booker's primary strength is that he's far and away the best public speaker of the current field, so he plays well with the "haha orange cheetoh made a typo in a tweet!!!" crowd
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Bernie Sanders will Run Again in 2020
- Thread starter RDreamer
- Start date
- Status
booker's primary strength is that he's far and away the best public speaker of the current field, so he plays well with the "haha orange cheetoh made a typo in a tweet!!!" crowd
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/d...throw-chairs-at-nevada-democratic-convention/
It turns out the chair throwing thing you reference wasn't even real.
People misinterpreted events and the lie snowballed because of... confirmation bias?
Having fake stories being published and repeated everywhere causes resentment and the sense that the system is not fair.
Literally snorted with laughter at the idea of the most detestable thing that happened at the NV Dem convention was a chair-throwing incident that didn't even happen
Needed that laugh
Wife was telling me this was bullshit as well (that shit was thrown) but I couldn't be bothered to look into it since it really doesn't matter regardless.
Would be swell if people could stick to real news but I guess that's inconvenient for some.
I really should've paid more attention to the online primary fights. I didn't even know that people were fighting over whether or not a chair was thrown
Socially conservative Democrats? You mean people like Joe Manchin? Bernie isn't the least bit appealing to them!
Booker is about as charismatic as a potato. He's focus-grouped to the care and also a shit politican
This is very, very wrong. http://graphics.wsj.com/elections/2016/how-clinton-won/
That I number + rural number is what you are missing. Bernie's coalition was lefties, young people, and socially conservative Is. Econ Moderate Dems would have been siphoned by Biden but leaned Clinton.
That Trump/Sanders overlap was a real thing and a big reason things always get so toxic, because the Trumpers w Bernie as a second choice want to tear down nonSanders candidates, while mamy lefties dont understand that the much more socially conservative group exists.
I haven't donated yet. Are they still passing out the rich cis male serum or am I too late?
By "charismatic" I mean in the sense of "people like him for some reason and it's not due to his politics", which I agree are totally shit.
I call Trump "charismatic" too because he triggers some instincts in his base and they respond with emotional adulation but that's not meant to be a compliment.
In what way are these voters socially conservative.. People like that voted for Trump and the Republicans. Not Bernie.
"We are not utopians. We know that an unskilled labourer or a cook cannot immediately get on with the job of state administration....[but] we demand an immediate break with the prejudiced view that only the rich, or officials chosen from rich families, are capable of administering the state, of performing the ordinary, everyday work of administration. We demand that training in the work of state administration be conducted by class-conscious workers and soldiers and that this training be begun at once, i.e., that a beginning be made at once in training all the working people, all the poor, for this work."
-Bernie Ilyich Sanders, 1917
The reason Is arent Dems isnt because theyre more conservative on economics. https://www.voterstudygroup.org/ass..._drutman_e4aabc39aab12644609701bbacdff252.png -full explanation https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publications/2016-elections/political-divisions-in-2016-and-beyond
Oh ok, I thought you were calling them socially conservative. (ie against lgbt right, pro-life, etc.)
Because leftists are the problem, something something, just shut up and get in line, something something, leftists are socially conservative, something something, Bernie supporters are the Pol Pot of American politics.
Look, just don't waste your time.
So you think having laborers and farmers have oversight over the financial system would be a bad thing? Seems to me like the most obvious thing in the world if you want a system that will work for the people and not just bankers and their wall street buddies.
There's some reference here with the date I'm not getting. Please explain these dank commie memes.
If 1917 isn't enough to tip you off, then I don't know what to tell you.
I was. Is are primarily more socially conservative than Dems. Bernie was doing better with them because it turns out running for election in Vermont makes you really good at campaigning towards them. edit: it's why this sketch works- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKcUOUYzDXA&t=2s
Last edited:
Yes. Not only would it be a bad thing, It'd be a catastrophically terrible idea.
You think a farmer knows monetary policy? Dealing with the IMF? Interest rates? International Trade?
