January Democratic Debate: Des Moines, Iowa, 9PM ET CNN

Mar 3, 2019
412
Lots of folks have been calling Warren a centrist or even a Republican. Which is what's making me wonder what I'm wondering.
They are probally just hyped in the moment like you were when you called Bernie a centrist. Lets be honest, both Warren and Bernie overlap on so many issues and ideas, they are both our left candidates for the most part. And ill vote for whichever wins the primary since they both have similar ideas, heck there is a reason they were friends for so long.
 

daschysta

Member
Mar 24, 2019
137
And on that same day Biden will open up a big delegate lead by winning by much larger margins in the south. If current polling holds, Biden's win in Alabama would wipe out Bernie's delegate gain in California
Possibly, we'll see. Regardless the margin will be smaller than 2016, and could be influenced by the results of early states. Also Bernie will win Utah, and the race won't be over. In fact it's unlikely that anyone will accumulate enough delegates prior to the conventoon, as hellish as that will be, I see it as the likely outcome.
 

Midnight Jon

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,972
Ohio
Oct 25, 2017
1,859
well there was also that whole thing where he kept randomly threatening violence against people
Right, I kinda missed that part.

Though he's not the only poster that I've seen self-explode on gaf, since that kinda just happens over a decade anyway. But it is frustrating to see people go from 'promising to good' and then 'and there's the batshit crazy part'. Which is my post history puts me firmly in the latter to avoid any confusion. :D
 

Mercury Fred

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,303
They are probally just hyped in the moment like you were when you called Bernie a centrist. Lets be honest, both Warren and Bernie overlap on so many issues and ideas, they are both our left candidates for the most part. And ill vote for whichever wins the primary since they both have similar ideas, heck there is a reason they were friends for so long.
I definitely agree and I'll vote for either in a general (I just took the WaPo quiz and I was most aligned with Warren first, Sanders second). It's truly that that label gets thrown around without much rhyme or reason so going by those "rules" my use of it seemed fine. I would sincerely love to see consistency and honesty applied when the label is being used.
 
Mar 3, 2019
412
I definitely agree and I'll vote for either in a general (I just took the WaPo quiz and I was most aligned with Warren first, Sanders second). It's truly that that label gets thrown around without much rhyme or reason so going by those "rules" my use of it seemed fine. I would sincerely love to see consistency and honesty applied when the label is being used.
Be the change you want to see :)
 

Nida

Member
Aug 31, 2019
1,459
Lynnwood, Washington
Trump was interrupted by multiple protesters tonight. He was not pleased.

It would be incredible if somehow 100 or so people got in and got attention one by one.

Wrong thread...
 

IMCaprica

Member
Aug 1, 2019
226
There were two people in that room and none of us are either of those people. So by all means choose who you want to believe. Nothing inherently wrong with that. But trying to argue whose counterfactual is the real deal is nonsense and I think exposes people for not really caring about the substance of this primary.

I do think there is a substantive discussion to be had about the strategies themselves. I don’t think it’s going to help Warren, and not because the more obsessive people on Twitter are spamming snake emojis like that means anything to primary voters.

Sanders got asked about it, he denied it twice, he told Americans to look at his record, he mentioned the confirmed and widely-reported fact that he was trying to talk her into running last time, and he got to reiterate that not only does he believe women can win but he “will do everything” in his power to help whoever the nominee is.

CNN asked Warren the same exact question about the thing Sanders allegedly said and said “I disagreed”. And then she refused to engage it further. Which is what she said previously. That’s the moment I think she messed up. She’s running as the self-proclaimed unifier. She’s running as the plan candidate. In that moment she wasn’t unifying at all, and she clearly didn’t have a plan.

