Beto O’Rourke Removed From ‘No Fossil Fuel Money Pledge’

[Feep]

This is blinkered nonsense and a conclusion you can only come to if you've already dismissed the full spectrum of political discourse to double down on status quo centrist liberalism. If you're only operating within this narrow band of discourse (as the vast majority of America does), what you said makes sense, but some of us don't operate there, and our goal is to open up the full range of political discourse by shifting the conversation further left. Resistance to this, I could throw back at you, is capitulation to reactionary momentum, and your "act like an adult" wisdom is socially destructive.

Click to shrink...

No, it's very simple logic. You can literally label anyone on the spectrum of good "evil" by saying they aren't reaching an imaginary bar whose position you, and only you, decide.

If you're unhappy with all politics in the United States, if no one, not even Bernie or Harris or whoever is hyper-liberal enough for you, cool. I also wish we lived in a different universe. And discussions about these sorts of policies are fine in the abstract. But when it comes time to talk about real candidates in real elections, you can take your high-minded ideals and shove them. Children are in concentration camps and it's time to get that shit out of office.

Criticizing, vetting, and discussing O'Rourke's policies and effectiveness are fair game and should absolutely be encouraged. This shitshow of a thread isn't that. It's an outright smear campaign and it's obvious.

 

[Allard23]

I am unsure if you are a troll or not.

Click to shrink...

Its pretty clear man, not sure what to tell you. Elizabeth Breunig set out exactly how I feel about Beto.

 

[TheLucasLite]

Do you want to try and bring up the various racist and culturally insensitive remarks made my Bernie?

No?

We can do this all day. It's all fucking attack fodder that is meant to distract us from the fucking end game. We have a legitimate white supremacist in the office right now. He hates minorities and poor people. Stay. On. Fucking. Target.

Click to shrink...

And it will happen again if the democrats keep pushing centrists who don't address the material needs of people.

 

[DeathbyVolcano]

Somehow this always ends up with - choose the liberal centrist though.

Click to shrink...

That's not what I'm fucking saying. I will gladly vote for the most progressive candidate as long as I feel like they can beat Trump. We're fighting way too much about this shit though. We need to work together to come to a goddamned consensus.

This shit is making me angry so I'm probably going to step away. We're doing exactly what Russia and Trump want us to be doing.

 

[Deleted member 5666]

Well, the similarities to when the DNC establishment shielded itself from any notion of going even a tiny bit further to the left, pushed their bad candidate all the way to the general elections, and promptly lost them should be pretty obvious.

Click to shrink...

If the more socialist wing of the left wanted a chance they should find someone who isn't running for President at the age of 79.

No one is electing a near 80 year old to a first term. It's not of any fault of his own but that is a HUUUUUUUUGE nonstarter with a massive chunk of the parties voting base.

 

[onadesertedisland]

She's flawed in the sense that she's a young politician. I love her, she provides me tremendous hope for the future. I mean that she's not perfect in the sense that she will make gaffes and is so public that mistakes are inevitable. Who gives a shit though, because I trust here underlying policy goals. That's my point.

Click to shrink...

You said she is "supremely flawed". Don't backwalk that unless you want to disavow it. A gaffe? Are you serious? At this point in the political game? A gaffe? For real, the president is a treasonous sexual assaulter and we're worried that someone mis-speaks? We might as already throw in the towel... We eat ourselves before the other side can even call us socialist...

 

[Brazil]

If the more socialist wing of the left wanted a chance they should find someone who isn't running for President at the ripe old age of 79.

No one is electing a damn near 80 year old to a first term. It's not of any fault of his own but that is a HUUUUUUUUGE nonstarter with a massive chunk of the partys voting base.

Click to shrink...

Sure. I agree.

 

[Allard23]

You said she is "supremely flawed". Don't backwalk that unless you want to disavow it. A gaffe? Are you serious? At this point in the political game? A gaffe? For real, the president is a treasonous sexual assaulter and we're worried that someone mis-speaks? We might as already throw in the towel... We eat ourselves before the other side can even call us socialist...

Click to shrink...

In the context of my response to you, it was clear.

 

[onadesertedisland]

In the context of my response to you, it was clear.

Click to shrink...

It was, in that you're disingenuous with your arguments and transparent with your objective.

 

[Deleted member 22490]

There is a ton wrong with Bernie as well, I'm not committed to him. He's one of the least bad options, but still bad in many ways.

My ideal candidate would be someone who has accepted $0 from any living soul and is campaigning on turning every McMansion into a homeless shelter while forcibly evicting their current residents. Everyone who fails to live up to this standard gets demerits.

