Bernies an elitist too. Look up who he had voted into city council roles in his city. Their lineages are fascinating
2020 Democratic Primary Thread: Focus on House & Senate races
- Thread starter mc_brew
- Start date
Bernies an elitist too. Look up who he had voted into city council roles in his city. Their lineages are fascinating
storyteller
Veteran
Where’s the lie?
ADevilYouKhow
Rhyme Reason
Singling our educated and affluent Democrats for what exactly?
Nefarious and divisive
I’ll so tired of us vs them narratives especially when they aren’t warranted
Nefarious and divisive
I’ll so tired of us vs them narratives especially when they aren’t warranted
storyteller
Veteran
He didn't say anything except that educated and affluent people are already a part of the Democratic party. It says her support is educated and affluent. That's it. Who are the newcomers to the party that she brings? Because that's the only accusation here. That she hasn't managed to appeal to newcomers and I think that holds up since Bernie's got 'em. Bernie's actually been attacked for it. Because the newcomers he brought, stayed home last time. That was literally highlighted as an attack on him over the 2016 numbers not long ago.
storyteller
Veteran
Yall need to stop letting the Worst Poster of the Year for consecutive years poison your damned minds with his bullshyt. This sensitive operative ass dude pushes conspiracy theories regularly to forward shytty ideals. He got you mad that Bernie's campaign wants us to acknowledge a reality...that Warren's support primarily consists of educated, affluent voters? That's not an insult, it's an observation. The shyt starts by calling her the next best option to Bernie, which makes sense coming from a Bernie supporter. Bad faith would be gassing Tulsi or Yang instead.
storyteller
Veteran
State the lie...
ADevilYouKhow
Rhyme Reason
it’s negative and dismissive. You really don’t think Warren adds anyone? I’m not buying that.
1. How is that a concern about HER?
2. All of her voters are not highly educated.
3. Not all of her voters are going to vote dem regardless
It's wild to me that people get outraged because candidates are trying to differentiate themselves from the others. They are running against each other ... what do you think was going to happen?
Republicans were savaging each other last presidential primary and it didn't seem to affect Trump too much.
I remember Hillary's camp dropping the news that Biden was against killing Osama bin Laden when there was a tiny possibility of Biden entering the race
ADevilYouKhow
Rhyme Reason
It's wild to me that people get outraged because candidates are trying to differentiate themselves from the others. They are running against each other ... what do you think was going to happen?
Republicans were savaging each other last presidential primary and it didn't seem to affect Trump too much.
I remember Hillary's camp dropping the news that Biden was against killing Osama bin Laden when there was a tiny possibility of Biden entering the race
the concern is that if Dems cut themself to ribbons during the primary it’s going to lower voter turnout
I’m unwilling to stomach another 4(?) years of Trump
the cac mamba
Veteran
the cac mamba
Veteran
propose a better ticket. I guarantee you can'tBiden/Tulsi
Just when you think cac mamba is making some progress he jumps all the way back on his bullshyt
the cac mamba
Veteran
no
but im not gonna forgive a doctor's school loans in the same stroke as I forgive a car mechanic
storyteller
Veteran
1. Fam, anyone who subscribes to the idea that this election will be a turnout based election ought to be open to the idea that the best option will be whoever turns out the widest variety of voters. The person with the broadest reach is the best option under that supposition. Now you could argue that for everyone Sanders brings in, he'll lose the same amount. Or that Warren's ability to speak to and distill policy in a relatable way more than makes up for that concern. But if we look at polling data, there's no lie here.
For both 2 and 3, I'd argue that you're speaking to a minority of her support. While the statement being pushed is one that applies to the broad majority of her support.
2. We've got plenty of polling on what occupations support each candidate. Obviously it's not 100% highly educated. But the biggest donor demographic and the biggest section of her support overall comes from the field of educated. There's nothing wrong with that. The only concern here is that, highly educated people have been a part of the party for a while. So if we're concerned with getting more people to show up to the polls, then we'd target new voters. It's a strategy argument but not an insult to anyone.
3. Of course this is true. Not all voters for any primary candidate ever will vote for the person that beats their preferred candidate. But according to historical precedent it's rarely above 10% of those primary supporters (exception being Clinton supporters when she lost to Obama). Also, I think that the loss to Trump and his past 4 years have made it even more likely that a vast majority of people who vote in the primary will make sure to vote for whoever wins that primary. I fully admit this last bit is speculation.
Here's my thing though...none of this is an insult to Warren supporters. There's a purposeful comment made at the front that she's our second choice. That also does not apply to all Bernie supporters, but the vast majority of us recognize her value and support her as the next best option. The idea that Bernie brings more newcomers to the party and can have a bigger impact is the safest difference you can draw without attacking her or her support. It draws a simple distinction in Bernie's ability to appeal to Independents (He's not a democrat right?). And it manages to both acknowledge Warren as the second best option should Bernie drop out while also making an appeal to consider him the more electable candidate. What more could you ask for from a competitor in this race? What is he supposed to say? He's not gonna have "vote for Warren, that's fine."