he doesn't have a proposal for truly universal healthcare for one (and in fact said he would strongly consider vetoing one that was put on his table to sign, as president)
-
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.
Democratic Presidential Primaries & Caucuses |March OT| Last Tuesday was 1000 years ago, old news no one cares about (Discussion Guidelines in OP)
- Thread starter Poodlestrike
- Start date
- Status
We appreciate you are a single issue voter
Understand that there are many issues and many things to have stances on. And the general political stance is viewed as an aggregation of all of those
Sure, as stimulus the goal isn't for people to retain it. But its how that stimulus is created. Giving everyone $1000 a month for three months is a short term boost with no long term gains. Expanding paid medical/sick leave requirements, raising the unemployment ceilings, etc. are things that could easily then be converted into permanent policy.
The GOP wants the economic stimulus but no long term commitment. That has always been their play in these scenarios. Pump cash to avoid any real worker protections for the next time it happens.
A cash pump that ultimately lands in the pockets of major corporation isn't an inherently bad thing, its a bad thing when its done just for that purpose and puts no further onus on the end benefactors to reciprocate when times are good or build proactive firewalls for the next time its needed.
They didn't successfully depress turnout in 2016 via appealing to leftists and young voters enough for them to not show up. They depressed turnout by making the race ugly and divisive enough to where moderates stayed home and some small but larger than normal portion voted third party. The later was more a product of the third party candidates running to the open margins (to the left in Clinton's case, to the middle for Trump) though thanks largely to both major party candidates being unpopular to historic levels.
i'm not an american citizen
if i were, i would still vote for biden in the general election
i'm really worried that he's fucking this up though by not listening to criticism on not proposing policy that ensures every single american receives healthcare
not supporting every single american being able to get healthcare to me seems like being a single issue voter who cares more about taxes staying low than about people dying preventable deaths under the current system.
Long term gains are explicitly not the point of stimulus payments! Normal unemployment insurance isn't a problem. We're in need of extraordinary temporary measures because a big chunk of our economy just went offline for the next 3-4 months and people will need to be taken care of temporarily til we can get testing initiated nationwide and the virus under control. Leave policies are oomething good to push on, but again, this isn't the time to be ride or die on long term structural changes- we need things that will hit hard and fast to help with the immediate damage.
It's 1 poll being turned into gospel because they like what it says. Looking to neighborhood results to get a better idea of how things actually went down is what people will be doing in the coming weeks.
It's 1 poll being turned into gospel because they like what it says. Looking to neighborhood results to get a better idea of how things actually went down is what people will be doing in the coming weeks.
making hillary not appear left enough was part of how they achieved it. targeted negative facebook ads to leftists stopped some people from voting. other negative messages were targeted against other groups to depress turnout there. biden would be vulnerable to the same strategy unless he starts proposing the policies that polls overwhelmingly show democratic voters support
Again, we acknowledge you are a single issue voter (who can't vote)
Again, please understand there are many issues and many policies and that Biden has pivoted a lot farther to the left over the years and even over the campaign
And please understand that continuing to push this narrative that all that matters is M4A does is push the narrative that Bidern is an evil right winger trying to destroy the world and you are sowing discord and hurting efforts toward the real election
It is perfectly fine to be pissed about his stance on M4A (I know I am). But understand that is one issue among many and he actually has some good stances on a lot of other ones.
maybe cubans living in America aren't as obsessed w/ the late Fidel Castro as pundits think
But there is some truth in the point he is making. I think we absolutely need to acknowledge that there is some nuance to this discussion and we can do so without lending credence to the "there's no difference between Biden and Trump" bullshit.
Biden voted for the Iraq War which has resulted in hundreds of thousands of people of dying. It's disgusting that this type of shit is normalized and swept under the rug in this country.
People were saying "maybe Bloomberg isn't so bad" when he talked about backing Biden with money. Kind of a pointless topic to argue in this forum sadly, people act like keeping Biden (or anyone) accountable will lead to Trump getting elected.
This fall the campaign is going to be about what to do with our economy for the next 4 years. Not the Iraq war. 2008 was about the Iraq war, despite the crash then.
how am i a single issue voter if i said i would vote for biden in a general election despite him being horrible on that single issue?
in fact, i'm the opposite of a single issue voter. i vote according to a strong ideological compass that informs my stance on every issue and not wanting people to die because their gofundme to buy insulin failed was just one example of the policy positions i have that are informed by my political ideology and where i think biden's policies are far from sufficient
Yeah Biden is completely awful and is a despicable politician and person. But the choice between him and Trump isn't close.
User Banned (1 week): Ignoring the staff post in regards to metacommentary
Wow! I can't believe the expert pundits on this forum were wrong.
