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?
-
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.
Politico: Sanders Camp Admits Anti-Warren Script Was Deployed in Multiple Early States
- Thread starter Deleted member 3896
- Start date
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?
OP
OP
I'm mostly interested in how this tracks with the campaign's history and trustworthiness with regard to the Warren electability spat.
Good God lol. They (Bernie camp) shouldn't have lied about it... But uh... what was said isn't factually incorrect or even remotely bad? The lying about it is the only glaring issue here and a pretty good shot to their own foot. Shame, really. The left is so busy eating their own they're making me very stressed out for the very real possiblity we are going to have to endure 4 more years of Orange Fuckface destroying the country.
Referencing the scorpion and the frog and thinking Warren is the frog is approaching absolutely nuclear levels of Elizabeth Energy (Elizergy) and I am very here for it
Bingo!
But to the point of the story, Sanders campaign deserves to be called out because they need to be better prepared for this type of shit. This was pretty mild, but it was just the start. It´s going to get a lot worse if he keeps having a good chance, and they have to be smart about it.
You cannot fall into these types of traps.
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.
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 what we are fighting over is if it is a lie.
Edit: I am happy the conversation is getting more reasonable though, at least for now.
Bernie's campaign never lied and the stakes here are going to remain very high if what we are fighting over is if it is a lie.
Edit: I am happy the conversation is getting more reasonable though, at least for now.
Last edited:
I feel like the Warren vs. Bernie media circus is easily one of the dumbest things I've seen so far this election cycle. It's coming down to the wire and candidates have to make their cases for why they should be the nominee. So, yes, that might also potentially involve some low key support for calling out other campaigns or making points regarding the elect-ability of yourself vs others. Is it dumb that Bernie and his camp downplayed this too much? Obviously. Was what was said somehow all that problematic? No. The fact that Democrats are constantly being asked to "play nice" for the sake of the party to an almost infuriating degree in which they can't actually have serious discussions about policies is making this whole cycle feel more ineffectual as a whole.
Now, I don't want Warren and Sanders fighting more than they have to as competing candidates because that's super bad for the progressive wing of the party. While the "complete non competition" had to be dropped at some point, it feels like the media is desperately trying to drum up a divide (which some people are really falling for it seems) for the ratings, when both Warren and Sanders clearly don't consider these more recent situations that big of a deal and would rather have policy speak for itself. I think they've both managed to mishandle this. Bernie clearly based upon this article and not trying to clarify his comments about women, and Warren for sort of letting the media play things up before really addressing the issue. I understand so many fellow Sanders supporters are passionate, as are so many Warren supporters, but this isn't the lane any of us need to be fighting because it just seems more likely to crater them both and clear the way for the Centrist to actual Republican candidates. Especially since we know this is an ideal area for outside influences to press on social media to further divides in the party.
Now, I don't want Warren and Sanders fighting more than they have to as competing candidates because that's super bad for the progressive wing of the party. While the "complete non competition" had to be dropped at some point, it feels like the media is desperately trying to drum up a divide (which some people are really falling for it seems) for the ratings, when both Warren and Sanders clearly don't consider these more recent situations that big of a deal and would rather have policy speak for itself. I think they've both managed to mishandle this. Bernie clearly based upon this article and not trying to clarify his comments about women, and Warren for sort of letting the media play things up before really addressing the issue. I understand so many fellow Sanders supporters are passionate, as are so many Warren supporters, but this isn't the lane any of us need to be fighting because it just seems more likely to crater them both and clear the way for the Centrist to actual Republican candidates. Especially since we know this is an ideal area for outside influences to press on social media to further divides in the party.
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.
This says alot about Sanders and Warren.
Sanders dodges and defensive, rarely admits to anything.
Warren keeps on taking the bait and acting as if it's so awful.
Warren fell for Trump's DNA challenge for crying out loud
Sanders dodges and defensive, rarely admits to anything.
Warren keeps on taking the bait and acting as if it's so awful.
Warren fell for Trump's DNA challenge for crying out loud
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
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
Evidence would help both of us, actually. I was asking for this if anyone knew of any and I got were shrugs and attacks for daring to imply that Bernie's script might have been too aggressive. I was thinking I could talk to you in good faith when I was clearly mistaken.
You're taking this far too personal.
The script described Warren's appeal as limited to the highly educated and financially well off. When spitting an uncontroversial fact becomes anti-person.
And let me get this straight, he actually pulled the script, but it was leaked and "His press aides never denied the veracity of the document."? Where's the lie?
And let me get this straight, he actually pulled the script, but it was leaked and "His press aides never denied the veracity of the document."? Where's the lie?
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
Remember people, they want us to fight Bernie v. Warren. And we have people here on Era willing to keep perpetuating it.