She’s running for POTUS and on her second attempt with this issue she opts to repeat the first attempt and not tell the American people anything. “I disagree” doesn’t solve the “he says it’s a lie” problem. An uplifting speech about overcoming sexism to be successfully elected to Congress doesn’t resonate as much as it should when she just got done telling us she’s not going to address nor combat the alleged sexism on display by someone she’s trying to defeat. And frankly if the context is that nakedly sexist I don’t want someone to let that shit slide just because they’re friends.

tl;dr: Sanders gave a well thought-out response to the sexism issue and got applause. Warren refused to elaborate and basically undercut all of her strongest pitches for why she should be POTUS.
 

blacktout

Member
Jan 16, 2018
834
Overall this was an incredibly boring debate. Lack of diversity was apparent, the questions were bad, and there didn't seem to be any fire in anyone except for Steyer.
Agree with all of this. The moderation was terrible: the questions were highly redundant, only a few topics were covered, they didn't have a good strategy for handling candidates who went over their time (the plan seemed to be to just keep talking over them and hope for the best), and they didn't do a great job at rationing hardball/softball questions evenly between candidates. I'm sure there's going to be a lot of "the moderators were biased against candidate X" claims, but honestly they just seemed generally incompetent?

I hear you on the lack of diversity too, especially since Yang had evolved into such a strong (and entertaining) debater and Booker was probably the only candidate never to truly flub a debate, even if he struggled a little distinguishing himself on policy. I really wish it were possible to trade in Steyer and Buttigieg and get them back.

That said, Steyer seemed surprisingly sharp tonight, compared to his past performances, which ... Isn't saying much I guess? Still, given how much I usually resent him being on stage, and the fact that he's only there because of the millions he's spent on advertising, I was shocked that I didn't look at my phone every time he opened his mouth tonight.
 

splash wave

Member
Oct 25, 2017
667
Bay Area, CA
my notes are telling me it's moronic to claim that the Native American "issue", thus far literally only seen in large numbers among the people with brain worms that still voted for the Republican Party in 2018, is singularly capable of sinking her campaign in ways that cannot be applied to some other candidate's defining flaw
I don’t know what else to tell you: I watched the 2016 election play out, and it’s pretty obvious that the Native American thing is red meat for a bully like Trump. You disagree.

You’ve also started this conversation sounding like a smug, condescending prick for no good reason, and you've done so on behalf of a candidate who is 1000% poised to lose the nomination (which is personally disappointing because she’s my second choice). It is, frankly, going to be embarrassing for you when her campaign collapses. Peace!
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
I don’t know what else to tell you: I watched the 2016 election play out, and it’s pretty obvious that the Native American thing is red meat for a bully like Trump. You disagree.

You’ve also started this conversation sounding like a smug, condescending prick for no good reason, and you've done so on behalf of a candidate who is 1000% poised to lose the nomination (which is personally disappointing because she’s my second choice). It is, frankly, going to be embarrassing for you when her campaign collapses. Peace!
To be fair, it's not like Bernie hasn't got his own Kryptonite as a Socialist and unlike someone like AOC they don't need to make shit up for Red Scare material. If Warren can't beat Trump, he definitely won't.
 

Midnight Jon

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,972
Ohio
You’ve also started this conversation sounding like a smug, condescending prick for no good reason, and you've done so on behalf of a candidate who is 1000% poised to lose the nomination (which is personally disappointing because she’s my second choice). It is, frankly, going to be embarrassing for you when her campaign collapses. Peace!
oh fucking spare me lmao

every time I've tried to force the issue of you actually demonstrating how Sanders, in literally never coming close to topping the field in two cycles in upwards of 24 months of campaigning, has done a better job of overcoming his Fatal Campaign Flaw than Warren, you have opted to dodge it entirely. (you didn't even offer a token citation of the hypothetical GE polling from november 2016 with the million analytical flaws that approach has)

given that I've literally been predicting Biden would win the nomination in public posts both on-site and off since at minimum mid-2019 while you seem to be functionally incapable of answering a simple goddamn question in January 2020, I'm probably not the one who's going to feel embarrassed by their #1 choice eventually losing
 
Last edited:

Brock Reiher

Member
Oct 25, 2017
36,266
Please don't confuse the issue with facts!
This post you are replying to is factually incorrect. Bernie ran the same race 2 years before as an independent and always planned to run as an independent again in 1990, but he got write-in votes because he was popular. It's also why the Democratic primary that year had so few voters.
 

