really anything on him, there's loads on Biden however.
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#25
Report 3 weeks ago
#25
(Original post by NotNotBatman)
Sanders is only 10 months older than Biden.

Biden has no chance of beating trump. Which wouldn't matter much because he is one smidgen of an iota better than Trump.
This is because Biden offers nothing progressive, a lot of that "dedicated base", will not vote for Biden over Bernie. On top of that Trump is waiting to use Biden's creepy encounters against him in the same way he did with Clinton.
Also, you're underestimating Sanders appeal massively; he won 43% of delegates in 2016 despite awful treatment from the media, huge amounts of Bernie blindness and less than 7% of the superdelegates (which shouldn't be a thing anyway). Sanders would absolutely decimate Trump in the debates, because there isn't really anything on him, there's loads on Biden however.
So?
Would you mind reminding me how this means he wont get elected? Especially as many people view progressiveness as a dirty word these days given all the woke people running their mouths on the topic.
At any rate i dont disagree with your point that many of Bernies supporters wouldnt transfer their support to someone like Biden but given that Biden still represents the solid middle and rationale arm of the party out of the two he has a better chance of appealing to Republicans who would, largely, rather cut their arms off than vote for a self described socialist.
0
reply
NotNotBatman
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#26
Report 3 weeks ago
#26
(Original post by Napp)
So?
Would you mind reminding me how this means he wont get elected? Especially as many people view progressiveness as a dirty word these days given all the woke people running their mouths on the topic.
At any rate i dont disagree with your point that many of Bernies supporters wouldnt transfer their support to someone like Biden but given that Biden still represents the solid middle and rationale arm of the party out of the two he has a better chance of appealing to Republicans who would, largely, rather cut their arms off than vote for a self described socialist.
You described Sanders as "crusty old", when comparing him to Sanders, so it's not a good negative descriptive when there is such small discrepancy in their ages.
Republicans are going to vote republican obviously, so that's out of the question. If you look at the 2016 voter turnout amongst traditional Democratic voters, it was down, because Hillary offered too much of the same old, someone who is offering big changes will encourage an increased turnout for those who agree. It's not about repealing to republicans, it's about appealing to the more apathetic people who don't trust either party, they make up a larger part of the population than republicans who will change their minds.

Also doesn't matter how the word progressive is used, my point (that still stands) is that changes are wanted, especially with millions of people having their medicaid cut, negligence to the environment and a president who is essentially an embarrassment.

*Democratic socialist who rejects the political theory/ ideology of self described socialist states. So not a socialist, by definition.
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#27
Report 3 weeks ago
#27
(Original post by Napp)
So?
Would you mind reminding me how this means he wont get elected? Especially as many people view progressiveness as a dirty word these days given all the woke people running their mouths on the topic.
At any rate i dont disagree with your point that many of Bernies supporters wouldnt transfer their support to someone like Biden but given that Biden still represents the solid middle and rationale arm of the party out of the two he has a better chance of appealing to Republicans who would, largely, rather cut their arms off than vote for a self described socialist.
If the 'rational middle' was what people wanted, Trump wouldn't be president right now. It's madness to think that Biden could ever appeal to Republican voters. Trump will eat him alive. He will tear him to shreds on live TV. Who the self-described socialist is is irrelevant to a voting bloc who were readily convinced that ****ing Obama was a communist. Republicans are a lost cause. It's high time the Dems stopped trying to compromise with them and start putting out some policies that people can actually get excited about.
Last edited by Captain Haddock; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#28
Report 3 weeks ago
#28
(Original post by NotNotBatman)
You described Sanders as "crusty old", when comparing him to Sanders, so it's not a good negative descriptive when there is such small discrepancy in their ages.
Republicans are going to vote republican obviously, so that's out of the question. If you look at the 2016 voter turnout amongst traditional Democratic voters, it was down, because Hillary offered too much of the same old, someone who is offering big changes will encourage an increased turnout for those who agree. It's not about repealing to republicans, it's about appealing to the more apathetic people who don't trust either party, they make up a larger part of the population than republicans who will change their minds.

Also doesn't matter how the word progressive is used, my point (that still stands) is that changes are wanted, especially with millions of people having their medicaid cut, negligence to the environment and a president who is essentially an embarrassment.

