• It's the most wonderful time of the year! Make your list and check it twice. The ResetEra Games of the Year 2019 Voting Thread is now live. Voting will be open for the next 1 day, 5 hours, 24 minutes, 21 seconds, and will close on Jan 26, 2020 at 9:00 AM.

Warren Refuses to Shake Bernie’s Hand After Debate, Bernie Throws Up Hands After They Speak

Status
Not open for further replies.

umop 3pisdn

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,461
It's neither.

And I'm a little flabbergasted that some are suggesting there's an expectation, or in many cases, even a demand, for people to engage with posts that use inflammatory, over the top language, takes and characterizations.

I hesitated to even give this thread any more oxygen as there are much bigger fish to fry, but I liked Shultz's perspective. I didn't come here to bicker, much less "troll."
It's not inflammatory if it appears virtually at the end of a long substantial rebuttal with the rhetorical function of saying "so in summation this take is fucking bad". You know that.
 

Baji Boxer

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,505
The point of bringing this up is not to assign blame about 2016.

The point is to recognize that this faction, which would likely also be against Warren, is a sizeable chunk of Bernie's coalition.

That doesn't mean Bernie is anything less as a candidate. It is what it is.
It's not sizable and significant in any meaningful way. It'd likely be the same number for every candidate's coalition.
 

Cherries

Member
Oct 27, 2017
409
"I don't think that all Sanders supporters are sexist but I'm here to remind you that they support a candidate who has an army of sexist bros at his disposal" sure is something.
 

Poodlestrike

It's salt.
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
6,131
Oct 25, 2017
849
Gimmie a break.

Her "nuanced" piece opens with John Legend attacking Bernie Sanders supporters for their "nastiness". There's neither a political disagreement raised nor any example of the alleged nastiness. When you have hegemonic power over mass culture as elite liberals do, it's easy to convince yourself you are the only legitimate arbiter of acceptable discourse. But your opponents also have opinions, and guess what, we think you're nasty too. We just don't have 100 television channels to broadcast our views.

This piece is a mild example, but still contains many of the gross fingerprints which can be readily found in grosser forms elsewhere.

Examples include:
- Equating left wing movement politics with borderline fascist white nationalism
- Weaponizing identity politics to avoid serious political discourse
- Selective calls for "unity" against the GOP

The real donut brain part of this piece is right in the center:


Virtually no Bernie Sanders supporter believes this. It's foundational to a leftist that women can and should be successful in politics. I have personally volunteered for 3 female candidates for political office. It's liberals who I frequently hear doubting that a woman can win. Liberals want to believe US politics is hopelessly racist and sexist because they refuse to question any other aspects of their politics. They don't have a good answer for why the country which recently elected its first black president is 8 years later circling the drain of Nazism. They're unwilling to see the material conditions in which working people live and connect it to their own corporate-friendly policies (and those of the GOP). In a word, Liberals are unable to question capitalism. It doesn't help that many of them (in places of power) are rich assholes who only talk to other rich assholes.

Where Schultz goes from merely disingenuous to actually evil is right here:


Is there any doubt what she's talking about? My reading is that she is equating the Warren camp waiting weeks before the Iowa caucus to launch this attack with women such as Christine Blasey Ford waiting years to report their sexual assault. It's hard to imagine a more disgusting comparison. But Schultz is not the first to do it. The first instance I saw was from Center for American Progress head Neera Tanden:


I shouldn't have to explain what is wrong with this. "Believe women" is a progressive maxim with regard to many instances of oppression faced by women where the (*cough* bourgeois) legal system constantly fails. Sexual harassment in the workplace, sexual assault virtually anywhere, etc. The law rarely holds men accountable for their sexist crimes, so the least we can do is believe women who come forward with their story. It doesn't mean that women are above lying in all aspects of life. This is an essentialist perspective, which would be analytically problematic if it wasn't so transparently cynical. Misusing progressive slogans like this risks souring broad swaths of the public, jeopardizing significant social progress which has been achieved, most recently by the MeToo movement. To have it misused for cheap political expediency is appalling.

"This is not a good look, and it's a tired rerun from 2016." - indeed
This a good well thought out post.

Shame the rest of the discourse is going as expected.
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
Frankly, it's disturbing how many Bernie supporters are acting like this is a game and totally disregard sexism embedded in our culture. Rather then try to understand another point of view they're more interested in weaponising sexual harassment terms which have been relevant into hitting "below the belt." No reflection, no compassion the woman must be a liar and Bernie must not be perceived as flawed. They're not interested in deescalating this, this is a justification to go after everyone they were waiting for. This isn't about being progressive, it's about supporting Bernie at all costs.

What's really baffling, but not surprising, is that Sanders and his proxies encourage this behaviour. It explains why he lacks so many friends and allies in Washington when he won't spend five minutes trying to understand where Warren's coming from.

There are plausible criticism against Warren and her campaign about how they made mistakes here, and they're not interested in examining them. You're either with Bernie or you're The Enemy who must be destroyed.

I hope Bernie's happy with the results. He's going to need all the happiness he can get when Biden wins the nomination.
 

rras1994

Member
Nov 4, 2017
3,201
Quite frankly this thread has made me feel more unwelcome as a woman due to sexism on this forum, then any of the shitty takes I’ve seen on the Gaming side. It’s just shitty and disappointing.
 

BADMAN

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
2,356
Frankly, it's disturbing how many Bernie supporters are acting like this is a game and totally disregard sexism embedded in our culture. Rather then try to understand another point of view they're more interested in weaponising sexual harassment terms which have been relevant into hitting "below the belt." No reflection, no compassion the woman must be a liar and Bernie must not be perceived as flawed. They're not interested in deescalating this, this is a justification to go after everyone they were waiting for. This isn't about being progressive, it's about supporting Bernie at all costs.

What's really baffling, but not surprising, is that Sanders and his proxies encourage this behaviour. It explains why he lacks so many friends and allies in Washington when he won't spend five minutes trying to understand where Warren's coming from.

There are plausible criticism against Warren and her campaign about how they made mistakes here, and they're not interested in examining them. You're either with Bernie or you're The Enemy who must be destroyed.

I hope Bernie's happy with the results. He's going to need all the happiness he can get when Biden wins the nomination.
She went to the press instead of handling the matter privately. In a presidential race. For president.
 

Mercury Fred

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,283
Idk if I'd say that. I've seen some pretty disheartening misogynist shit over the last 48 hours.

Maybe don't do this. Maybe we can disagree with each other without making the accusations. I know Fred made one too, but I just got here, so I'm taking things as they come.
To be clear, my intention wasn't to make an accusation.

I came to the thread to share what I feel is a unique take from an acclaimed woman who personally knows both Warren and Sanders. When that article was dismissed as "actually evil" it made me automatically realize that there's no common ground to be found there and that my read of that post is that poster is looking for a fight, not a discussion. If I'm wrong there, my bad, but I'm not into entering discussions with people holding flamethrowers. As you can see from some of my back and forth with Surfinn, I'm happy to engage when the dial is not at 11, but if it is, I don't see the point.
 

GiantBreadbug

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,645
There are plausible criticism against Warren and her campaign about how they made mistakes here, and they're not interested in examining them. You're either with Bernie or you're The Enemy who must be destroyed.
Considering the entire premise of this discussion is literally the bolded, your post really does reach the loftiest heights of the use of "see, sexism!!!" to immediately neutralize situations that make politicians you like look like shit
 
Status
Not open for further replies.