Weltall Wrote:The world is ending. I am officially to the left of ABF!

Quote:That's rite. I'm 100% Feeling the Bern as the kids say. My wife and I have donated money multiple times and I'm going to try my hand at phonebanking.

Because, he's definitely not a one-issue candidate. He's loudest about his economic policies, and let's face it: people who are chained to the ground by systematic poverty can never hope to break free of all the other chains. It's sad, but true.

What's not true is the 'one issue' meme. Not even slightly. Here are some others you'll almost always hear come up in any given public speech:

An end to the War on Drugs (and a reminder that it disproportionately targets minority populations)
Removal of cannabis from the controlled substance schedule list + decriminalization
An end to private prisons (and a reminder that we have a higher prison population than any other country on Earth)
Amnesty + a path to citizenship
Strong support for efforts to battle climate change
Champions alternative energy sources (often solar)
An end to police brutality
Demilitarizing police forces
Unconditional support for a woman's right to choose to have an abortion
Insists that health care is a fundamental human right
As is college education
Proponent for campaign finance reform, of public funding for elections, and the abolishment of Citizens United
The restoration of the Voting Rights Act
Supports measures to end discrimination against LGBTQ people in schools, workplaces and in the public sector
Abolish the death penalty
Against police action use of military force, favors military intervention only as a part of an international coalition
Against the War on Terror and unilateral military operations
Against free trade agreements of any kind
Against pervasive government surveillance programs
Against Patriot Act
Strong proponent of Social Security expansion
Proponent of major infrastructure investments in transportation, energy and other sectors
Proponent of net neutrality

Quote:I do not think that Clinton will fare well against Donald Trump in the general election. Imagine the nightmare of Clinton being attacked from the left and the right, except you won't have to. Donald will be able to attack her (and credibly) on issues like SuperPACs and corruption, plus her pro-Iraq War vote, all the while rallying the racists and the bigots as he has been doing all along. She has very high unfavorable ratings (which have proven to be murder in general elections), and nothing will help glue the fractured GOP back together (even if for one final presidential campaign) than the prospect of finally defeating Clinton once and for all, as she is a supremely hated figure on the right. And, independents (who are considerably larger in number than affiliates of either party) are vastly more comfortable with Sanders than Clinton. Clinton has the support of registered Democrats... a shrinking cohort that can't win an election by itself.

Quote:Furthermore, Clinton depresses voter turnout. It's been the case in each primary so far. Sanders set an all-time record for New Hampshire votes received, even though turnout was down something like 30% from 2008. Clearly, low turnout wasn't his fault. Her message is not inspiring, and what's worse, her campaign is simply dirty as fuck. She's personally been spreading false memes about Sanders, and she's having surrogates, famed civil rights icons, slandering Bernie Sanders (how about John Lewis trying to imply that Bernie Sanders wasn't involved in the Civil Rights marches!?).

Quote:And, she's corrupt. She won't release transcripts of her paid speeches to Goldman Sachs, almost 90% of her fundraising comes from wealthy donors maxing out, she takes full advantage of Citizens' United and has no interest whatsoever in solving problems of income inequality or corruption in government. The DNC has been limiting debates to deny Sanders national exposure, and has lifted bans on SuperPAC money so as to give Clinton a fundraising advantage.

Quote:All this runs the significant risk of alienating Sanders supporters come November, and she's screwed if that happens.

Quote:We need a candidate who will inspire voters to not just vote for a president every four years, but to replace the GOP in state houses, legislatures, governor's mansions and Congress. Bernie Sanders repeatedly maintains that it's not about him, and he can't do it alone. It's true. We need an energized, motivated base of voters. What do we have now? A Party that has basically given up all hope of ever dislodging Republicans from Congress, who puts up weak candidates who are afraid to be progressive and end up losing to fucking cavemen like Matt Bevin and Paul LePage, when an even halfway competent candidate who would actually give Democrats a reason to show up on Election Day should have slaughtered both of them.

Quote:Finally, the trend is definitely in Sanders' favor. Clinton has done nothing but bleed away her lead since Sanders began his campaign. He achieved a virtual tie in Iowa, a blowout in New Hampshire (where Clinton won in 2008), and a 5 point loss in Nevada (where Obama lost by 6 points in 2008). In all of these places, Clinton started out with enormous leads. She was up double digits in Iowa and Nevada within weeks of those caucuses. If he manages to keep SC and Super Tuesday close, the rest of the map is actually quite favorable (as polling trends indicate that his numbers will continue to rise as hers fall). It's a long fight.