*Democratic socialist who rejects the political theory/ ideology of self described socialist states. So not a socialist, by definition.
Small point, you're welcome to it if you want though?
Maybe but given that isnt how the american system works with their electoral college and all. But given that Sanders doesnt appeal to the whole democratic cohort, let alone many republicans...
Well it kind of does as it has distinct connotations. I mean i dont disagree with your point on change being warranted and Trump being a disgrace but that most certainly doesnt mean that sanders has a hope in hell of beating him.
It really doesnt matter what he claims to believe or not. The fact remains he has attached the word socialist to himself which is a dirty word in america (never mind his history of being cosey with socialist states)
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
If the 'rational middle' was what people wanted, Trump wouldn't be president right now. It's madness to think that Biden could ever appeal to Republican voters. Trump will eat him alive. He will tear him to shreds on live TV. Who the self-described socialist is is irrelevant to a voting bloc who were readily convinced that ****ing Obama was a communist. Republicans are a lost cause. It's high time the Dems stopped trying to compromise with them and start putting out some policies that people can actually get excited about.
Touche.
Maybe so but he has more chance than Sanders imo.
Beats there suspicion that he was an african plant i guess.
Ha thatll be the day. Especially given they seem to be in a race to the bottom on how to alienate the bulk of the country on the sacrificial stone of 'progress'. Take Sanders hilarious comments on taxation as an example par excellence.
0
reply
NotNotBatman
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#29
Report 3 weeks ago
#29
(Original post by Napp)
Small point, you're welcome to it if you want though?
Maybe but given that isnt how the american system works with their electoral college and all. But given that Sanders doesnt appeal to the whole democratic cohort, let alone many republicans...
Well it kind of does as it has distinct connotations. I mean i dont disagree with your point on change being warranted and Trump being a disgrace but that most certainly doesnt mean that sanders has a hope in hell of beating him.
It really doesnt matter what he claims to believe or not. The fact remains he has attached the word socialist to himself which is a dirty word in america (never mind his history of being cosey with socialist states)

Touche.
Maybe so but he has more chance than Sanders imo.
Beats there suspicion that he was an african plant i guess.
Ha thatll be the day. Especially given they seem to be in a race to the bottom on how to alienate the bulk of the country on the sacrificial stone of 'progress'. Take Sanders hilarious comments on taxation as an example par excellence.
That's not really true, the majority of the population aren't well versed in such terms and are indifferent to any connotation it has. https://www.vox.com/2020/1/31/211137...lity-primaries.

If you look at the debates, the person who becomes president is usually the better talker during the debates. Crooked Hillary was disastrous, all she did was laugh and say how wrong Trump was, no good plans of action. The electoral college is a corrupt system, but they'll be forced to vote for the most popular essentially.
Sanders would decimate Trump in a debate and there's only so many times you can use socialism as an pejorative, as shown the word socialism is losing its affect. Let's see what Trump has to say "Crazy Bernie" and "Socialism", but there's nothing on him. On Bernie's fan pages (which I do follow) there's already a plethora of things wrong with Trump listed there that Bernie would use in a debate. The only problem I see is with him not hitting hard enough.
Cosy with socialist states; what are you talking about?
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#30
Report 3 weeks ago
#30
(Original post by NotNotBatman)
Cosy with socialist states; what are you talking about?
Sanders received a letter from a soviet official congratulating him on his election as senator way back when. Which well, Lincoln got the same from Karl Marx so it kinda means nothing.
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#31
Report 3 weeks ago
#31
https://twitter.com/robdelaney/statu...124380160?s=19

The state of this explanation :laugh: "Well you see, Sanders is winning on both first and second preference votes, but he's not securing the all important votes of empty fields of corn, so in reality Buttigieg wins"

America are genuinely incapable of having a functioning democracy aren't they?
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#32
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#32
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
https://twitter.com/robdelaney/statu...124380160?s=19

The state of this explanation :laugh: "Well you see, Sanders is winning on both first and second preference votes, but he's not securing the all important votes of empty fields of corn, so in reality Buttigieg wins"

