Why?This campaign is going to be a hilarious train wreck. I can't wait.
I'm sure there are Native American affirmative action programmes in these situations. It can be seen as fraudulent to lie about your race.
"We need to end bigotry because it's a threat to the state" is, uh, quite the interpretation.
Wasn't Abrams a justice dem/our revolution endorsed candidate?
Anything divisive is a national security threat, apparently. Overturn Roe v. Wade or the Russians win.
This campaign is going to be a hilarious train wreck. I can't wait.
Particularly after the effects of the Trump election and the statistical rise of white nationalism, there should be zero (0) push back to the claim that civil rights are a national security issue.
If you define national security issue so broadly that it ceases to be a meaningful concept.
Anything divisive is a national security threat, apparently. Overturn Roe v. Wade or the Russians win.
Ill have to look more into Klobuchar but she doesn't seem anywhere close to the most progressive politician in the primary. However im all for anyone running who would allow Bernie or Warren to win the primary.
Don't forget the number of caucus states have been reduced.As long as Kamala acts like she is now it's hers to lose. Maybe it'll change in the future, but for now their chances are slimmer by her being there and she has the advantage in California - which is pushed up to March.
Maybe Bernie fans are worried that Stacie Abrams might run for president after how well her SOTU response went?
Maybe Bernie fans are worried that Stacie Abrams might run for president after how well her SOTU response went?
Just guessing as to why they might start attacking her as a neoliberal grifter... if there's some other reason I'd love to hear it.
Also my question wasn't rhetorical: Are there acceptable American politicians besides Bernie and (as of half a year ago) AOC? Who else is worthy? Or are those two supposed to run the government by themselves, maybe with some assistance from Lee Carter...
She hasn't declared or even rumored to declared so bringing up Abrams in this thread is stretching it, especially when it seems like only one person is doing it. I don't think it's wise to extrapolate that to the entire left movement.Maybe Bernie fans are worried that Stacie Abrams might run for president after how well her SOTU response went?
Just guessing as to why they might start attacking her as a neoliberal grifter... if there's some other reason I'd love to hear it.
For some leftists, Bernie is the furthest right they want to go. Try to ook at things from their perspective. Imagine the furthest right you would want to vote on - that's basically how some leftists view it. In fact, Bernie is seen as a compromise among the left. To me, a compromise isn't really "worthy". Of course, this does not mean that all leftists think that way, that it's Bernie or Bust. Many will still vote for whoever gets the nomination, but we'll still gripe about it.Also my question wasn't rhetorical: Are there acceptable American politicians besides Bernie and (as of half a year ago) AOC? Who else is worthy? Or are those two supposed to run the government by themselves, maybe with some assistance from Lee Carter...
Maybe Bernie fans are worried that Stacie Abrams might run for president after how well her SOTU response went?
Just guessing as to why they might start attacking her as a neoliberal grifter... if there's some other reason I'd love to hear it. Calm down.
Also my question wasn't rhetorical: Are there acceptable American politicians besides Bernie and (as of half a year ago) AOC? Who else is worthy? Or are those two supposed to run the government by themselves, maybe with some assistance from Lee Carter...
I wonder what percentage of "Bernie is the furthest right" folks would consider Nicola Maduro more worthy than Abrams or Warren... hopefully Pol Pot at least is "a bit too far"...For some leftists, Bernie is the furthest right they want to go. Try to ook at things from their perspective. Imagine the furthest right you would want to vote on - that's basically how some leftists view it. In fact, Bernie is seen as a compromise among the left. To me, a compromise isn't really "worthy". Of course, this does not mean that all leftists think that way, that it's Bernie or Bust. Many will still vote for whoever gets the nomination, but we'll still gripe about it.
It was literally one wacky tweet. May I use tweets asking the death penalty for Sanders for colluding with the KGB to paint a broad generalization of Sanders-haters?
I wonder what percentage of "Bernie is the furthest right" folks would consider Nicola Maduro more worthy than Abrams or Warren... hopefully Pol Pot at least is "a bit too far"...
I wonder what percentage of "Bernie is the furthest right" folks would consider Nicola Maduro more worthy than Abrams or Warren... hopefully Pol Pot at least is "a bit too far"...
It's a free country, Jill Stein. You can do anything, even help your pals in Russia get Trump elected.
Maybe i missed something but why is Kamala Harris is a bad choice?
That and her campaign's back pedaling on M4A doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in other progressive positions. The stance she took on the CNN Town Hall was extremely good but then her campaign walked that shit back.
That and her campaign's back pedaling on M4A doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in other progressive positions. The stance she took on the CNN Town Hall was extremely good but then her campaign walked that shit back.