Click to shrink...

Bernie is very much a compromise candidate

 

[onadesertedisland]

Close this shit thread.

 

[Piecake]

Damn, history has be re-written already.

We literally went with the analogue to Beto in 2016 because that was supposed to be the safe choice. Holy shit.

Click to shrink...

You are living in a fantasy land if you think that.

Clinton is a cold-calculating politician who struggles connecting with voters because she is never willing to show her 'true self'

Beto is charismatic, inspires people, is good at making connections, and takes moral stands that gives his candidacy meaning and purpose.

Obama would have beat Trump if he was allowed to run for a third term. He would have won because he is also able to do all of that on the campaign trail. Obama flubbed a bit when he actually got into office as siding with the banks in the bailout kind of hurt him in terms of the whole moral stances and meaning and purpose.

 

[brownmagic]

It's not hard; it's only when we say "Beto doesn't represent my values" that we encounter problems from mainstream liberals for being, apparently, "scorched-earth." Put up an actual progressive. Stop putting up cops and neoliberals. Is that so hard?

Click to shrink...

Why don't you try running for office if none of the candidates the Democrats are putting forth appeal to you? Your core assumption is that everyone wants ultra left candidates, why not prove it? Cause I'm willing to wager that the majority of America does NOT want that.

Beto is great, would vote for him in 2020.

 

[Tebunker]

You're bringing up the "searching for a perfect candidate" accusation in a thread about someone who is, in a painfully obvious way, not even a good candidate. If you meant those words in a general sense, and not as a defense of Beto specifically, then I apologize - but the context of this thread told me otherwise.

Why do you consider Beto "good"?

Click to shrink...

I hadn't made my mind up either way, he could be, I am more of the first, I am not defending Beto, just any candidate right now.

We need to see more policy and platform, I want to see more on a national level. Hell we don't even know if he is an actual candidate.

He was a "good" candidate for Texas running against a horrible person. So that leaves a lot for me to learn.

 

[TaleSpun]

I'd be just as pissed if a thread was made spreading misleading bullshit about Kamala Harris or Amy Klobuchar.

Click to shrink...

Noted. ;)

 

[Allard23]

You are living in a fantasy land if you think that.

Clinton is a cold-calculating politician who struggles connecting with voters because she is never willing to show her 'true self'

Beto is charismatic, inspires people, is good at making connections, and takes moral stands that gives his candidacy meaning and purpose.

Obama would have beat Trump if he was allowed to run for a third term. He would have won because he is also able to do all of that on the campaign trail. Obama flubbed a bit when he actually got into office as siding with the banks in the bailout kind of hurt him in terms of the whole moral stances and meaning and purpose.

Click to shrink...

Again - my issue with this liberal perspective - you're literally making a calf-cramp argument. There are no real substantive differences between the two, and you are assuming voters are stupid enough not to notice because they'll be charmed by him. And even if that works - which it might - then we will get the fucking ugly version of Trump in 8 years. Because that won't fix inequality, and that won't solve the creaking, slow death of neoliberalism that we're seeing right now. Its so short sighted.

 

[Piecake]

Why don't you try running for office if none of the candidates the Democrats are putting forth appeal to you? Your core assumption is that everyone wants ultra left candidates, why not prove it? Cause I'm willing to wager that the majority of America does NOT want that.

Beto is great, would vote for him in 2020.

Click to shrink...

We got some pretty good evidence in the 2018 campaign that you are right about that, but that has not seemed to have stopped people from claiming otherwise.

 

[Brazil]

You are living in a fantasy land if you think that.

Clinton is a cold-calculating politician who struggles connecting with voters because she is never willing to show her 'true self'

Beto is charismatic, inspires people, is good at making connections, and takes moral stands that gives his candidacy meaning and purpose.

Obama would have beat Trump if he was allowed to run for a third term. He would have won because he is also able to do all of that on the campaign trail. Obama flubbed a bit when he actually got into office as siding with the banks in the bailout kind of hurt him in terms of the whole moral stances and meaning and purpose.

Click to shrink...

Literally nothing of what you said about either Clinton or Beto is about actual policies.

You guys really need to realize ASAP that simply beating out the Republicans and then not actually improving people's lives dramatically when you're in power just means that the Republicans will be back in power soon enough.

 

[Deleted member 5666]

Noted. ;)

Click to shrink...

Donald Trump appreciates your continued hard work I am sure.

 

[Xiaomi]

Bernie is very much a compromise candidate

Click to shrink...

