This is a very strange response about political truces between politicians who are supposed to be friends. Have you heard of the fable The Scorpion and the Frog?
I'm mostly interested in how this tracks with the campaign's history and trustworthiness with regard to the Warren electability spat.Like you awkwardly concede here, that they were distributed doesn't necessarily mean they were approved. Doesn't have to be as extreme as "doesn't have any control over the talking points that it's putting out" either. Could be that Sanders and high level staff weren't as scrutinizing here and it burned them. I think at best it demonstrates sloppiness in their campaign if no one at a high level wanted this distributed as it was, yet it went out. At worst they always meant to issue these talking points which would be super weird since they would have at some point needed to answer for them and backtrack, so.... yeah this seems to be more likely a fuck-up than anything.
People trying to spin this as some 'Lyin' Bernie' thing, though.... seems even weaker than the hand-wringing over his health records.
There's a large difference between acknowledging a fait divers that happened that ultimately has no interest whatsoever and making yet another thread on yet another flimsy excuse for yet another hollow controversy. This thread is not made in good faith in the slightest. The very article quoted belies the very silly and transparent OP.
And you had no quote for me :(
Your post implies that he has bad hiring practices and credibility comparable to Trump. Which is unfair to say the least.I'm saying he needs to do better. If he wins I am gladly supporting him. This has been completely mishandled. He can't afford for his campaign to keep fucking up.
Everyone in the democratic primary is less conservative than Trump. Not sure what you are alluding to there.
The burden of proof is on you. That's how arguments work. You might as well believe that Biden is the zodiac killer because no one has proved otherwise.That's how arguments work. I was asking point blank for evidence about this and was met with a shrug.
Bernie is openly hostile to capital and favors nationalization of major industries for the public benefit. Warren favors regulation of capital, but largely doesn't reject the profit motive as a foundation for economic organization. We can debate the merits of each worldview, but most left/right axes would put the socialist decidedly to the left of the regulatory capitalist.
I fear we're going to have to go over how Bernie's campaign never lied on every new page as long as the OP is claiming the campaign's original statement was "not true".
Bernie's campaign never lied and the stakes here are going to remain very high if that's what we are fighting over.
You might as well believe that Biden is the zodiac killer because no one has proved otherwise.
Kinda weird how effectively both sides of the Warren camp's mouths run with both the eagerness to gravely imply Sanders's is ripe with liars, sexists, but also equal eagerness to "just leave it in the past bro we need to work together"
I guess it's just a shame to see utter desperation dressed up so cynically in thin trimmings of "we're allies!" but that was only ever going to get her campaign so far
Warren is Bernie's friend and his campaign is filled with trash people, this isn't mutually exclusive.
What is exclusive is that one will win and the other will lose, and this fraying at the ends of Warren's relationship to the Sanders campaign is indicative of the fact that she and the people around her know which of those ways things are going for her
In retrospect, not surprising; but def embarrassing
He's advocated for the nationalization of energy, banking, manufacturing, and healthcare and the widespread establishment of worker coops and workplace democracy.can you be specific on the ways in which bernie sanders advocates for public ownership of the means of production, a necessary component for socialism
He's advocated for the nationalization of energy, banking, manufacturing, and healthcare and the widespread establishment of worker coops and workplace democracy.
You're moving the goal posts, your original post was about the context with the campaigns and I gave them to you. Not everything is black and white.
warren has also advocated for most of those things, especially the nationalization of healthcare and the establishment of worker co-ops, so what's the specific threshold that makes her not a socialist when she and sanders have the same position on the means of production
I can think of one specific person it's helping.
does leftist theory say that the primary determinative factor is whether somebody says they're a socialist, which marx book is that in
I kinda feel like you're describing people getting defensive about possible bad narratives here, especially given the way it played out - there wasn't a uniform "eh it's nothing *shrug*" kind of response, people got vicious. Are still a little vicious. The thing for me is, the more harmful narrative is "the left eats itself again!" which is... what all the back-and-forth produced.
Marx cares about class composition, but Gramsci* would say that Warren is not being helpful in the War of Position!