Midnight Jon

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,972
Ohio
The politics of the US being famous for remaining strictly confined to its territorial boundaries. I certainly haven't heard about this Sanders/Warren spat all day on the radio in Australia.
certainly impressed by this extremely large contingent of non-citizen non-resident non-voters who seem literally convinced of The End of All Things if one man is not nominated and who make sure to remind people who've knocked on doors and conducted phonebanking for over a decade of this at every possible opportunity
 

FF Seraphim

Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,464
Tokyo
Please don't confuse the issue with facts!
Those "facts" are wrong:


In 1988, incumbent Republican Congressman Jim Jeffords decided to run for the U.S. Senate, vacating the House seat representing Vermont's at-large congressional district. Former Lieutenant Governor Peter P. Smith (R) won the House election with a plurality, securing 41% of the vote. Sanders, who ran as an independent, placed second with 38% of the vote, while Democratic State Representative Paul N. Poirier placed third with 19%.[77] Two years later Sanders ran for the seat again and defeated Smith by a margin of 56% to 39%.[78]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders#cite_note-79
 

Thorn

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,114
CNN must be so fucking happy to see the tension between Warren and Sanders.

Progressives get to be split AND they get their theater.
 

Nida

Member
Aug 31, 2019
1,459
Lynnwood, Washington
I did the Washington Post quiz. I thought Bernie was more progressive than Warren? But he opposes all guns being registered, universal income.

It's not progressive, but he doesn't want to deport national security threats and violent criminals?
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,982
This post you are replying to is factually incorrect. Bernie ran the same race 2 years before as an independent and always planned to run as an independent again in 1990, but he got write-in votes because he was popular. It's also why the Democratic primary that year had so few voters.
Ironically:

a) it even says write-in in the Wikipedia table and this was somehow missed by both Rilakkuma and xbhasharx
b) some dude named Peter Diamondstone actually kinda did what people are trying to accuse Sanders of

 

Brock Reiher

Member
Oct 25, 2017
36,266
Ironically:

a) it even says write-in in the Wikipedia table and this was somehow missed by both Rilakkuma and xbhasharx
b) some dude named Peter Diamondstone actually kinda did what people are trying to accuse Sanders of

Both the tweet and that post acknowledge that it was a write-in. Let's be charitable and assume that they were both so excited to post the dirty secret behind Bernie's "within the past 30 years" win that they didn't have time to consider how somebody could get 2,000 write-in votes and then go on to get 100,000+ in the general as an independent lol

edit: never mind, the tweet doesn't say write-in. maybe he missed it lol
 
Oct 28, 2017
899
CNN must be so fucking happy to see the tension between Warren and Sanders.

Progressives get to be split AND they get their theater.
Still all coming from Warren too btw.

Even after everything, Sanders tried to shake her hand post debate and Liz refused letting CNN replay that clip at least 5 times in the 30 mins post debate I could stand to watch.

Let’s keep pretending like Warren isn’t the instigator here though...
 

BoboBrazil

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,595
Still all coming from Warren too btw.

Even after everything, Sanders tried to shake her hand post debate and Liz refused letting CNN replay that clip at least 5 times in the 30 mins post debate I could stand to watch.

Let’s keep pretending like Warren isn’t the instigator here though...
Have you ever considered that maybe she didn't feel right shaking his hand if he lied on stage and did tell her that a woman couldn't be President?
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
Still all coming from Warren too btw.

Even after everything, Sanders tried to shake her hand post debate and Liz refused letting CNN replay that clip at least 5 times in the 30 mins post debate I could stand to watch.

Let’s keep pretending like Warren isn’t the instigator here though...
She isn't. She's been reacting to Bernie and his campaign's fuck up's.
 

Mercury Fred

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,303
It's depressing watching Sanders lie then gaslight Warren about it and yet she's the bad guy.

Sexism in this country is a hell of a drug.
 

mutantmagnet

Member
Oct 28, 2017
9,281


Normal people: who is Bernie Sanders?
I'm surprised Steyer really is getting a lot of attention in Nevada and the Carolinas.

I noticed awhile back he had a focus in these states but the strategy is odd especially since one of those states is there once Biden has to win before Super Tuesday.

Let's see how this pans out.
 
Nov 14, 2017
1,232
certainly impressed by this extremely large contingent of non-citizen non-resident non-voters who seem literally convinced of The End of All Things if one man is not nominated and who make sure to remind people who've knocked on doors and conducted phonebanking for over a decade of this at every possible opportunity
Unfortunately from what I understand things are a bit touchy at the moment regarding foreign involvement in your elections.