2008 was not about the iraq war -- beyond the fact that obama gave a speech calling it stupid (ie he was opposed to it, but couldn't actually vote against it because he wasn't in the senate)
2004 was about the iraq war
In CNN's 2008 exit poll, 63% said the economy was their top issue. Iraq war weighed in at... 10%
Was Biden the President when the Iraq war happened...or did he just vote for it alongside an overwhelming amount of politicians at the time. Was it bad? Yes. However it doesn't make sense at all to say that he is personally responsible for it. And I have no idea how someone can use that situation to say that there's morally no difference between voting for Trump or Biden.
The argument Matt is making is flat out wrong and heavily motivated by accelerationism.
This absolutely was not the case - the 08 election was not just a referendum on foreign policy and man do a lot of weird alternate timeline critiques of the Obama admin make more sense if people actually think that. The Iraq War and Katrina debacles had the GOP on the back foot heading into the election. The economic crash is how Obama got a landslide and flipped places like Indiana.
On the scale of morality they're both pretty fucking close to the wrong side of the spectrum. Like how in god's name can you say that someone who voted to authorize the iraq war even has an ounce of morality in any fiber of their being?
Pretty easy? Morality isn't something you judge based on one event. Otherwise nobody has any morality.
Is Florida an open primary? If not, this says half of Democratic Cubans didn't mind. Extrapolating to independents or moderate conservative Cubans is specious.
No, they are not close at all.
Also, while I personally opposed the Iraq War at the time, it's ridiculous to claim that everybody who supported it is completely immoral, seeing as many did so for differing reasons and based on different information and assessments of the situation.
This is one poll made actually before the election. I don't think we can draw much from it.
It's not really about what Joe Biden believes. It's that generally speaking, he'll put appoint people who will do less damage than whoever Trump puts in. Whether its the Supreme Court, or the EPA or whatever, I would rather have him put a corporate neoliberal than the next white nationalist on Trump's list.
It's not ideal that both Trump and Biden support sanctions on already struggling economies, like Venezuela. But like Trump was looking for support among South American leaders to invade Venezuela like 2 years ago. I'm fairly certain that for as bad as Joe Biden is, he probably won't do that. I don't really want Trump to get a 2nd term and see if he can. Same w/ Iran, frankly. He's just too reckless.
No they aren't. Jesus. Are you okay with a 7-2 conservative court destroying every progressive advancement in the last hundred years?
First off all, yes, he is directly responsible for the Iraq War because he voted for it! A vote is a vote is a vote, and when you vote for something you are morally responsible for ALL of the bad things that come from that vote. You wouldn't say that a Trump supporter deserves any amount of forgiveness because they were one of millions of people that voted for Trump, so don't make excuses for politicians who voted for a war that killed hundreds of thousands of people.
And I never said that there is no moral difference between voting Biden or voting for Trump!!
Yes, they absolutely are. Did I ever say that is a justification to not vote for Biden? Did I ever say that voting for Biden would not be the most moral thing to do given the situation? We can acknowledge that morally Biden and Trump are both shitty and bad people, while acknowledging that voting Biden is the morally superior option. Biden being a terrible, awful person is not mutually exclusive with voting for him because it's the moral thing to do.
I'm getting really sick of people twisting my arguments.
I'm not trying to argue that Trump is morally superior or that voting for Biden is a bad thing. I'm just saying that Biden and Trump are both pretty far along the immoral end of the morality spectrum. Joe Biden shouldn't get a pass for voting for the Iraq War just because he would install a Supreme Court judge that isn't a white nationalist. We shouldn't avoid this discussion and I can guarantee you that Trump will bring up shit like this in the General just like he did last time.
Edit: *not* installing a white nationalist in the Supreme Court is a pretty low bar to pass.
No, that's not how moral responsibility works. They share some amount of responsibility, but not all by a long shot. You're trying to erase the line between someone committing an action and someone who enables that action to occur in some way. Your argument is the same one people make when they blame a parole board for a murder someone on parole makes. People don't have perfect foresight into the actions other people commit. If we sat Biden down and showed him a slideshow of everything that Bush would permit in Iraq do you honestly think he'd still have voted for it?
The tweet you're quoting is making that argument, so if you have a radically different point I would appreciate you spelling it out. You have said before that there's some "nuance", but not completely articulated, unless I missed it, where you agree and disagree with that tweet.
"this forum is wrong because of a single poll" is certainly a take
here's another
Ahh yes, who could have foreseen that sending the US Military to Iraq to find nuclear weapons that don't exist could have led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.
"this forum is wrong because of a single poll" is certainly a take
here's another
Bernie doing that well in Hialeah would still suggest he actually ended up doing better in heavily Cuban areas than he did statewide.
Ahh yes, who could have foreseen that sending the US Military to Iraq to find nuclear weapons that don't exist could have led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.
