You seem to be confusing Buttigieg supporters for Bernie supporters.
Also, why are you attacking Bernie in this topic about Warren?
-
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.
Warren asked at a town hall: "Was there ever a time where somebody you looked up to didn't accept you?" Here's her answer
- Thread starter Aaron
- Start date
Also, why are you attacking Bernie in this topic about Warren?
Yeah, it's clear, even if I deeply disagree with her on a number of issues, she's a genuinely good-hearted person and as well-intentioned as a politician can be while wanting to keep within our current framework. So kudos.
Yeah. Didn't someone on Pete's CAMPAIGN STAFF pre-emptively blame black voters for not voting for him or something? I seem to remember that distinctly. Might be wrong though.
I like Warren and all, but I don't understand what they were getting emotional about, so I couldn't get emotionally-attached to vague sentimental statements.
OP
OP
This gets mentioned in the article someone posted earlier on this subject:
Given the context I think it's super obvious what Raelyn is going through.
It's also an extremely personal question, moreso than what presidential candidates are typically asked. Sounds like it ripped open a wound in Warren's life (an abusive relationship with her mother) that she wasn't prepared for.
I mean, just think of where Warren is today. Now think of the fact that her mother didn't even want her going to college.
I really like Warren. I'd be very happy for her to win the nomination if it isn't Bernie. She'd be a great president, I think.
But I understand people on the left, women included (not to suggest women can't be sexist against women), who simply don't see Warren as a viable alternative because of what true, necessary change looks like to them. That's not to say she wouldn't be preferable to Biden, et al.
As well, there are absolutely some who, I think, exaggerate the differences in order to prevent people from conflating Warren with Bernie. They need to be seen as distinct.
Sexism is also a part of how she's portrayed/perceived by many people, but I wouldn't so simply condemn.
OP
OP
Ironically it's Warren's preference for things like abolishing the filibuster and adding judges to the Supreme Court that elevate her over Sanders in my book. I don't care how many college students you get on Capitol Hill, SCOTUS is law of the land and I'd rather Democrats worry about scrounging up fifty votes rather than sixty.
To his credit, Sanders does support a half-assed workaround with the filibuster via reconciliation, but like... just get rid of the filibuster. It's cleaner.
You could see how difficult it was for her to even begin asking the question. I was wondering if it was about coming out to her family.
It's interesting that a thread about Warren becomes a thread about "she's fine but she's not Bernie" for lots of folks. And yet when Bernie threads get derailed with sentiments like that, it tends not to fly.
It's disappointing that some folks can't let a simple thread about a nice, seemingly sincere and emotional moment from Warren be just that.
It's disappointing that some folks can't let a simple thread about a nice, seemingly sincere and emotional moment from Warren be just that.
This strand of discussion started because someone said that people saying Sanders is the only good candidate is evidence of sexism.
Must be really confusing for Americans these days (especially Republicans). What's real, what isn't? Are those real emotions? Does that person have integrity? What is true and what is a lie? Is it fixed or spontaneous? A real life soap or a fake life soap?
It seems sincere to me. And while it seems opportunistic to spread on Social Media, it does also send a really good message. A lot of people don't feel accepted, don't feel this world is for them. You have to do what you feel is right. And, hopefully, voting for a humane candidate is one of the easier things to do for people.
Anyway, Warren seems like a great candidate. I like Bernie as well. As far as i'm concerned these two are the only candidates who can really move the USA towards a more reasonable and humane country. I'm not an American though, so unfortunately i can't vote for them.
Glad we can agree that it's better to let moments like this stand for themselves rather than bringing up inflammatory generalisations about others apropos of nothing, although I don't agree with you that people responding to them is "interesting," because it's very understandable and predictable imo.
I don't agree with the sentiment that he's the only good candidate, but that is quite literally what happened. There was no hint or whiff of Sanders until that poster made an offhand and unrelated comment that had nothing to do with the thread.
Anyway, it's a sweet moment and I think she's a strong candidate.
It means marrying someone with money or status. It's an old person thing. They still think men earn the bread and women just look after the house, which evidently Warren wasn't interested in.
Then we can count on you backing up the liberals and centrists being insulted in threads then?
You are correct. The student thought up the question on the car ride over. The question was written potentially hours before being asked.
Won't someone stop the shady Warren campaign before it's too late?
