If you frame it truthfully, yes. I would be 100% comfortable saying that to a civil rights figure.
Oh yeah Iāll talk mad shit to corpses, theyāre pussies and just lie there, donāt even backsass. Complete walkovers.
3 Likes
lol, here we go again with you. No, youāre pushing the argument elsewhere, again.
You made the explicit argument that Bernie voters will do the right thing and vote for the nominee. You then said, but Iām not voting for Biden if heās the nominee. Then, you said that your vote doesnāt matter. Then we went to the whole thing about not voting. And this is why Iām out of this conversation. Itās dumb, because Bidenās not going to be the nominee and you can obviously do whatever the f*** you want. But donāt act like you have some sort of high ground when you do that.
This.
Hey, congrats, your candidatesā disingenuous attack is already setting back the push for Medicare for All. A huge success for GOPete!
But, hey, he went from 10 to 12% on PredictIt, so pop some bottles, am I right?
4 Likes
I made the explicit argument that they will do so at similar (or higher, in the case of ā08 Hillary voters) rates as voters who support other candidates. You misstated my argument literally like 5 posts ago and I corrected you. At this point you are lying.
Just so you know, every time I say LOLnunnehi, Iām simply using my right to free speech because people died for it.
5 Likes
Who died and made you arbiter of the high ground?
1 Like
āTheyā as in āyouā, got it. My mistake, whateverā¦not.
He might not be lying. He could have Trump-level reading comprehension.
Itās almost like you donāt pay attention to what this guy does.
A guy says something is not correct. He then comes in and says ābut akshullyā. He is then one of the exact types of people heās arguing arenāt substantial.
I mean, remember how this started. I didnāt go in picking at his argument because it doesnāt matter. All I said to him after he posted that was, āBut didnāt you say you wouldnāt vote for Biden if heās the nominee?ā. We know he is a Sanders supporter. And we end up here with him, like we always do. Donāt try to put this on me. Iām just sticking with what I asked and he pulls me into this stuff that Iām not even remotely interesting in discussing.
You asked if I was voting for Biden and I said no and explained why. The rest of the thread from that point on is a detail that was entirely your doing, and where literally nobody has agreed with you. This happens in every thread, every day.
For some people, the goal is defeating Trump and the desire is for the candidate who maximizes the probability of that. For other people, the goal is structural change The perceived difference between Trump and a very establishment Democratic candidate is not that huge for some people with that goal.
I am committed to the idea of a candidate who plans to fight the systemic corporate and political corruption and I am very willing to harm the electability of Democrats who donāt tick that box in order to make my preferred candidates more appealing to those who care about electability.
I want a candidate who banks and insurance companies are going to go all-out to oppose because they are afraid. I understand if some people want to appease banks and insurance companies because they only care about getting rid of Trump, but donāt expect everyone else to agree with that.
1 Like
Aww I has a sad being disagreed with by people I will never agree with on most things. Welcome to the internet.
Here is GOPete doing the same thing on immigration:
As Iāve gotten older, Iāve learned that āmoderateā just means a craven person who will say whatever it takes to get elected. Both Clintons, Biden and GOPete are great examples.
My guess is GOPete saw the āmoderateā lane blocked by Biden when the campaign started so he pretended to be āprogressive,ā now he sees Biden stumbling hard and Warren/Sanders dominating the āprogressiveā lane so he is switching to āmoderate.ā
Brilliant thinking by the strategists he buys with the money health insurance companies funnel to him. Canāt deny the logic of it.
14 Likes
There isnāt a single Biden leaning primary voter on this site (maybe jman, I donāt know for sure), and we spend pages and page and pages of words talking about how we canāt vote for Biden this, canāt vote for Biden that, what happens if this, what happens that? The default assumption Iām guessing of 90 percent of people on this site is that Biden will not be the nominee. Everyone in that 90 percent knows why he wonāt be the nominee. So we sit around here talking all day about Biden this Biden that. Why?
What I said the other day was practically a prophecy about why Medicare shouldnāt be talked about at the debate in detail. Find a message, tell them all to stick to it, beat Trump. Every single plan will be better than Trump being elected. Push your crappy plan all you want, but donāt attack other plans and certainly not with bullshit like ābut how are you going to pay for it?ā.
Iām GLAD Warren is doing it. Because candidates should hone their policies as they go. Sheās going to have to separate herself from Bernie on this eventually, so now sheās doing it. I think it will make her a better candidate. Iām not entirely sure that she had even planned to have health care be one of her big things (as opposed to some of the other, more detailed policies she has), and now that it is, sheās being forced to refine and sharpen her policy.
If youāre saying that all candidates should have their policies set in stone from day one, then fine, youāre going to be very dissatisfied with anyone except Bernie, I guess? since they all have advisers and strategists and pollsters, etc, and their messages get refined and changed over the course of the campaign.
Also, while Iām following the betting thread, I donāt have any money on predictit, sorry to disappoint you. Itās an interesting mental exercise but not something i have the energy and time to follow closely enough to make it profitable.
Pete hasnāt even released an immigration policy yet, soā¦ok?
1 Like
I love you as a poster, and I like Pete, and I even think I know what youāre going for here, but itās just a no.
Healthcare is healthcare. She shoulda been ready.
Sheās not honing her policy because itās not good enough, sheās honing it because sheās falling victim to disingenuous attacks from Pete and others. That sheās getting hit with āBut how will you pay for it?ā from a supposed progressive is ridiculous. This is also moving the partyās position on healthcare farther to the right before we even get to the general.
Weāre well on the way to doing some patchwork on the ACA and calling it four years, so congrats to Peteās healthcare donors on that front (and Bidens, Bookerās, Kamalaās, Klobucharās, etc).
4 Likes
āHoning policyā is a generality. Weāre saying that this specific honing is bad, because it cedes unfounded points and gives up territory needlessly. I also donāt understand why Warren āneeds to separate herselfā from Sanders on healthcare. If Sanders has the best plan, she can just steal his idea. What matters is the policy, not who implements it.
1 Like
I think you can say that after her final policy comes out. If it doesnāt change, then Pete didnāt influence it at all.
I know she has white papers on a lot of things, but i havenāt seen one on health care/M4A. I went through her medium page and her website, this is what I could find. Not many details.
yes, yes, sheāll fight and sheās for M4A, but there are no details. I like numbers, I like math, usually Liz does too, so why not here? Also, if itās Bernieās billā¦just say that.