I think that we can't trust bankers to make decisions that will benefit farmers or laborers or other ordinary people.
When only elites oversee these institutions, their decisions are made to only benefit elites.
Bankers do not run the Fed. It's staffed by economists who are considered experts in the field by their peers. They are the elites in the field because of their credentials, not because of their background. They run monetary policy to keep inflation under control and to keep the economy from careening off course. A farmer will have none of the skills required for the job because they haven't spent their whole life learning and practicing the skills required. You wouldn't hire a pumber to fix your teeth, an auto mechanic to do your graphic design, or Steven Spielberg as your surprise birthday cake stripper.
That makes sense let's check with the Asian Communist revolutions to see how that system would work
Piles of skulls you say
For the record, it's not "intellectualism" we're opposed to. We're opposed to "intellectualism that's only achievable for people in a certain socio-economic class, which conducts policy in such a way as to enhance the conditions of their class while worsening the conditions of the lower classes".
Implicit social segregation perpetuates itself when it locks people out of seats in governance according to the class into which they were born.
Implicit social segregation perpetuates itself when it locks people out of seats in governance according to the class into which they were born.
To be clear, he said they should have representatives at the fed. It would be odd to have farmers decide monetary policy and regulate an industry they don't know anything about.
Literally no one is saying "remove all people with economy backgrounds". They're saying "include other voices like laborers, farmers, homeowners, etc" who will have unique perspectives and will be far more affected by the decisions made than some well off economic experts who just look at everything completely clinically and are set for life already.
I also want to say that I think some people are really showing their ass when they refer to attempts to give a voice to laborers and farmers as "anti-intellectualism".
Quite an interesting leap in logic to make there...
Exactly. We need to get away from the idea that you need to have spent time working for the banks to be able to regulate the financial industry.
Quite an interesting leap in logic to make there...
Exactly. We need to get away from the idea that you need to have spent time working for the banks to be able to regulate the financial industry.
I mean I could smell the classism the when they spit out "fucking farmers".
The contempt is palpable.
Ask sphagnum for these. I showed my scrub commie ass when I failed to recognize 1917.
Those unique perspectives are utterly useless without a background in the field at a very high level. Ben Bernanke, the guy who was an expert on the great depression and who happened to coincidentally be in charge of the Fed when the Great Recession hit, was raised in a middle-class family. Janet Yellen was raised in a middle class family. Paul Volcker was raised in a middle class family. Having a PhD in economics is generally going to put you in the upper-middle class, yes, because a Econ PhD is super valuable on the job market. Not because it's only "rich bankers" who get appointed to the fed.
Those voices have plenty of room to exercise their preferences in other ways through our political system. But the Fed is deliberately cordoned off and taken incredibly seriously because it's there to keep a guy like Trump from trainwrecking the economy single handedly. The powers the Fed have make it so a mismanaged Fed can set the US economy back decades with the wrong decisions.
Let's take a look at dictatorships around the world...
Hyperinflation you say.
It's anti-intellectualism when you claim that having farmers on the board that sets economic policy would be better than people who have PHDs in economics and have studied the field their entire life, yes.
The quote is:
"Banking industry executives must no longer be allowed to serve on the Fed's boards and to handpick its members and staff. Board positions should instead include representatives from all walks of life — including labor, consumers, homeowners, urban residents, farmers and small businesses."
Who says the representatives are going to be too dumb to understand some of this stuff? Sounds like he's asking for Union leaders and that ilk, not actual farmers. Even if it did, people who are these factions aren't always racist Trump supporters. They can be really smart and understanding of the issues like anyone else.
Anti intellectual populism sucks, but so does elitism.
Also, I should note, I don't think it's the best solution, but it's better than looking for an "intellectual" is who actively working against us (a Banker).
Asking my doctor to have a medical degree and license is not "elitism." Asking someone who's going to be in charge of managing the economy to have a background in economics isn't "elitism" either.
- Status