I wouldn't say you could "count on" me participating on this forum at any given time, but tell you what: if you ever see a leftist complaining about liberals derailing a thread about say, Corbyn's jam-making or AOC livestreaming a sit-in, when the derailing is actually a response to an inflammatory post made earlier in the thread, feel free to tag me and I'll ride on in (circumstances permitting, of course) and re-iterate this basic point about human behaviour and motivations.
What's interesting to me about this moment is the fact that people forget that for this young person, not sure what pronouns to use, can see their own struggle in something that happened to Warren. While it's not the same, there's a lot of similar aspects in how Warren's mother treated her that young people from a lot of walks of life can get. It's also interesting that Warren openly admits in her book about her own family issues (can you call it abuse?) namely with her mother.
Regarding the whole thing with her mom and her, Marrying well was a big thing for some families. Given her backstory about her family (like the fact that they basically were practically living paycheck to paycheck and had their car taken back, it doesn't at all surprise me that her mother wanted her to marry someone who had a better social status and money so that her daughter would be secured a future financially. Given the fact that her first husband, Jim, met her in High school and is the father of her two kids, they clearly knew each other well enough to try to make a marriage work. I'm guessing that Jim probably came from a more well off family seeing as he was able to land a job at IBM during the 1960s.
During the time period of her first marriage, you rarely saw a woman go to college after they had married or had a kid, not that it didn't happen, but a lot of women dropped out of school to stay at home for their kids. But for a woman to go back to college and get a law degree after having two kids, during the time that she did it is still impressive and probably caused a lot of contention with her mother who clearly wanted her daughter to be more of a Social Mother wife than a working mother.
So I can understand why she would see a lot of herself in Raelyn given that the Raelyn is probably struggling with the same rejection that she did when she had to tell her, more than likely, religious, mother that she was getting a divorce. It would be like now a days saying to your parents that you're going to, I don't know...move some where dangerous. It was something that wasn't done, and was looked upon as a sin and that it would bring down her, and her family's, status. Also pointing out she's from OK. So yeah, religious and social expectations were, and still are, high over there, so her dropping her husband could be seen as a scandal to her family.
Regarding the whole thing with her mom and her, Marrying well was a big thing for some families. Given her backstory about her family (like the fact that they basically were practically living paycheck to paycheck and had their car taken back, it doesn't at all surprise me that her mother wanted her to marry someone who had a better social status and money so that her daughter would be secured a future financially. Given the fact that her first husband, Jim, met her in High school and is the father of her two kids, they clearly knew each other well enough to try to make a marriage work. I'm guessing that Jim probably came from a more well off family seeing as he was able to land a job at IBM during the 1960s.
During the time period of her first marriage, you rarely saw a woman go to college after they had married or had a kid, not that it didn't happen, but a lot of women dropped out of school to stay at home for their kids. But for a woman to go back to college and get a law degree after having two kids, during the time that she did it is still impressive and probably caused a lot of contention with her mother who clearly wanted her daughter to be more of a Social Mother wife than a working mother.
So I can understand why she would see a lot of herself in Raelyn given that the Raelyn is probably struggling with the same rejection that she did when she had to tell her, more than likely, religious, mother that she was getting a divorce. It would be like now a days saying to your parents that you're going to, I don't know...move some where dangerous. It was something that wasn't done, and was looked upon as a sin and that it would bring down her, and her family's, status. Also pointing out she's from OK. So yeah, religious and social expectations were, and still are, high over there, so her dropping her husband could be seen as a scandal to her family.
I hope she wins, just so you all can see how full of pandering she is.
Imagine floating a conspiracy theory then following up with this.
OP
OP
And I hope she wins just so she can pass a bunch of good, progressive bills into law and see how you twist yourself in knots to argue that she actually isn't a progressive.
...I dunno, this seems like a planned moment IMO.
Why would someone ask such a weird specific question??
I guess I'm always suspicious of these things when they're used as marketing for candidates
Why would someone ask such a weird specific question??
I guess I'm always suspicious of these things when they're used as marketing for candidates
Ah, we're back to "campaigning for the votes of people who aren't straight white men is pandering" again.
The campaign deliberately highlighting the moment does not mean the moment was staged.
What do you think a campaign is? What the purpose of a campaign twitter account is? Yes, they're marketing the moment because marketing a candidate is what you do in an election.
The campaign deliberately highlighting the moment does not mean the moment was staged.
Why would a young LGBT person in a conservative state ask a question about how to handle not being accepted by someone you love?
Gee I don't know...
It was recently Thanksgiving. Time to eat bird and for family members to make each other feel bad about their life and their choices.