I understand how the ACA got formed in 2008 and I don't see how this relates to how things would happen differently with Bernie or Kamala being president. I'm sure you understand that the president doesn't personally write the bill.She's not Bernie, very few politicians are going to drive to the left most policies because they know it's not passing in congress. Don't confuse her progressive ambitions being in doubt because she's not able to go to the highest politics extremes. For example, with the ACA Pelosi wanted Single Payer and the Public Option but she didn't have the votes for either, so she passed the most affective bill she could because that's better than all or nothing. How she feels about healthcare is not a factor in whether she can get the votes to pass it and Kamala is likely on a similar wavelength with her policies.
I understand how the ACA got formed in 2008 and I don't see how this relates to how things would happen differently with Bernie or Kamala being president. I'm sure you understand that the president doesn't personally write the bill.
She didn't walk it back, she said that she'd be willing to sign multipayer legislation if that's what congress sent her.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2012/06/22/stockman/bvg57mguQxOVpZMmB1Mg2N/story.html
Read this, and tell me what happens when you don't compromise.
Obama's deals with republicans would have never worked. The man offered to gut out social security but the tea party absolutely refused anything from the man.It's all about compromise, Kamala's followers will have less reason to go ballistic for her doing this than Bernie's - who expect him to move the world. No compromises, no fence sitting, no weakness in defiance of the status quo. He's built his political career on that image. The last politician who faced those difficulties like that in having enormous dreams to fix America (Obama) got hammered because he couldn't deliver this though congress because they were he'd by the GOP. This depressed the progressive voters further and further and now many of those same people think he's a spineless sell-out.
Obama's deals with republicans would have never worked. The man offered to gut out social security but the tea party absolutely refused anything from the man.
I can't imagine this scenario changing in the post-trump era of politics.
Is there a list somewhere of American politicians who are acceptable besides Bernie and now AOC?
https://twitter.com/SeanMcElwee/status/1092880753237639169
But then wouldn't that failure fall upon the house leadership because they couldn't get their base around a bill to pass a simple majority. Bernie as the president will likely set the policy goals but the only actual will he will except on the bill will be whether or not to veto it.The GOP controlled congress for the 6 out of 8 years in congress because of this attitude from voters. He's weak, he can't do anything let's vote in less Democrats in congress to shore up his support than get shocked when he can't close Guantanamo like he promised. It's a death spiral that Dems constantly want to re-live.
Would I have liked him to be more aggressive in negotiations, sure. But this is missing my point - putting Bernie in there will get the same results.
The reason I bought up Pelosi is because it's not solely about Republicans, Dems first need to compromise with the coalition to get bills because Team Bernie in congress can't do this all themselves.
This is about leadership and compromise, and Bernie's weaker than both against Obama.
But then wouldn't that failure fall upon the house leadership because they couldn't get their base around a bill to pass a simple majority. Bernie as the president will likely set the policy goals but the only actual will he will except on the bill will be whether or not to veto it.
The issue you're bringing up with GOP control wasn't because the democrats couldn't pass anything. The reason why GOP took over as effectively as they did was because of their massively successful misinformation campaign that attacked every facet of the Obama's government accomplishments with things like ACA death panels and did everything in their power to stop bills from being passed which became insanely easy once Nancy lost the gavel which compounded the issue.
You're blaming things on a supposed Bernie presidency that were caused by Republicans Ichthyo.
???Why did Bernie have to be such an idiot by having a tantrum and not letting Abrams have a dem response. He just had to go after her to white knight his way to give his position didn't he...
He seems to be gearing up to be a dem nominee and pulls out this act ? Will he think voters are dumb ?
Why did Bernie have to be such an idiot by having a tantrum and not letting Abrams have a dem response. He just had to go after her to white knight his way to give his position didn't he...
He seems to be gearing up to be a dem nominee and pulls out this act ? Will he think voters are dumb ?
I think he thinks that most voters will (correctly) not care that he gave a damn livestream after a network-televised response. I certainly don't, and roll my eyes at anybody that does.
It's the people who don't like it which will affect Bernie. He needs more people to join his cause if he wants to want the presidency, can't just do that with the true believers.
I am betting that the people who care are not a statistically significant enough contingent that he DOES need them.
Why did Bernie have to be such an idiot by having a tantrum and not letting Abrams have a dem response. He just had to go after her to white knight his way to give his position didn't he...
He seems to be gearing up to be a dem nominee and pulls out this act ? Will he think voters are dumb ?
For this, sure. But what needs to concern you is this is a symptom of a larger problem. It's fucking hard to build a coalition when you're a controversial candidate.