*famously translated by the Good Buttigieg
there are no goalposts and we are not playing any fucked up sport here, but
Warren's campaign and Warren herself are now forwardly comfortable stoking these confrontations when it thinks it wins a petty victory and desperate to cling to unity with Sanders when it looks like it's going badly. That's the context. There's the ball through the goalposts, if that helps.
Kinda weird how effectively both sides of the Warren camp's mouths run with both the eagerness to gravely imply Sanders's is ripe with liars, sexists, but also equal eagerness to "just leave it in the past bro we need to work together"
I guess it's just a shame to see utter desperation dressed up so cynically in thin trimmings of "we're allies!" but that was only ever going to get her campaign so far
Warren is pretty widely against nationalization outside healthcare (and like most of the Democratic field is unwilling to fully commit to total public ownership of all major medical sectors) and her advocacy for workplace democracy falls short of workers seizing material ownership of corporations, instead advocating for minority corporate board representation adjudicated by a federal regulatory authority. Plus, you know, she's said she believes in the profit motive whereas Bernie has said the opposite.warren has also advocated for most of those things, especially the nationalization of healthcare and the establishment of worker co-ops, so what's the specific threshold that makes her not a socialist when she and sanders have the same position on the means of production
Biden desperately trying to figure out if he is dreaming right now.
Warren is pretty widely against nationalization outside healthcare (and like most of the Democratic field is unwilling to fully commit to total public ownership of all major medical sectors) and her advocacy for workplace democracy falls short of workers seizing material ownership of corporations, instead advocating for minority corporate board representation adjudicated by a federal regulatory authority. Plus, you know, she's said she believes in the profit motive whereas Bernie has said the opposite.
Thank you, I'm so lost at the first page, you know each of these candidates are trying to win. Saying factually true non smear talking points is not a scandal its stating your case. This we need to hold hands and not disagree shit helps no oneLooking at the shit Republicans do and I just have to laugh at the supposed Sanders v. Warren "controversies" from the past few days. Releasing talking points about why you're a better candidate than your opponent is a scandal now?
Pretty sure he put out a policy this campaign where he proposed corporations with more than 100 mil in revenue apportioning stocks to worker-elected boards every year, with the goal of reaching 20% worker ownership
Maybe I wasn't clear enough it wouldn't be the first time. I'm saying our candidate needs to be as honest as possible, because they need to be credible. Not just compared to Trump, but credible period. It's not too late for any of the candidates to rise to that challenge. Any dishonesty is going to be treated equivalent to Trump by the media. So it's got to be stopped.Your post implies that he has bad hiring practices and credibility comparable to Trump. Which is unfair to say the least.
I'm saying that "less X" than Trump is a low bar to clear and sounds a lot like damning with faint praise. We need to do better like you said. I wouldn't describe some Democrats as less of a liberal than others so much as I would describe them as less conservative than someone in the GOP. That definitely applies to some candidates (though not Warren). That's more important than this. This issue is just a distraction that shouldn't push the needle from south of George Washington to just north of Trump in people's estimation of Bernie's credibility.
Bernie and Warren are both good candidates, I think. Both camps want to win, but I don't think that makes either less credible here. It seems just as plausible that both campaigns don't have complete control of their staff.
I mean no offense, but your appraisal of the comparative degree of leftism between a self-identified capitalist and a self-identified demsoc is not very useful coming from someone who has no interest in reading socialist theory.
It couldnt be more obvious but gotta ignore that to scream about media bias.Pretty clear pattern of the first story out of the Bernie campaign usually being a lie and then needing to be walked back a few days later.
You're free to disagree, the left/right spectrum is not comprehensive or widely respected even by those who choose to identify with it, but most people who choose to use it tend to put the socialists to the left of the social democrats.Wait... So you can only be a true leftist if your a socialist? What the fuck?
I don't get why pigeon has been so insistent that she's a socialist. Supporting certain socialist policies (specifically ones that are proven popular) does not a socialist make. Her response here is, I think, a good illustration of how she's distinct. And people can hand wave all they'd like, but referring to herself as a capitalist and specifically saying she isn't a democratic socialist seems... fair? We don't need to convince ourselves that she's lying as if it's inconsistent.Warren is pretty widely against nationalization outside healthcare (and like most of the Democratic field is unwilling to fully commit to total public ownership of all major medical sectors) and her advocacy for workplace democracy falls short of workers seizing material ownership of corporations, instead advocating for minority corporate board representation adjudicated by a federal regulatory authority. Plus, you know, she's said she believes in the profit motive whereas Bernie has said the opposite.
