this is the correct perspective.

facts. America is controlled largely by lobbies and corporate interests that people are lucky to get a trickle down from. that's a fact, that's where we start from. now what do we do about it?

Option 1:
-list of demands that will cause the corporations to lose massive amounts of money and be held accountable to stock holders who can literally fire them
-universal healthcare NOW, if u like ur insurance too fucking bad. if u work in insurance, call coal country for tips on how to not have a job.
-we're going to take (insert here) down. racists, corporations, billionaires, the military industrial complex, lobbies, anyone who doesn't like it.

Option 2:
-we will work if we can on what we can get done and not lie to you about what were going to pass
-work towards universal health care
-we're going to try and combat (insert here) when and where we can.


its a choice between dreams and results. Bernie voters are people who call a sex hotline and know theres a 300 lb chick on the other end of the line but still convince themselves she's a 10/10. when you whittle them down in what they truly expect the congress to approve they're left with "at least he's not trump". neither is biden, neither is Bloomberg.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Mar 3 2020 07:19pm

I see your point, and your logic seems sound at face value. But this is not how things work in a two-party system. At least not one that's still functional and has still has some persuadable swing voters in the middle.

In such a system, nominating the more ideologically pure or extreme candidate will usually reduce the chance of your side's candidate winning, and thus increase the chance of the candidate from the other side winning, someone who's ideology and policies are diametrically opposed to your own.
An illustrative example: say you're a progressive voter, and a Bernie presidency would be a B+ for you (because he wont get all his policies through Congress), a Biden presidency a D, and another Trump term an F------. If you assume that Bernie's chances against Trump are 20:80 while Biden would have a 50:50 chance, then going for Biden over Bernie in the primary CAN be the rational choice although you like Bernie more.


Now, of course this argument falls apart if there is hyperpartisanship and no more persuadable swing voters at all, so that races are exclusively determined by turnout. In that case, nominating the candidate which excites your base the most would be the rational choice. But given the number of Obama-Trump and Romney-Clinton voters we saw in 2016, and how many districts and Senate seats were flipped in 2018, I dont think that we're at this point just yet.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Mar 3 2020 07:23pm

Basically, we're reliving the discussions about incrementalism vs big sweeping change and about turnout vs persuasion that have been consuming the Democratic party ever since 2016, and to which it still hasnt found a conclusive answer.
And by the looks of it, the Democrats are still relatively evenly split between these two camps. Either way, the outcome of the 2020 election will finally provide this conclusive answer.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Mar 3 2020 07:29pm

you are aware that this completely contradicts the gist of the post you quoted there and characterised as 'correct', right?

ice mage is suggesting that the lobbyists' control of america is somehow a far-fetched conspiracy theory.

also, concerning your (obviously false) dichotomy: for option 2 to happen, wouldn't the basic requirement be that the candidate that makes that happen is NOT beholden to said "control of lobbies and corporate interests" that determine american policies?


biden voters are people who keep sending money to nigerian princes, and still expecting to see any of it back, probably even profit.
bernie voters are people who want to show america that even if the ruling caste of politicians might prevent his ideas from being fully implemented, the desire is there, and people are sick of being promised little, and receiving nothing. they are showing that meaningful change actually has political support.

speaks for itself how you choose to frame it.

stfu foreign voyeur

How can you say that? Biden has had his hand in some of the most monumental legislation since LBJ...

Looks like Warren might come in 3rd in her home state.

Why hasn't she dropped out yet? I saw a clearer path (albeit a small one) for both Buttigieg and Klobuchar over Warren.

She is doing her duty. Politics is about finding common ground, building bridges, and forming coalitions. If that doesn't interest you, activism/lobbying is a more appropriate career. At the end of the day, Warren knows how to govern and she's being a team player.

weren't you cheering for klob and butt for doing the exact opposite, or was that some other establishment shill?

Texas is doing some hella good voter suppression tonight, sum good drama.