America are genuinely incapable of having a functioning democracy aren't they?
We’ve got 86% in now and it looks like Buttigieg is ahead in the popular vote apparently.
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#33
Report 3 weeks ago
#33
(Original post by Rakas21)
We’ve got 86% in now and it looks like Buttigieg is ahead in the popular vote apparently.
In the rigged results yes. In the actual votes cast almost certainly no. Like, the state of this, results for Black Hawk for instance being reported actively contradict those released by the supervisor of the Black Hawk count: https://twitter.com/lib_crusher/stat...617712128?s=19

Amazed that the GOP is less corrupt in their primaries than the Dems (Rep in 2016 didn't want Trump, they wanted Rubio or Bush, but Trump won the voters so won the nomination).

Good thing at least is Mayo Pete has basically no support amongst black voters so doesn't stand a chance going forward.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#34
Report 3 weeks ago
#34
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
Sanders received a letter from a soviet official congratulating him on his election as senator way back when. Which well, Lincoln got the same from Karl Marx so it kinda means nothing.
Not to mention his 'honeymoon' in the USSR and the self confessed prophetic effects it had on him.
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#35
Report 3 weeks ago
#35
Oh, and they've been "accidentally" assigning Sanders and Warren votes to Deval Patrick and Tom Steyer respectively: https://twitter.com/PhilJamesson/sta...053628930?s=19

I know the old saying goes "don't ascribe to malice what is explainable by incompetence", but that seems to be doing a lot of heavy lifting for malice, given the party's admin surely can't be this incompetent to consistently be releasing late results that contradict those already released by county supervisors
0
reply
generallee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#36
Report 3 weeks ago
#36
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
If the 'rational middle' was what people wanted, Trump wouldn't be president right now. It's madness to think that Biden could ever appeal to Republican voters. Trump will eat him alive. He will tear him to shreds on live TV. Who the self-described socialist is is irrelevant to a voting bloc who were readily convinced that ****ing Obama was a communist. Republicans are a lost cause. It's high time the Dems stopped trying to compromise with them and start putting out some policies that people can actually get excited about.
Who knows about the medium term, Texas may well become Democrat because of demographic change. The startling increase of the Hispanic vote, specifically, and without Texas it is hard to see the Republicans ever winning again.

But in the short term, ie the next Presidential election, the policies that their erstwhile swing voters in the rust belt States get "excited about" are off limits to the Democrats. Unless you think they are going to reverse their de facto "No Borders" policy vis a vis Central and South American migrants, and start to get all right wing on trans gender bathrooms and "white privilege."

It is like the Labour Party here. The Democrats can't help themselves in alienating their former core, blue collar vote because of their obsession with identity politics.

How many times do we on the right have to say it? It isn't economics, it is culture that wins their vote. In Redcar and Pennsylvania alike. It must be too simple and obvious for left wing intellectuals to see, I suppose.
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#37
Report 3 weeks ago
#37
(Original post by generallee)
How many times do we on the right have to say it? It isn't economics, it is culture that wins their vote. In Redcar and Pennsylvania alike. It must be too simple and obvious for left wing intellectuals to see, I suppose.
That's really not the case at the moment: you mentioned the labour party, ask why Corbyn made massive gains in 2017 against May and got beat back in 2019 by Johnson? The referendum policy certainly didn't help (52/60 seats lost were leave seats) but the big thing was that May was an establishment politician while Johnson managed to paint himself as this loveable rogue through years of poor media coverage. Obviously Boris is right in with the establishment in reality, but he's viewed as this outsider who doesn't play the normal political system and as such is popular. Trump got the same effect against Clinton and getting the nomination, portraying himself as anti-establishment and not part of the elite (despite allegedly being a billionaire). What actually wins at the moment is not some culture war, it's populism either way - people have grown tired of the traditional politician, completely beholden to corporate interests and without the indication that they'll be listened to, and so fall behind people acting like they'll shake up the system. If the Dems don't recognise that and just run another establishment candidate, they'll hand it to Trump again
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#38
Report Thread starter 3 weeks ago
#38
(Original post by generallee)
Who knows about the medium term, Texas may well become Democrat because of demographic change. The startling increase of the Hispanic vote, specifically, and without Texas it is hard to see the Republicans ever winning again.