I was confused then. I'm sorry. You're right and I wholeheartedly agree. The ability to admit mistakes is highly underrated right now.Maybe I wasn't clear enough it wouldn't be the first time. I'm saying our candidate needs to be as honest as possible, because they need to be credible. Not just compared to Trump, but credible period. It's not too late for any of the candidates to rise to that challenge. Any dishonesty is going to be treated equivalent to Trump by the media. So it's got to be stopped.
It wasn't meant to sound like I was disqualifying Bernie. Of the the top Dem candidates right now he's my number two choice.
It'd be a refreshing change to have a candidate who admits mistakes, and I don't believe it's a losing strategy. I think every candidate could do with learning that lesson.
Pretty sure he put out a policy this campaign where he proposed corporations with more than 100 mil in revenue apportioning stocks to worker-elected boards every year, with the goal of reaching 20% worker ownership
"Calling out my guy's campaign for repeatedly lying? How desperate of you."What is exclusive is that one will win and the other will lose, and this fraying at the ends of Warren's relationship to the Sanders campaign is indicative of the fact that she and the people around her know which of those ways things are going for her
In retrospect, not surprising; but def embarrassing
You don't get in trouble for sticking your hand in the cookie jar. You get in trouble for saying you didn't when you did.Thank you, I'm so lost at the first page, you know each of these candidates are trying to win. Saying factually true non smear talking points is not a scandal its stating your case. This we need to hold hands and not disagree shit helps no one
I don't get why pigeon has been so insistent that she's a socialist. Supporting certain socialist policies (specifically ones that are proven popular) does not a socialist make. Her response here is, I think, a good illustration of how she's distinct. And people can hand wave all they'd like, but referring to herself as a capitalist and specifically saying she isn't a democratic socialist seems... fair? We don't need to convince ourselves that she's lying as if it's inconsistent.
Looking at what has actually been said over the last few days, what has actually changed? The campaign position was that the document was real, had been used by staffers, but was unapproved (ie, Bernie and people close to him were not aware). No one has said otherwise, but correct me if I'm wrong.
Sorry, not sure what you're saying 'No' to w/r/t my post. I don't disagree that people self-identifying is insufficient -- just pointing out that it seems fair given where she actually falls with her policies.No, he has a point. Whatever politicians call themselves does not on its own determine their politics, and Bernie isn't going to be winning any purity tests from died in the wool Orthodox Marxists. What we call "socialist" in America in this day and age is slippery and hard to nail down, and the line we draw between Bernie's policy proposals and Warren's does not imply the point where a "capitalist" ends and a "socialist" begins in anything but the intuitive sense that self-described "socialists" tend to line up more with one over the other.
However, I do think there is a meaningful difference between the two in their rhetoric, espoused worldview, and praxis which demonstrates that Bernie is skeptical of the fundamental role of capital accumulation in society to a degree that Warren is not. That might not make him a socialist in a rigorous sense, but he certainly skews further that way than Warren in my eyes.
It was sent to multiple states which means someone with decision making power in his national campaign. He and his campaign are lying.Looking at what has actually been said over the last few days, what has actually changed? The campaign position was that the document was real, had been used by staffers, but was unapproved (ie, Bernie and people close to him were not aware). No one has said otherwise, but correct me if I'm wrong.
Yeah I don't know what "unapproved" means for their organizational structure and who would be finalizing/disseminating these sorts of notes going out, but the suggestion is that Sanders and at least his high level staff didn't authorize it. Seems perfectly plausible to me and the alternative is that they all endorsed an initiative to begin criticizing Warren, which would contravene a core principle of their campaign and inevitably blow back. At a minimum, as I said before, it's sloppy and they should tighten up if they're going to hold themselves to high standards. Missteps won't go unexploited.It was sent to multiple states which means someone with decision making power in his national campaign. He and his campaign are lying.