Elizabeth Warren HQ: She's Got A Plan!

GodinDaFlesh

Banned
Supporter
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
12,846
Reputation
1,359
Daps
69,284
Reppin
The Godverse
If Warren sees Bernie's chances as DOA even with her endorsement, the progressive move might be making sure there is a progressive voice in the room in the administration of the inevitable winner. That was her rationale for not endorsing either Bernie or Hillary in 2016. She knew Bernie couldn't win, so she used her non-endorsement to extract progressive concessions from Hillary's team. Warren isn't in this for symbolic wins or principled defeats, she's in this to actually wield power to enact a progressive agenda.

If she had dropped out and endorsed Bernie before ST, Bernie would have won more states, thus increasing the chances of a progressive agenda actually being enacted.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,656
Daps
203,843
Reppin
the ether
In your view, is Bernie a Progressive or a Socialist?
He's obviously a progressive whether or not he's a socialist. I don't think its accurate to call him a socialist by the definition I grew up with but the definition has become pretty fluid so use whatever you want.

I'd say FDR and MLK were more socialist than Bernie but that doesn't mean you can't call them progressives too.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,656
Daps
203,843
Reppin
the ether
It's seems Bernie supporters want it both ways some times.

If you accept that he has made progressive ideas part of the mainstream of the Dem party then one should be able to accept that he might not be the best or only person who can carry it out.

:yeshrug:


I only wish that someone would have said something like this last year.

I'm beginning to think that Bernie may have peaked, and not in a bad way.

He's the radical that said stuff no one was willing to say in 2016. He changed the entire conversation. Back then there was just one Bernie, now it feels like everyone other than Biden is defined by how many of Bernie's ideas they're promoting.

At his age, and without the stark choice that he used to be presenting between himself and the establishment, he's not necessarily the best choice for 2020 anymore. I'm not saying he should drop out right now or anything, but I think he might be on a downward trend that's going to last. But if the result of his candidacy is that Warren or Harris or any number of the young up-and-comers is promoting his ideas in the majority of their platform, he'll have done his good work. They just have to finish the job and actually win the damn election.

Oh wait, I did. :martin:
 

Shogun

Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
25,487
Reputation
5,926
Daps
62,969
Reppin
Knicks
He's obviously a progressive whether or not he's a socialist. I don't think its accurate to call him a socialist by the definition I grew up with but the definition has become pretty fluid so use whatever you want.

I'd say FDR and MLK were more socialist than Bernie but that doesn't mean you can't call them progressives too.
I think the fluidity of the term is detrimental to the actual advancement of Progressive policies.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
51,330
Reputation
19,656
Daps
203,843
Reppin
the ether
I think the fluidity of the term is detrimental to the actual advancement of Progressive policies.

That's by design. Conservatives and centrists have worked to fukk up the term as much as possible in order to muddy the waters. That's why you've seen Bernie over his history sometimes reject the term and sometimes embrace it and try to remove the stigma and sometimes just ignore it, because it's just hard to know how to move when they do shyt like that.

I consider socialism to be the dissolution of private ownership of significant capital/the means of production, and "socialism" as a stand-alone term as it's used in America more specifically means state control of the means of production. I've seen no sign he wants that.

However, once you start adding words to it, like "cooperative socialism", you could legitimately argue that Bernie is a socialist of a sort, in that his long-term goal would probably be worker/collective ownership of the means of production and he's pushed for tiny steps in that direction. But for the most part that's not his platform at all.

Personally I'm fond of libertarian socialism, but that is completely unrecognizable from what "socialism" is referred to today and so far from our current systems that I feel like it would just confuse people if I called myself a socialist.
 

Shogun

Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
25,487
Reputation
5,926
Daps
62,969
Reppin
Knicks
That's by design. Conservatives and centrists have worked to fukk up the term as much as possible in order to muddy the waters. That's why you've seen Bernie over his history sometimes reject the term and sometimes embrace it and try to remove the stigma and sometimes just ignore it, because it's just hard to know how to move when they do shyt like that.

I consider socialism to be the dissolution of private ownership of significant capital/the means of production, and "socialism" as a stand-alone term as it's used in America more specifically means state control of the means of production. I've seen no sign he wants that.

However, once you start adding words to it, like "cooperative socialism", you could legitimately argue that Bernie is a socialist of a sort, in that his long-term goal would probably be worker/collective ownership of the means of production and he's pushed for tiny steps in that direction. But for the most part that's not his platform at all.

