My gut is saying there'll be people with egg on their faces one way or another this cycle.
Official Bernie Sanders HQ: Not Me, Us!
- Thread starter Berniewood Hogan
- Start date
My gut is saying there'll be people with egg on their faces one way or another this cycle.
storyteller
Veteran
It's not Obama's fault Bernie couldn't win the nomination over a Hillary just as he did in 08.
Obama hasn't endorsed a candidate.
Your argument hinges on the false assumption that Obama views increasing taxes on the wealthy and providing Healthcare for everyone as tearing down the system.
Posting fox news spin just shows your desperate.
Based on polling this statement is absolutely correct.
Edit: imagine thinking that's not a shot at the GOP
Fam, everybody read those comments as rebukes of not just Bernie but your girl Warren too. Here are a couple of examples...
Obama indirectly rebukes Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren by warning donors not to be ‘deluded’ into thinking voters want radical change
Here's one of the summary points:
"The comments were an indirect rebuke of Sen. Bernie Sanders' call for a "political revolution" and Sen. Elizabeth Warren's campaign for "big, structural change."
Obama finally weighs in on 2020: Democrats shouldn’t move too far to the left
Y'all reaching.
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
If you got another name or names that make more sense please enlighten us.Y'all reaching.
Y'all reaching.
If Bernie starts to surge and let's say he wins every early state minus SC but wins a strong 2nd there and then does well on Super Tuesday providing a path to the majority of pledged delegates...
Wouldn't there be a freak out?
Obama said a lot of Democrats don't want to tear down the system.
Let's try to focus here. We're talking about whether Obama is willing to interrupt the primary and put his finger on the scale not whatever alarmist nonsense you're kicking with that civil war BS. Save the soapbox for someplace else.
Also, the way you cherry picked that one quote is pretty weak given it came from a paragraph that ends stating the exact opposite of what your starting point claim was.
I then said, he's right people aren't actively trying to tear down the system.
If people aren't taking to the streets in protest then they really aren't trying to tear down the system.
They're just participating in the natural ebb and flow of democracy.
If Obama wanted to tip the scale he'd just endorse a primary candidate. The fact is he didn't in 2016 and he hasn't going into 2020.
If your position is so flimsy that Obama pointing out the obvious tips the scales you didn't have a strong position in the first place.
I'm a Warren supporter, but I'm not naive enough to be smug about her chances or Bernie's chances of winning the nomination and that's just based solely on recent election results and current polling.
There's a reason why Biden has been the front runner since he announced, Mayor Pete has seen a surge, and the majority of gains have been moderates.
But I'll let y'all get back to your circle jerk.
Why would there be a freak out? I was told he's the most popular politician in America and people all hate the establishment and moderates.
Yall play these hypothetical games, but I've been consistent that primary elections reflect the will of active voters and the direction the electorate chose to go. It was the same for Trump and the same for Hillary.
That said, you don't even believe your hypothetical because you have said repeatedly no one is gaining 51% going into the convention.
Y'all just like to play the victim. It's disgusting.If you got another name or names that make more sense please enlighten us.
storyteller
Veteran
This is just being pedantic. The idea is systemic change not tear it to pieces. That's why M4A takes a successful aspect of the system "Medicare" and expands that part. It's reformation. You're upset about semantics, grow up.
If your position is "he's not taking shots" and journalists from center to the left all acknowledge that what he said was a shot not just at Bernie, but at the candidate you support. Maybe everyone in this thread, the Warren fans at VOX and the writers at Business Insider aren't the ones with a flimsy position. Those groups aren't even of the same frame of mind.
Fam, the only one being smug is you with this position that everyone else is misinterpreting Obama's shot, but also Obama was right and everyone's wrong, but it wasn't a shot.
There's a reason why Biden has been the front runner since he announced, Mayor Pete has seen a surge, and the majority of gains have been moderates.
But I'll let y'all get back to your circle jerk.
Again, no one is saying that Bernie or Warren are defacto winners. The article even says as much as that Obama isn't taking Bernie's chances seriously. We're upset at Obama's rhetoric specifically because it helps out Biden and Pete with their mischaracterizations of Bernie AND Warren. If you don't understand even that basic bit, then definitely take the soapbox somewhere else.
AnonymityX1000
Veteran
Still no answer?
You're just easily disgusted. Increase your tolerance we not even at a primary yet. Shyt is gonna get downright filthy.
I'm not the one playing semantics, that's you. Expanding an existing system to cover more people isn't tearing down the system.
It's pretty much been accepted that M4A likely won't happen. The political math doesn't support it and more than likely any sweeping change we see to increase healthcare will be, as you put it, incremental.
The articles themselves are attempting to ascertain if Obama is taking a shot at someone. They're literally a bunch of people trying to figure out what Obama's actual position is.
With regard to Warren, the quote you gave referenced a position from 2015. It's accurate, if people went with Warren in 2016 it would have been a repudiation of his economic theory during the recession.
I'm sure Obama is mature enough to handle and accept the criticism of his approaches. He's been fairly quiet since he left office despite people wanting him to jump into the fray.
Again, Obama in entitled to have his opinions, but if him merely opining these thoughts will shift the field then the initial premise itself fails.
Your position is:
- People are gravitating towards Sanders and Warren as a repudiation of Obama's policies
- Then Obama speaks out against them
- Now people are following Obama again????
Do you not see how illogical that is?
Like I said, this is a reach. The same articles y'all are quoting specifically says he thinks Joe Biden is washed.
The only way your theory works is by disregarding your fundamental premise that people are drawn to leftist candidates because they were unhappy with Obama and his policies.
Otherwise, you're saying the election is nothing more than a cult of personality.
New Jeruzalem Journalist
Superstar
Breh, c'mon. The past couple of posters have done a pretty good job contrasting your defenses of Obama against what he ACTUALLY said, but why would he need to throw veiled shots at the GOP instead of directly calling them out? He was clearly taking shots at Warren and Bernie.
Definitely
There are all these reports about big donors freaking out about warren but bernie would be comparatively worse for their interests
He's speaking broad. The main critique was that the issue isn't that people have proposed something radical enough.If you got another name or names that make more sense please enlighten us.
With that said, Castro - - decriminalization at the border.
AOC - - the push for abolishing ICE.
Yang - - UBI
Beto - - gun buyback
Warren - - breaking up Facebook and Amazon
Williamson - - reparations
Sanders - - Abolishing the electoral college
Multiple candidates - - Supreme Court packing
Tulsi - -
It clearly was critique of a presumed race to the left. The idea that people have to go further and further left on every issue in order to win.
Breh, c'mon. The past couple of posters have done a pretty good job contrasting your defenses of Obama against what he ACTUALLY said, but why would he need to throw veiled shots at the GOP instead of directly calling them out? He was clearly taking shots at Warren and Bernie.
It's not unique to either candidate nor is it unique to just presidential candidates.
And the truth is, he's right.
People can stomach M4A and increased taxes on the wealthy. People want to legalize weed and student loan relief.
But people really aren't clamoring for banning guns, abolishing ICE, reparations, or even barring private insurance.
Last edited: