YESS!!!Sanders on how big Jeremy Corbyn's win will be. If Sanders is nominated, it would be deja vue all over again. — Wayfarer
:razz:Drawing parallels between anti-establishment anger at both ends of the political spectrum in Britain and the US, the former candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination also applauded Jeremy Corbyn’s efforts to reshape the Labour party.
“What has impressed me – and there is a real similarity between what he has done and what I did – is he has taken on the establishment of the Labour party, he has gone to the grassroots and he has tried to transform that party … and that is exactly what I am trying to do,” said Sanders.
“I am also impressed by his willingness to talk about class issues,” he added
So can a woman beat Donald Trump? Look at the men on this stage. Collectively they have lost 10 elections. The only people on this stage who have won every single election they've been in are the women, [Sen.] Amy [Klobuchar] and me. — Sen. Elizabeth Warren
Her alleged abusiveness isn't disqualifying. It's apparently contributed to her problem keeping staff, but if she were President, it probably wouldn't have THAT result - there's prestige and power associated with serving a President, so I think most people would just buck up under the petty complaints she might make. A positive spin on her behavior is that she is singularly focused on getting the work done, and doesn't waste energy fretting about the feelings of her staff.Beyond the incoherency of a dual endorsement, what's absurd about the NYT endorsing Klobuchar is that less than a year ago the Times published a story about how she is physically and mentally abusive to members of her staff and that she has the highest staff turnover rates in the Senate. — Maw
Tulsi. You see what a dreamer I am — fishfry
The pro-Bernie/Warren folks suggest they'll energize the base and bring more people out. IMO, this will result in them winning Blue states by a bigger margin than Hillary did in 2016 (which doesn't garner any more electoral votes), but it raises the risk of losing the swing states. — Relativist
I may even sit out the General due to another fact, viz. if voting really made a difference, they would make it illegal. — Noah Te Stroete
I don't think we do have the numbers in the swing states, and it's probable Republicans will be fired up if a "socialist" runs. I know Bernie supporters are enthusiastic, but not all Democrats are enthusiastic Bernie supporters. My wife can't stand him, although she'd vote for chicken poop over Trump.I think this misses an important point: we already have the numbers in this country. All we need is to get the vote out. We need organization and enthusiasm. I don't buy the fact that Obama won because he was moderate -- it's because people turned out for him, they were excited about his candidacy (foolishly, in my view, but that's irrelevant). — Xtrix
Don't be ridiculous. They're trying to make it as hard as possible to vote in some states. Republicans are doing all they can to suppress the votes and gerrymander because they see the trends.
I used to think as you do, and not vote. I hated all the propaganda trying like "Vote or Die" and the like. But I was wrong. Especially in swing states, you most certainly should vote. It's not the only thing that matters -- we can do much more than voting -- but in a country as powerful as ours, it matters and should be the minimum. — Xtrix
I don't think we do have the numbers in the swing states, and it's probable Republicans will be fired up if a "socialist" runs. — Relativist
Will anything change for me personally? No. — Noah Te Stroete
I think the point of the NYT's dual endorsement is
(a) the Democratic Party establishment - the DNC, Slick & Shillary, "O'Biden", Senator "Wall Street" Schumer + donors, etc (which also includes much of the NYT editorial board) - oppose Sanders again ... no surprise;
(b) to (demand? i.e. plant the flag) that the country vote (again) for a woman for president, which is especially timely with the tRUMP era ascendency of so many women politicians, anti-GOP/tRUMP mobilization of suburban woman, the master-class, political bravura of Speaker Pelosi, the #me too movement, and recent ratification of the ERA in Virginia;
(c) and to propose a "balanced" Northeast-Midwest ticket before the primaries (NB: I like the chances of Klobuchar & Warren coming out of the Iowa Caucus on top) that's strong enough, smart enough & ideologically broad enough to steamroll over tRUMP in the fall.
IMHO, not "incoherent" at all — 180 Proof
I think we are pro-capitalism. The New York Times is in favor of capitalism because it has been the greatest engine of, it’s been the greatest anti-poverty program and engine of progress that we’ve seen.
Her alleged abusiveness isn't disqualifying. It's apparently contributed to her problem keeping staff, but if she were President, it probably wouldn't have THAT result - there's prestige and power associated with serving a President, so I think most people would just buck up under the petty complaints she might make. A positive spin on her behavior is that she is singularly focused on getting the work done, and doesn't waste energy fretting about the feelings of her staff. — Relativist
The Trump team should also like this.I'm much more interested in the fact that several young politicians (of color) who will take up the mantel of Left politics in America, such as Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar endorsed Bernie, as did Pramila Jayapal (et. al.) I'm much more interested that Labor Organizations such as National Nurses United (representing 150K nurses), or the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America (representing 36K blue collar workers) and others, endorsed Bernie. — Maw
A trump is a playing card which is elevated above its usual rank in trick-taking games. Typically, an entire suit is nominated as a trump suit; these cards then outrank all cards of plain (non-trump) suits. In other contexts, the terms trump card or to trump can refer to any sort of action, authority, or policy which automatically prevails over all others. — Wikipedia
Swing voters (both independents and never-Trumper Republicans) who don't like Trump won't vote for him, but if they also don't like the Democratic candidate - they'll stay home. My top priority is to oust Trump, and that priority is best served by picking the Democrat I feel has the best chance to win - and that entails being palatable to swing voters.They're fired up anyway. There is no ideal candidate. The Trump people will vote Trump. The swing voters, if there are any, greatly dislike this president. After four years, I think they've given him "a chance" and will now vote blue, regardless of the candidate -- like your wife. — Xtrix
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.