Personally I'm fond of libertarian socialism, but that is completely unrecognizable from what "socialism" is referred to today and so far from our current systems that I feel like it would just confuse people if I called myself a socialist.
I guess libertarian socialism (if I'm interpreting you properly) and democratic socialism seems too optimistic to me, especially in the digital age, in that it relies on people being selfless and valuing their community over their personal well being. It's a nice thought, but one of the many trends of post-industrial society has been the breakdown of community in America; it's common that people don't even know their neighbors anymore.

Either way, I think saying that socialism and progressivism are interchangeable is playing into conservatives hands more than anything. Progressivism seeks to make progress on the Liberal model whereas socialism condemns it. That's not a small difference, in my opinion, in a country that is built on Classical Liberalism.

The majority of the specifics in Bernie's vision (healthcare, free college, etc.) can easily be framed in a Progressive Liberal (e.g., pro-Capitalist) argument in the 21st century. I think Bernies use of the word socialism has made him just popular enough to be relevant, but never popular enough to win. Arguing for those things through a Progressive lens would alienate far less people.
 
Last edited:

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,057
Reppin
The Deep State
I’m sorry, but it’s pure hilarity in that Bernie thread with them crying out for a warren endorsement and extending olive branches to her supporters, you know, the


fail to expand your base brehs and then need the voters who actually vote democratic :mjgrin:
they're SO humble on twitter right now :laff:
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,057
Reppin
The Deep State
If Warren endorses Joe Biden you're arguing she's a progressive? Joe Biden isn't really doing any of the shyt she's talking about implementing. Bernie actually is. Yall on this cult of personality shyt I'm trying to see people elected that actually push policies I like.

I didn't even want Bernie to run but this is where we're at. If he doesn't win at this point we're stuck at the status quo,
If elected, Joe Biden would be, on paper, the most progressive president in history.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,057
Reppin
The Deep State
I'm not sure if you realize this you, but in politics there's this thing called "politicking" where you may not agree on every single value but can influence the eventual nominee of implementing some of your ideas down the road. Can you please tell me how in the hell would bernie implement his ideas in Washington without working with non progressives? Hopefully bernies successor understands... that you can't just tear down washington and wallstreet at the same damn time especially considering it's the party you have to pass actual legislation with. The president is a relatively powerless position without its political base, Bernie's trying to win without his parties voting block.
Bernie hates this part of the job :mjlol:

 

King Kreole

natural blondie like goku
Joined
Mar 8, 2014
Messages
15,345
Reputation
4,467
Daps
42,747
They both represent massive symbolic gestures and wield actual power. The in-fighting only helps the rest of the democratic elite and conservatives.
I mean in the context of 2020. There's a difference between having a seat at the table vs looking in from outside the window. I don't see this as infighting, I'm just trying to see things strategically. I still think she'll endorse Bernie btw.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,057
Reppin
The Deep State
Where was that guy that was talking about there being no Bernie discussion in the warren thread?



Bernie is selfish and his game plan was trash in 2016 and arguably worse in 2020 when you consider he had a 4 year head start on the competition.

He missed the boat on propping up a younger version of himself that hadn’t already burned bridges with the majority of the Democratic Party

I’ve said it before but to have been in politics as long as he has, its mindblowing that he has NO idea how to play the game
honestly, warren could run again and still be younger than everyone in the race :dead:
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,466
Reputation
-34,327
Daps
618,057
Reppin
The Deep State
I mean in the context of 2020. There's a difference between having a seat at the table vs looking in from outside the window. I don't see this as infighting, I'm just trying to see things strategically.
Again, Ralph Nader and Barney Frank were warning people about how poorly he works with others.

Dude is terrible.
 

dora_da_destroyer

Master Baker
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
65,029
Reputation
15,922
Daps
266,222
Reppin
Oakland
ST was a non starter, she at least deserved to compete in her home state. She had tons of donors in some of those states and there was the hope of consolidating some of the woman first Amy support and college educated Pete support. It didn’t work, so NOW, yes, there is a case for her to drop, but the idea that she should’ve done it for ST needs to stop.
If she had dropped out and endorsed Bernie before ST, Bernie would have won more states, thus increasing the chances of a progressive agenda actually being enacted.
 
Top