Yeah but again just looking at your words. You're using hindsight here again.
"Who would have known that releasing the murderer would result in another murder?!"
I can do the same with a whole bunch of other bills and for a whole bunch of other situations. It's pretty easy to do. What's actually hard for most people, including you, is acknowledging that in different time periods with different social and political pressures and information that someone might come to the wrong conclusion and enable people to do evil shit. In hindsight these people obviously wouldn't make these decisions.
The comparison you're trying to make is utterly ridiculous. Releasing a muderer on parole is a decision made by people who can make an informed decision as to whether or not they believe the murderer has been rehabilitated.
Sending the military into a country to seek revenge for 9/11 was 100%, beyond the shadow of a doubt, going to result in a non-insignificant number of people dying, and primarily brown folks at that. It's the reason why folks like Sanders did not vote in favor of invading Iraq. And giving a pass to people like Biden who voted in favor of it is disgusting. Tell that to the scores of families who have lost loved ones they will never get back because of Iraq War. Hindsight is not an excuse for authorizing murder.
I would say that's becuase a lot of them (compared to other Latinos) are republicans. So they wouldn't be voting in the dem primary anyways
In any event, better to be citing the actual precinct data than a pre-election poll!
So apparently Bernie is suspending his campaign ads of Facebook?
Maybe look into Biden's history some before making sweeping generalizations.
Joe Biden happened to be one of the senate leaders for interventions related to Milosevec's Yugoslavian ethnic assaults on Bosnians, Albanians, etc., resulting in two direct military action events by the U.S./NATO (Bosnian War in the early 90's, Kosovo War in the late 90's) culminating in Milosevec being indicted by the UN as a war criminal. He died before conviction.
The people of Kosovo appreciated it well enough to have named a major highway after his son, who after the war spent a few years as a legal advisor helping them train judges and prosecutors.
Saddam Hussein was a similarly violent dictator. When the administration at the time was railroading the U.S. into war based on spurious information, sacrificing the integrity of Colin Powell to that end, it shouldn't be a surprise that someone like Joe Biden, who had seen U.S. intervention in violent conflicts as a tangible net positive and protector of life to that point, would support it.
That doesn't make him immoral. He was wrong in putting faith in the Bush administration to act in good faith regarding national security and to have a meaningful plan for limited violence in deposing a murderous tyrant.
He's also wrong in that I'd suspect he still sees the U.S. military as a net positive for global security and safety at this point. But that doesn't come from an immoral or evil place. It comes from a misguided view of U.S. foreign power as a force of romantic heroism.
Still bringing up the Iraq War when he was part of an administration that avoided boots on the ground in similar capacities with Libya and Syria shows a lack of perspective. Similar to that where people attack Obama for substantially more drone strikes than Bush, ignoring that the weaponization of drones was something that only really took off after Obama took office, and was effectively the concession Obama gave to the military status quo while pulling back boots on the ground interventionism.
U.S. foreign policy is largely a trolley problem run amok. Non-action by a U.S. President effectively ensures death of innocents because of the house of cards the U.S. and WWII allies constructed after WWII. Action also carries an inherent cost to life. Being POTUS or a high ranking foreign policy senator/congressperson implicitly requires a level of moral compromise. Judging them with the power of hindsight is disingenuous.
It also prevents meaningful discourse needed to shift the status quo. You aren't going to change beltway regulars that the interventionist practices of the past are a net negative today by immediately attacking the moral argument. It needs to be deconstructed in a fact based, reasonable method. Much like M4A or similar universal healthcare proposals, a change in U.S. policy is something most people inherently desire but can't see the path from where we are today to where we should be.
All you've done is lay out the basic differences between working on a parole board and being a politican. You haven't engaged with the core of the analogy at all, which is that people can find themselves in jobs where their assessments on a situation, if incorrect, can result in giving someone else the power to cause the deaths of others. Using hindsight in these cases to paint these people as monsters when they're incorrect, long after they've admitted they were wrong makes no sense to me. Being a politican means that eventually you will probably be wrong and advocate for something that will result in a lot of suffering.
Show me where I was giving anyone a pass on anything! I already said he shares some of the responsibility. However, your argument spreads moral responsibility in a way that makes no sense. To follow your argument to it's logical conclusion, then you'd have to believe that even anyone who voted for politicians who voted for the Iraq war are all morally reprehensible beings.
even if he didnt vote for it it still wouldnt have changed the outcome so to hold this over his head is honestly not productive at all.
wow we really got into the "well his vote wouldnt have changed anything" phase faster than i expected
It may not have changed the outcome, but it's absolutely a reflection of who you'd be as the leader of the free world.
The Libya campaign was about helping France continue to exploit Africa. The Administration helped out Massa's spiritual successor. That's immoral. Obama was a clown for that too.
- Status