Quote:The GOP is fracturing now. Clinton wants to board the windows and hope they don't hurt us too badly. Her message is that there's no hope of achieving any substantial progressive policy victories, so we might as well just try to avoid being rolled back. That's not an inspiring message! Sanders wants to break them. There may be no better opportunity than 2016.

Quote:If America could vote in that Marxist Socialist Muslim Kenyan Nigger Barry Soetero twice, by comfortable margins, then I am not afraid of the 'socialist' tag harming Sanders.

Dark Jaguar Wrote:ABF, you need to do the thing we did, completely upturn your entire world view. Come on, it's fun.

Dark Jaguar Wrote:I just mean you need to seriously consider examining WHY you are so loyal to the democratic party.

Quote: You may well end up voting democrat anyway (we sure will), but maybe you don't need to give them your loyalty? Maybe they've got a lot of problems, and not just imaginary "they aren't tough enough" problems but real ideological problems that are contributing to systemic issues in society. Take some time to really compare it to progressive parties in other countries and ask yourself why our so-called "progressive party" doesn't seem to measure up. It's okay to push them a bit, to push for a candidate that reminds the party of what it supposedly stands for.

Quote:No, I don't think you need to seriously consider joining the republicans. :D Well, maybe take a good long look at WHY they think the way they do. When you realize that deep down, they actually DO believe in authoritarian moral codes, that all morality stems from authority, and that earthly troubles like starving to death are minor compared to the glories of the afterlife earned by living according to that moral code (and they want to teach people this), THEN you'll see. You'll see they aren't lying, they aren't secretly trying to hurt women, they just don't CARE that it hurts women because it's the right thing to do. Why does this even matter? Well, only because it shows that a lot of the tactics people use to argue with them just don't work. Point out all the terrible things you like, and they'll just smile knowingly, thinking but not saying "this poor fool, so concerned with worldly troubles, just needs to learn to think of eternity". This is why they don't seem to have any empathy.

Weltall Wrote:I was a conservative Republican Christian in large part because it was what I was taught was right, from a very early age. I never felt like I had any reason to question these things, and even if I did, it was wrong to do so. The real world taught me that just about all of it was lies. Success doesn't happen in a vacuum. Terrible things can happen that no one can possible prepare for or defend against. Morality isn't a question with a single right answer. Etc.

Quote:I see the things I used to say ten years ago and it kind of makes me sick.

If it means anything, ABF, when I realized that my political worldview had changed to the point where I felt proud to call myself a liberal, one of the first thoughts I had was wondering what kind of reaction it would get out of you.

A Black Falcon Wrote:You are right that the Democratic Party is much less left-wing than the left parties in most European nations, but this country is more conservative in a lot of ways than most of Europe is, so that is understandable. Considering America's electorate, I think the Democratic Party mostly does a good job policy-wise, or at least they do now and in recent decades. Yes, they are lots of things about the party I wish were more liberal (most obviously, the failure to do enough about climate change is terrible), but I do like and care about the party, so I think the best way to accomplish that is by pushing for better Democrats, not blowing up the system.

Quote:This is quite interesting. What you're saying here sounds exactly like medieval European explanations for why society should stay in order, with the nobility on top and peasants below -- if you rock the boat you challenge the fate of your soul, which matters more than your earthly suffering. So it's a familiar concept to me, though not so much as applied to modern politics...

However, the Republicans do not believe in an ordered society like medieval theologians did -- they believe that you can make yourself great by making a lot of money. In the middle ages merchants were not thought highly of; the divine status of nobility did not usually just come with a fortune, but through blood.

Quote:Heh... that's nice. I don't remember the specifics of much of our arguments (I could look up a lot of it, though, in the site's old threads...), though I certainly remember having them. I probably remember my constant arguments with OB1 about videogames more... when I think of '00s TC that's the first thing I think of. :p As for political debates though, I'm sure if I looked back I'd see some things I disagree with now, but I'd probably still agree with most of it. Hopefully that's because I was right, not just because it's hard for me to change my mind on things that it's made up about. :) ... And with that, you see my usual thing that I'm always my own worst critic and can't help but always be hard on myself even if someone says something positive about me. Ah well...

Dark Jaguar Wrote:That said, I've heard surprisingly little from both Hillary and Sanders on climate change. They've both mentioned it, but it hasn't been a major pillar for either campaign. That said, the important question I have is which one of them is more likely to actually take action regarding it?