That's what's hard to communicate to liberals for me. Bernie is already my lesser-of-two-evils. He's a social democrat or market socialist at best, and is not my "perfect candidate" by a long shot. But corporate Dems seem to think that I'm not really compromising until I pick someone from their list.

 

[Orayn]

If anyone is going to start the Klobuchar smear thread, it should be me, as a Minnesotan.

 

[Deleted member 5666]

Literally nothing of what you said about either Clinton or Beto is about actual policies.

You guys really need to realize ASAP that simply beating out the Republicans and then not actually improving people's lives dramatically when you're in power just means that the Republicans will be back in power soon enough.

Click to shrink...

Presidential Elections have jack shit to do with policies. Never have in the modern tv era. The most "exciting" candidate is the one who always wins.

 

[Allard23]

Literally nothing of what you said about either Clinton or Beto is about actual policies.

You guys really need to realize ASAP that simply beating out the Republicans and then not actually improving people's lives dramatically when you're in power just means that the Republicans will be back in power soon enough.

Click to shrink...

THIS THIS THIS

 

[Orayn]

Presidential Elections have jack shit to do with policies. Never have in the modern tv era. The most "exciting" candidate is the one who always wins.

Click to shrink...

I'm glad we're at least admitting to this level of surrender instead of pretending to care about Hillary's positions on this or that.

 

[Deleted member 22490]

That's what's hard to communicate to liberals for me. Bernie is already my lesser-of-two-evils. He's a social democrat or market socialist at best, and is not my "perfect candidate" by a long shot. But corporate Dems seem to think that I'm not really compromising until I pick someone from their list.

Click to shrink...

Either they don't get it or don't want to get it. We like Bernie but also know that Bernie has problems. Despite that, he's still the closest to our ideals than anyone else.

 

[TheLucasLite]

Presidential Elections have jack shit to do with policies. Never have in the modern tv era. The most "exciting" candidate is the one who always wins.

Click to shrink...

Guess we're all just here tuggin' each other off then.

 

[Titik]

Wait were actually not a good saying that picking Beto is the safe choice now

 

[Brazil]

I hadn't made my mind up either way, he could be, I am more of the first, I am not defending Beto, just any candidate right now.

We need to see more policy and platform, I want to see more on a national level. Hell we don't even know if he is an actual candidate.

He was a "good" candidate for Texas running against a horrible person. So that leaves a lot for me to learn.

Click to shrink...

That's a reasonable perspective. But even though I obviously rooted strongly for Beto to kick that disgusting blob out of the Senate, there's already a lot of information out there about what Beto's policies are on a national level. He says he supports universal health care, but won't commit to supporting Medicare for All. He didn't sign the House bill protecting Social Security. He says he wants to rejoin the Paris accord, but that's simply not enough, even compared to AOC's proposals. He didn't sign the bill in favor of debt-free college. Simply put, having him as a candidate would be a huge compromise on some of the most entry-level issues that need to be discussed in the next primary.

 

[bmdubya]

People committed to Bernie 2020 are not all like this. But literally every. single. attack. trying to tear down Dem 2020 top tier candidates are coming from Bernie fans. Every thread here about it, every drive by attack in PoliERA.

Those that prefer Biden, Kamala, Booker, etc are not doing this.

Click to shrink...

Yes, because if you speak out against Beto, that must mean you're a Bernie fan.

Or, maybe progressive Dems want more out of a candidate than someone who is pretty much center left. Plus progressive ideas are starting to become mainstream. 70% of Americans want medicare for all, 62% of Americans support marijuana legalization, and 60% of Americans favor tuition free college, which I consider three mainstream progressive platforms. I want a Democrat that supports all of these things, and so far I've yet to hear Beto's position on these policies.

 

[Deleted member 22490]

Presidential Elections have jack shit to do with policies. Never have in the modern tv era. The most "exciting" candidate is the one who always wins.

Click to shrink...

Then we should be pushing these exciting candidates to adopt more progressive policies. Make no mistake, we gotta keep agitating for better things even if our preferred candidate makes it to the nomination or even to the White house.

 

[TaleSpun]

Donald Trump appreciates your continued hard work I am sure.

Click to shrink...

Spasiba.

If anyone is going to start the Klobuchar smear thread, it should be me, as a Minnesotan.

Click to shrink...

Mmmmmm okay, but you gotta trade me for Harris and Booker.

 

[Tebunker]

Sure. I agree.

Click to shrink...

Literally nothing of what you said about either Clinton or Beto is about actual policies.

