U.S. Politics | Page 1998 | The Popjustice Forum

U.S. Politics

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Veritaserum, Feb 16, 2016.

  1. I think the tweet @CaliDevotion posted shows that this framing by the media doesn't really edge out as the motivations or appeal some candidates have don't work out how pundits think they do, let alone that many people vote based on aspects of culture than they do any kind of ideology. Bernie is still #1 with Biden voters as a 2nd choice, for example.

    As well, when we look at the actual metrics, these divides don't really work out.

    Bernie won those without college degrees in New Hampshire despite the non-educated being who liberal elites often claim as most likely to be backwoods deplorables. Bernie also was #1 amongst both Democrats and independents. Bernie also performed similarly to Pete & Amy amongst voters who consider themselves "Conservative".

    What is clear is that Bernie's not popular amongst a very specific type of voter - the suburbanite affluent voter. These voters largely are the ones who made-up their mind last minute as they're the ones whose guiding ideology is simply anti-Bernie than pro-anything. These people would have voted for Warren if she was the most viable to block Bernie and the media narrative, I'm sure, would have been "Bernie can't bring together progressives!" as opposed to "Bernie only has progressives".

    A lot of the issue and kind of core conflict here is that the party's establishment at large love these kind of voters and appealing to them. They love building robots like Ossoff, Buttigieg, etc. to appeal to these very voters. The party pretty explicitly said in 2016 that they don't care how many poor black or brown people they lose in Milwaukee or Detroit, because they'll gain 2x white suburbanites in their place. (It actually ended up the opposite - for every one white suburbanite they picked up, 2 voters of color in economically-suffering cities stayed home).
  2. It's been an ugly weekend for Bloomberg after all the skeletons are beginning to come out of the closet. Hopefully this dogs him before the next primaries and Miss Berniece sails on
    BricksAndStrings likes this.
  3. This trainwreck interview christ

    LiK, 3Xs, Mr.Arroz and 12 others like this.
  4. Painful.
  5. fffff the way she looks over at her team for a lifeline. *fringe quiver intensifies*
    3Xs, Mr.Arroz, alanmr and 11 others like this.
  6. Anyone else following this bizarre story about Pete's comms manager running a dummy account pretending to be a Nigerian man?

  7. I hope Nevada gets their shit together before the caucus. Also, perhaps I'm being thick, but how exactly does early voting work in a caucus? An early voter obviously isn't obligated to show up on election day. If they early-voted for a candidate who ends up meeting the first-round viability threshold in their precinct, great. But, if they early-voted for a candidate who did not meet the first-round viability threshold in their precinct, tough shit? Voters on site on election day whose first choice does not meet the viability threshold have the option of staying with their candidate, or changing their vote to one of the other candidates in the second round. So, what happens to those first-round early-votes?

    And, what happens if an early voter shows up at a precinct on election day? Do they get to participate in second-round voting and, if so, how are the precinct volunteers ensuring that their first vote isn't counted twice, especially since NV doesn't require ID when voting?

    Put another way, why the hell do caucuses even exist??
  8. That's not what happens in Nevada. Nevada's rules are different to Iowa's.

    You have to be viable in the first ballot to be part of the 2nd round. If you're not, you're automatically out. There's no realignment to save unviable.

    If the scenario was:
    Bernie - 22%
    Steyer - 19%
    Biden - 14%
    Pete - 13%
    Warren - 8%
    Amy - 5%
    Everyone else's voters should have to choose between Bernie or Steyer or being uncommitted in the next round.

    The early voting ballots require you to put 3 rounds of choices like ranked voting. I imagine someone whose choices were Amy - Pete - Biden would then go into an Uncommitted category if they could not commit to anyone viable.

    The Sanders campaign is telling people to put Sanders - Uncommitted - Uncommitted.

    If the Sanders team can really bring out Latino turnout, there'll hopefully be lots of precincts where Bernie is the only viable candidate on the first round and thus the only candidate who gets delegates.

  9. Thanks! That's helpful!
    nooniebao and Sanctuary like this.

  10. *screams into void*
    michaelhird, nooniebao, 3Xs and 5 others like this.
  11. There's two possibilities:
    1) Pete's comms manager is running a dummy account pretending to be a Nigerian man
    2) A supporter of another candidate is playing 4D chess with twitter trolling

    but one thing I know for sure:
    There is not a Nigerian man in the world who stans Pete's comms manager with such passion. It's impossible. I'm living. Pete can't even get black support in AMERICA, you expect me to believe his comms manager got stans in Nigeria?
    Butterfly and CaliDevotion like this.

  12. lmfao. Get her.

    Jwentz likes this.

  13. omg....it's true. Pete's one black supporter isn't even in America!
  14. Not Hope Hicks returning to the White House as an adviser to Kushner.
  15. This is why Bernie should never have given them an inch and apologized for made up smears and journos being angry that people called out their bad political takes on Twitter.

    He tried something new with the "who knows if these aren't fake accounts/ all campaigns must end their divisive rhetoric" line but it didn't hit like he wanted.

    He needs to say that, yeah, his supporters are angry - his supporters are single moms working minimum wage and service industry workers barely affording rent who haven't seen a dentist in 5 years and that he is not going to stand for the media to smear the working class Americans who make up his base.
    aboutyounow and Mr Blonde like this.
  16. Working single moms and broke industry workers aren’t online harassing other candidates and going to their events and chanting fuck you. Bernie does need to call the crazy people and trolls out and say that they don’t represent his campaign because they don’t and they absolutely have been out of control lately. Saying “oh well ¯\_(ツ)_/¯” is very trumpian and not a good look for any campaign.
  17. I’m sorry but thinking someone disagreeing with you online is a form of harassment is the embodiment of class privilege while people are angrily begging their elected officials to pass policy to save their lives.

    The hypothesis of your post is fundamentally incorrect. There is no unique ~Bernie Bro~ collective of angry digital harassment. This started off as a David Brock smear campaign as detailed in the Clinton campaign’s leaked emails to frame Bernie’s supporters as uniquely white and male to exploit privileged PMC ideas about wokeness. As Bernie became the predominant candidate with support from people of color, the smears went from “racist/sexist harassment” to now just “harassment”. Actively saying toxic and disgusting things about Bernie, his base, and his policies is going to generate a reaction and people should be held accountable for the reactions they elicit. Lying about Medicare For All is going to elicit pushback, even if you’re a rich union boss. Referring to Bernie as cheap and unlikeable is going to elicit a reaction even if you’re a high-powered Democratic donor. Referring to the campaign of a Jewish front runner as brown shirts is going to elicit a reaction even if you’re a well-paid MSNBC host.

    And my god, “Trumpian” is not an adjective nor a real world. The world existed before 2016. Actually say what you mean. I’d argue rich folks like Soledad O’Brien using her massive platform to send targeted harassment to small accounts who reply to her awful policy takes on policy that poor people need is vastly more an abuse of power and platform than someone with 10 followers photoshopping a gun onto a popular Bernie meme.

    Some of the tweets are literally by Warren supporting groups -

    This isn’t an actual “thing” and it’s come down to this because it turns out that big old scary book of oppo that allegedly existed never actually had anything in it to begin with.

    Forgive me if I don’t buy that emojis are a form of violence from the man who used the NYPD as a modern gestapo to destroy Muslim Americans’ lives.
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2020
    R92, alanmr, aboutyounow and 9 others like this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.