As for Bernie's camp, why would you not want to have a script for all your opponents? It's not a big deal tbh.
As for Bernie's camp, why would you not want to have a script for all your opponents? It's not a big deal tbh.
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.
He's advocated for the nationalization of energy, banking, manufacturing, and healthcare and the widespread establishment of worker coops and workplace democracy.
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
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 they think they win 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.
"capitalist to my bones"
does leftist theory say that the primary determinative factor is whether somebody says they're a socialist, which marx book is that in
I can think of one specific person it's helping.
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
Surely you can understand that people sometimes get frustrated over the same tired arguments from, quite frankly, some really bad actors. Sure, restraint often would be advisable, but we are human after all. We feel things. And then some people's lives actually depend on a general shift towards the left for mere survivability. Healthcare for all is not an abstract idea, it's an achievable, concrete goal.
When i see someone pining for the return of the status quo, my thought is not 'well that's better than nothing', my thought is 'well fuck that, the status quo is terrible and nothing to pine for'. I'm not American, but unfortunately for the rest of the world, the US has an immeasurable weight on where the world moves. And right now, the movement of which Sanders is emblematic is literally the only real chance at real positive change in the US, which ideally will have a positive ripple effect worldwide. A return to the status quo is just not nearly good enough. That's why people at times get defensive imo.
For example, and to use an extreme example, i do get quite mad when i see white privileged American people explaining to foreign people why meddling in their country's affairs, destroying their economy and bombing their land is actually a good thing. Sure, i could ignore it, and admittedly getting angry with people on the internet is nearly useless. But i would rather dismantle, or mock, a bad argument than ignore it. Ignoring things rarely makes them go away. Maybe someone else on the side lines sees how bad an argument is and it influences them to know more. That is better than nothing.
This is your original post:
Despite admitting their are numerous people involved on Warren's side there is no flexibility for multiple opinions inside Warren's camp, your argument is that everyone in Warren's camp are bad and can't be trusted and that there can't be more to Bernie and Warrens' relationship than that or that relationships can't change. You're omitting the fact Bernie and his camp haven't been passive observers during this debacle and that the trust they had with warren's camp might not be earned for them to get away with petty snipes like they intended. It shows how thin the trust between the two camps were and that's not all Warren's camp fault. They're reacting to Bernie and his camp's fuck ups, of course they're not going to brush off every slight Bernie and co. give them, and the fact Bernie's camp started all this. Bernie's script was the original domino that fell.
Warren only entered this confrontation when Bernie lied to the press about their discussion, she didn't just blurt it out once things got heated in the press.
No, we're not playing a sport - which is why I'm getting frustrated when you're brushing off legitimate complaints from Warren's camp.
Only matters if being defined as a socialist matters above her reputation, which made her a friend and ally of Bernie and a second favourite among his followers.
Last edited:
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 one
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.
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.
Wait... So you can only be a true leftist if your a socialist? What the fuck?
It couldnt be more obvious but gotta ignore that to scream about media bias.
Sexism and harassment in his campaign, endorsing scum, coming around so late on guns, Seems like he's apologizing every month and people wonder why he's scrutinized.
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.
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.
I was confused then. I'm sorry. You're right and I wholeheartedly agree. The ability to admit mistakes is highly underrated right now.
That sounds like a pretty capitalist compromise. Probably not to the bones though, just down to the tendons.
"Calling out my guy's campaign for repeatedly lying? How desperate of you."
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.
Sanders has a reputation to sell as an "outsider", so getting caught being a politician (which he has been for over three decades) is bad for the brand. So instead of just saying "yeah, that's ours, was any of it untrue", his campaign dissembles about everything that can be construed as actually campaigning then points their finger at everyone else. From there, certain supporters, instead of just saying "well, it's politics, he's a politician," pick up the flag and carry that message until, oops, turns out they were actually doing it. At which point those same supporters, instead of feeling insulted for being made to carry a false banner, suddenly play it off as being no big deal. When, previously, it was such a problem that the mere insinuation of the campaign doing it was tantamount to sabotage.
Last edited:
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. As others have pointed out above, the stuff he's proposed isn't exactly a revolution of the proletariat, and we can't really speculate if he views these policies as ends within themselves or an increment towards something more radically different than what we have now.
However, I do think there is a meaningful difference between the two candidates 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.
Last edited:
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.
Bernie's live response "And people sometimes say things that they shouldn't" never really made sense from the beginning, of course, since this was always about a document that had leaked. Was as if he didn't understand what had actually happened and/or ultimately didn't want to be bothered with it.
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.
It was sent to multiple states which means someone with decision making power in his national campaign. He and his campaign are lying.
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.