You guys really need to realize ASAP that simply beating out the Republicans and then not actually improving people's lives dramatically when you're in power just means that the Republicans will be back in power soon enough.

Click to shrink...

Presidential Elections have jack shit to do with policies. Never have in the modern tv era. The most "exciting" candidate is the one who always wins.

Click to shrink...

All of this can be true. Old dude running for the first term probably not going to the be sexiest pick, and for sure as hell whomever is elected needs to actually do shit, and lastly the President rarely has to do with actual policy, since you can seemingly spout nonsense at people and get elected.

The key is to keep working congress and to have a president that is capable and willing to work with them.

It's one thing I harp on with my friends, right now, even the perception of trying to get shit done to improve people's lives will help democrats and the left. Even if that means passing tons of bills that get shot down in the Senate and/or vetoed, the key is to keep trying, and then not back off when it become politically convenient.

 

[Brazil]

Presidential Elections have jack shit to do with policies. Never have in the modern tv era. The most "exciting" candidate is the one who always wins.

Click to shrink...

You know what "excites" people the most? Policy proposals that give them what they actually want.

 

[TheLucasLite]

You know what "excites" people the most? Policy proposals that give them what they actually want.

Click to shrink...

Are you sure it's not a rad skateboard and Pod Save America shirt?

 

[Deleted member 5666]

You know what "excites" people the most? Policy proposals that give them what they actually want.

Click to shrink...

There has not been one single winning Presidential election in the last 50 years that shows that people get excited over policy wonks.

If that was the case Warren would be killing it. Instead her campaign is DOA because of her dna gaffe.

 

[Pwnz]

I donated more most of these donations ya'll are flipping out about from people who work in oil.

I work in healthcare.

Am I part of the vile healthcare industry "buying" Beto with implicit demands?

Click to shrink...

Yes, Beto should return your filthy blood money.

I demand a progressive candidate that easily won a deep blue state with farm to table donations only.

 

[Deleted member 5666]

Are you sure it's not a rad skateboard and Pod Save America shirt?

Click to shrink...

Who is your favorite policy wonk President of the last 40 years?

 

[Piecake]

Again - my issue with this liberal perspective - you're literally making a calf-cramp argument. There are no real substantive differences between the two, and you are assuming voters are stupid enough not to notice because they'll be charmed by him. And even if that works - which it might - then we will get the fucking ugly version of Trump in 8 years. Because that won't fix inequality, and that won't solve the creaking, slow death of neoliberalism that we're seeing right now. Its so short sighted.

Click to shrink...

Yes I am, because it is the truth.

People don't vote based on policy. They vote based on identify. The vote for the person that they can identify and build a connection to. That is Obama and Beto. That isn't Clinton, Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, Mondale, or Carter. Bernie does ave the Obama and Beto quality as well. His problem is that he is a bit too far out of democratic policy norms, values, beliefs, etc that not enough people identify with him.

Your claim that we will get the ugly version of Trump in 8 years is honestly based on nothing. People have been predicting the downfall of capitalism since Marx and it still hasn't happened. People don't want radical change. They want some change to improve their lives, but they don't want to upend the system because that is scary. Super Trump won't happen in however many years so long as we keep nominating candidates who are charismatic, can build connections, and give meaning, purpose and morality to their campaigns and their presidency. Demographics are on our side and it is only going to get easier.

I also find your analysis extremely flawed because by your logic we are totally fucked. There is absolutely no way ANYONE can do ANYTHING major about inequality due to how our political system is set up. You would need massive majorities in the senate and the house to get anything done to ensure that the 60th vote isn't some blue dog democrat.

Good luck with that.

 

[Tebunker]

That's a reasonable perspective. But even though I obviously rooted strongly for Beto to kick that disgusting blob out of the Senate, there's already a lot of information out there about what Beto's policies are on a national level. He says he supports universal health care, but won't commit to supporting Medicare for All. He didn't sign the House bill protecting Social Security. He says he wants to rejoin the Paris accord, but that's simply not enough, even compared to AOC's proposals. He didn't sign the bill in favor of debt-free college. Simply put, having him as a candidate would be a huge compromise on some of the most entry-level issues that need to be discussed in the next primary.

Click to shrink...

And I will like to see him answer for that in primaries. I agree it is concerning and honestly I have checked out for the last couple of weeks.

I don't always get on people for not signing every bill or accord, there are always some dumb kind of political game afoot, but if it wouldn't have hurt him politically there is really no excuse for not putting his proverbial money where his mouth is.