But in the short term, ie the next Presidential election, the policies that their erstwhile swing voters in the rust belt States get "excited about" are off limits to the Democrats. Unless you think they are going to reverse their de facto "No Borders" policy vis a vis Central and South American migrants, and start to get all right wing on trans gender bathrooms and "white privilege."

It is like the Labour Party here. The Democrats can't help themselves in alienating their former core, blue collar vote because of their obsession with identity politics.

How many times do we on the right have to say it? It isn't economics, it is culture that wins their vote. In Redcar and Pennsylvania alike. It must be too simple and obvious for left wing intellectuals to see, I suppose.
Demographic change and the pace it occurs is always interesting (one always assumed that white states in the north would move republican over time but not go in one sweep). That said the tiny margins means its not a given.
....

Tacking back to the primaries we have 96% of the vote in and Butt leads Sanders by 0.2%.
Last edited by Rakas21; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
generallee
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#39
Report 3 weeks ago
#39
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
That's really not the case at the moment: you mentioned the labour party, ask why Corbyn made massive gains in 2017 against May and got beat back in 2019 by Johnson? The referendum policy certainly didn't help (52/60 seats lost were leave seats) but the big thing was that May was an establishment politician while Johnson managed to paint himself as this loveable rogue through years of poor media coverage. Obviously Boris is right in with the establishment in reality, but he's viewed as this outsider who doesn't play the normal political system and as such is popular. Trump got the same effect against Clinton and getting the nomination, portraying himself as anti-establishment and not part of the elite (despite allegedly being a billionaire). What actually wins at the moment is not some culture war, it's populism either way - people have grown tired of the traditional politician, completely beholden to corporate interests and without the indication that they'll be listened to, and so fall behind people acting like they'll shake up the system. If the Dems don't recognise that and just run another establishment candidate, they'll hand it to Trump again
OK, you know best...

Answer me this, though. I mentioned Redcar because it was an extraordinary result in the recent election, albeit one of many. But it seemed to sum everything up, for me.

A nine and half thousand Labour majority was turned into a Tory majority of three and a half give or take. This after the steel works, the former major employer and industrial heart and soul of the constituency was closed, DURING A TORY GOVERNMENT.

Do you know what the Labour majority was in 1997? I'll tell you. 21,664.

Why has Labour's vote, which had been rock solid for as long as the Party has aspired to Government, melted away, like snow in sunshine?

Simple question?
0
reply
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#40
Report 3 weeks ago
#40
(Original post by generallee)
OK, you know best...

Answer me this, though. I mentioned Redcar because it was an extraordinary result in the recent election, albeit one of many. But it seemed to sum everything up, for me.

A nine and half thousand Labour majority was turned into a Tory majority of three and a half give or take. This after the steel works, the former major employer and industrial heart and soul of the constituency was closed, DURING A TORY GOVERNMENT.

Do you know what the Labour majority was in 1997? I'll tell you. 21,664.

Why has Labour's vote, which had been rock solid for as long as the Party has aspired to Government, melted away, like snow in sunshine?

Simple question?
A belief that labour were betraying them, not because labour supported all people, but because labour abandoned a commitment to leave and instead talked about a second referendum. By doing so, the message labour sent out was that they were for this "metropolitan elite" and the political establishment that never wanted Brexit, rather than representing the people. Meanwhile, Johnson was out there pretending to be a man of the people, loveable scoundrel you could have a pint with and seemed like he was actually listening to them by pushing brexit forward. Let's be clear, no-one is losing many if any votes by saying "let's aid refugees" or "let's let trans people piss in peace", they're losing votes by appearing to only represent the desires of the political establishment, not the people they're supposed to represent.

You think those things matter because you're obsessed, but the majority of people don't care about other people's business, they just want politicians who at least appear to listen. Hell, that's why Corbyn was elected as leader in the first place, because he actually established a connection with the party voters rather than seeming like just a continuation of the highly polished PR based leader.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you get study leave?

Yes- I like it (491)
59.59%
Yes- I don't like it (43)
5.22%
No- I want it (234)
28.4%
No- I don't want it (56)
6.8%

Watched Threads

View All