US Politics Megathread

[n0el]

Well I’m convinced Biden is going to lose to Trump so basically nothing.

[fightinfrenchman]

Why do you think Biden is less likely to beat Trump than Sanders, Warren, or Harris?

[n0el]

He’s got way more baggage and he’s a significantly worse version of Hillary. The legitimate complaints about Hillary are basically amplified under Biden, and there will always be made up, useless slander like emails that are manufactured. His only hope to win would be that R’s turn on Trump, but the more and more I talk to people the less I see that happening. In the end, they will hold to the party regardless of its head.

[fightinfrenchman]

there will always be made up, useless slander like emails that are manufactured.

Fortunately this is not a problem for Sanders, Warren, or Harris

[n0el]

It is. But they don’t have the crime bill, Hyde amendment, anti-busing, Anita Hill, etc.....baggage to go with it.

[fightinfrenchman]

You underestimate how the media will treat women or a guy who honeymooned in the Soviet Union

[n0el]

So basically Biden is the only choice because he is a white man who doesn’t ID as a socialist? Seems like the Democrats are in a great place. Definitely nothing to worry about if said white man does win. Can’t wait for President Tom Cotton or Mike Pompeo in 4 years.

[Goodspeed]

As someone with money riding on Trump winning re-election

Did you get good odds at least?

[Goodspeed]

Seriously though. I cannot wait for Sanders, Warren and Harris to savage Biden in the debates.

And Pete will be the only candidate with a message that is actually positive and different. Dude will crush. He will make all of the other candidates look like angry children, especially if they attack each other.

[n0el]

That’s possible, but is a positive message what people want. Still to be seen.

[Goodspeed]

After years of shock and fear politics? Of course it is. More importantly his message is different. He focuses on taking back democratic values. This is as much criticizing the status quo as Bernie's rhetoric, but more subtle and it feels very different. It transcends politics, plays into what really connects us as people which is not the policies we support but the underlying reasons we support those policies.

To illustrate, we can have many debates on policy here but in the end most of us have very similar moral values and ideologies. Pete's focus on what unites us rather than what divides us is what makes his campaign different, and why he will resonate with people in a way none of the other candidates will.

[Jam]

Why even bother having elections when you have a very stable genius in the white house.

[Goodspeed]

Formality. People need to think they have a voice.

[n0el]

After years of shock and fear politics? Of course it is. More importantly his message is different. He focuses on taking back democratic values. This is as much criticizing the status quo as Bernie's rhetoric, but more subtle and it feels very different. It transcends politics, plays into what really connects us as people which is not the policies we support but the underlying reasons we support those policies.

To illustrate, we can have many debates on policy here but in the end most of us have very similar moral values and ideologies. Pete's focus on what unites us rather than what divides us is what makes his campaign different, and why he will resonate with people in a way none of the other candidates will.

I was thinking more of what propels activism (the key to winning), and generally speaking, it is and always has been anger. Can Pete take that focus and play it with anger of inequality, attacks on women's rights, attacks on minorities, etc... to win? I don't know. I hope he can, because the more candidates that can, the better chance we have of winning.

He needs to clearly demarcate from Biden's version of unification, where somehow the Republicans are going to start working with the Democratic president, which of course is just a sign of complete and total insanity. The only mission should be complete and utter destruction of the Republican party in it's current state. If Pete can achieve both of these messages together, then I would probably support him as my number #1 choice.

[fightinfrenchman]

The only mission should be complete and utter destruction of the Republican party in it's current state.

This would be nice but it's not possible with the broken system we have.

[Goodspeed]

After years of shock and fear politics? Of course it is. More importantly his message is different. He focuses on taking back democratic values. This is as much criticizing the status quo as Bernie's rhetoric, but more subtle and it feels very different. It transcends politics, plays into what really connects us as people which is not the policies we support but the underlying reasons we support those policies.

To illustrate, we can have many debates on policy here but in the end most of us have very similar moral values and ideologies. Pete's focus on what unites us rather than what divides us is what makes his campaign different, and why he will resonate with people in a way none of the other candidates will.

I was thinking more of what propels activism (the key to winning), and generally speaking, it is and always has been anger. Can Pete take that focus and play it with anger of inequality, attacks on women's rights, attacks on minorities, etc... to win? I don't know. I hope he can, because the more candidates that can, the better chance we have of winning.

He needs to clearly demarcate from Biden's version of unification, where somehow the Republicans are going to start working with the Democratic president, which of course is just a sign of complete and total insanity. The only mission should be complete and utter destruction of the Republican party in it's current state. If Pete can achieve both of these messages together, then I would probably support him as my number #1 choice.

But do you need to be angry yourself in order to get angry people's votes? No. In fact I think it plays much better to focus on hope and unity, and to calmly talk about solutions to the things that made people angry in the first place. Have you forgotten Obama's campaign?
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... -democrats

[Dolan]

Lol. Do you really believe that if you destroy a party you also destroy the electorate, the huge mass of individuals with particular political temperaments who would vote for a similar party? It would be just a question of time until a new one would spring into life.

What the Repubs represent is a polarisation of values in the US society. You don't solve that by destroying its party.

[n0el]

@Goodspeed I haven't, but times have changed. I am not saying he has to be angry, but he has to recognize the anger and play to it. Biden has clearly taken the opposite path here which gives Pete a big opening.

@fightinfrenchman it is possible, in fact the blueprint is already there. no deals, no judges, use power to entrench power, etc...it is definitely not possible if your campaign is built around working with a party that refuses to work with you.

[n0el]

Lol. Do you really believe that if you destroy a party you also destroy the electorate, the huge mass of individuals with particular political temperaments who would vote for a similar party? It would be just a question of time until a new one would spring into life.

Of course not, but the majority of the party is not the problem. That side of the party can rebuilt something sane.

[Goodspeed]

@Goodspeed I haven't, but times have changed. I am not saying he has to be angry, but he has to recognize the anger and play to it. Biden has clearly taken the opposite path here which gives Pete a big opening.

Biden's problem, according to the article which you really should read it's pretty good, is not that he's taking the opposite path but that this path doesn't fit him. He's pretending to be Obama but really he's nothing like Obama. That's where Pete found an opening.

[fightinfrenchman]

@n0el You can't realistically get rid of the Senate

[n0el]

did i say that?

[n0el]

@Goodspeed link?

[Goodspeed]

It's in the post before that

[n0el]

Not going to lie, Ezra Klein as the author makes me immediately very skeptical of anything in the article, but i will read it.

edit: read it, good article and he makes some good points. I agree with his conclusion however, that Obama is popular but the times have changed. Where that balance lies, no one knows.

also, on the Biden topic in the article, I would suggest listening to this short podcast @Goodspeed
https://theintercept.com/2019/05/23/joe ... -disaster/

its Medhi Hassan with Rebecca Traister who was quoted by Ezra in that article.