 

[Deleted member 22490]

here has not been one single winning Presidential election in the last 50 years that shows that people get excited over policy wonks.

Click to shrink...

Not policy wonks. Policy. Candidate A will give you this or that kind of thing. Bernie got so damn popular because he's saying he can get us Medicare for all and free college.

 

[Midnight Jon]

We literally went with the analogue to Beto in 2016

Click to shrink...

Hey PBY - you mind if I call you PBY? - this being an unironic thought is some clown shit.

(If anything he's the poor man's 2008 analogue!)

 

[Deleted member 5666]

Not policy wonks. Policy. Candidate A will give you this or that kind of thing. Bernie got so damn popular because he's saying he can get us Medicare for all and free college.

Click to shrink...

So is that why he is behind Biden in every poll and barely ahead of Beto who no one knew of till a few months ago? And lost to Hillary in 2016?

 

[TheLucasLite]

Who is your favorite policy wonk President of the last 40 years?

Click to shrink...

Zero good presidents in the modern era is a fantastic argument to persuade voting for a status quo establishment!

 

[Deleted member 22490]

So is that why he is behind Biden in every poll and barely ahead of Beto who no one knew of till a few months ago? And lost to Hillary in 2016?

Click to shrink...

If Bernie didn't have those policies, he would be dead last. If beto started backing the same things Bernie has been pushing, he'd be in the lead or very close to Biden.

 

[onadesertedisland]

This kind of thing is how Hillary became the un-electable candidate she ended up being. Years of this kind of stupidity circulating. Attack the other side. Don't fall for this.

 

[DeathbyVolcano]

Zero good presidents in the modern era is a fantastic argument to persuade voting for a status quo establishment!

Click to shrink...

Fucking eye roll. So you're never going to be happy.

 

[Brazil]

There has not been one single winning Presidential election in the last 50 years that shows that people get excited over policy wonks.

If that was the case Warren would be killing it. Instead her campaign is DOA because of her dna gaffe.

Click to shrink...

That's because no general election candidate that took part in the fruitless back-and-forth of the last 50 years in American politics actually had exciting policies. Carter and his plan to deregulate the credit industry certainly didn't, and Clinton's "third way" centrist bullshit plan to finally kill the New Deal didn't either. Obama ran on "good vibes" and then proceeded to bail out and reward banks for ruining the global economy.

The moment a general election candidate steps up there and promises universal coverage and free college tuition for all, that candidate wins. But the DNC establishment will kill us all before letting it get to that point.

 

[Velocity:Design:Comfort]

Literally nothing of what you said about either Clinton or Beto is about actual policies.

You guys really need to realize ASAP that simply beating out the Republicans and then not actually improving people's lives dramatically when you're in power just means that the Republicans will be back in power soon enough.

Click to shrink...

Fucking thank you. The smears about other candidates in this thread about betos own stupid pledge (why did he do it then if he wasn't going to commit? He knows he is in Texas....) is way more telling than any of the boogeyman evil Bernie people. But I do think he has to fucking step up,or at least message way better, on race stuff and fast or I won't support him.

 

[UltraGunner]

This country doesn't need another mealy mouthed establishment dem that will let billionaires continue to fuck over the planet just to boost their short term profit. We got only 10 years left until this planet's death is irreversible and you think this guy will do jack shit to stem the tides?

 

[Madison]

Presidential Elections have jack shit to do with policies. Never have in the modern tv era. The most "exciting" candidate is the one who always wins.

Click to shrink...

Lol you just gave up completely.

Because going for the exciting candidate worked wonders for the Dems, in fifty years they have had:

Jimmy Carter who threw a supermajority in the garbage and got pummeled in his reelection bid
Bill Clinton who lost the house and senate and proceeded to make constant concessions to the right
and Obama, who had two years of decent policies before losing the house and basically being unable to push for major legislation during 2/3 of his presidency

But yeah, sure, lets keep going for those kind of presidents. Lets ignore the Obama drone strikes and the changes to Student Loans during Clinton that hurt american students like a brick to the face. The exciting candidate is the one that matters!

If Clinton had won the 2016 elections we would be terrified of 2020 and republicans would have probably won a supermajority in the senate. Instead democrats have a chance, a real chance of trying something different and to push for the policies that people want.

Instead, people want to run candidates because they appear to be progressive. I hope that the plan works out because otherwise the US will have to just deal with garbage presidents every eight years, begging that said presidents dont end up destroying the world.

Spoiler

...god, the 2020 elections are going to get heated here.