I understand and sympathize with the level of cognitive dissonance it’s going to cause when you finally come to your senses. I sincerely wish I’d never been there. My condolences, really.
This is just a shitty juvenile personal attack.
5 Likes
No it’s not. It’s genuine. I’ve absolutely been there and it sucks. This may not be the straw that breaks the camels back for her, but that’s coming because it’s his character. He’s going to keep doing stuff that sucks. She can follow him down and lose her own integrity if she wants, but that’s not a good experience either.
I’m sorry but she’s straw manning my very reasonable position on her favorite candidate, which is that he’ll happily betray any of his so called ideals for a tiny chance at personal advancement (and I do mean tiny). She’s doing that because there’s no really good defense of Pete’s line here, which means she’s already experiencing the cognitive dissonance. But that doesn’t change that that’s what he’s done. He’ll give up other ideals along the road. Nobody ever does something like this just once.
The reason why I’m so venomous about it is that, again, I expected way better from him. I’m disappointed and I feel betrayed. I didn’t see it coming. I expected it from Biden, Klobuchar, or really any of the older pols in the race who sold out a long time ago. I didn’t expect it from Pete… because I thought he wasn’t that kind of person. Turns out he is and that sucks.
I like skydiver and I hope I’m wrong and Pete magically rediscovers his character… but at this point he’d pretty much have to apologize publicly and drop out. That’s how serious his attack line on single payer is. He has a lot of credibility, which means that what he’s done is super super serious.
Sorry to report bro, that’s really him. A cursory research on his home town could lead you to this conclusion.
thanks. it’s ok.
See, his next post is particularly funny to me, because trust me, I have followed his campaign since February, and he’s been saying the same things. Shit, he’s been saying the same things since he was at Harvard. The thing is, I pay attention and read every single plan, every source, every footnote, every interview, I watch every town hall and speech. You may think that’s lame, but I take my role as a grassroots leader very seriusly, so when people come to me for facts with open minds, I know exactly where to go for answers.
What I don’t do is get my news from biased tweets and pundits with agendas. So I understand that being for “medicare for all” as an end game is IN HIS PLAN IN WORDS TYPED ON THE PAGE. One can be against Bernie’s plan and still be for “medicare for all” because only in the past 8 months or so has that term morphed into meaning “Bernie’s plan or nothing, rah rah rah!”
You can keep your fake concern because I’ll be fine. I hope you guys don’t feel betrayed when Warren comes back from re-evaluating the costs of her plan and comes up with something more moderate or longer term than Bernie’s, especially if she gets the nomination.
You also might notice that I don’t give the other candidates derogatory nicknames, call them pieces of shit or whatnot, like everyone else here seems to do. I do dunk on Biden and Tulsi a bit, I admit, and sometimes get frustrated with Yang for some of the more naive things he does, but I never call them disgusting names.
Now, I’m not going to be on here as much in the next few weeks, not because anyone’s driven me off, but because I’m heading to Iowa in 2 weeks and I have a shit ton of stuff to prepare for that, then 2 weeks after that is the CA Dems fall convention, which we also have a ton of shit to prepare for. So while y’all sit here, I’ll be out doing work. Maybe if you guys love your candidates so much, you’ll stop with the shitty personal mudslinging and prop them up instead…or better yet, go out and volunteer.
8 Likes
You’re starting to vex me Unstuck. I think paradoxically, or maybe quite predictably, the absence of people to dunk on who really deserve it is causing some of you to pick on increasingly friendlier targets. First it was Vice President Sleepy. Understandable, but consider that all the man wants to do is tell you guys what the fact of the matter is and then take a nap. Is that so bad? Now it’s Judas Pete, the Great Betrayer, favors a healthcare plan that’s never going to happen over another health care plan that’s never going to happen, polling at 5.8% on top of it. Who is next, Bernie, he who calls costs taxes?? Heretic. Schismatic wretch, burn him, burn him! Scents and echoes of ritualistic sacrifice itt
May I reference maybe the Devil Himself?
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1184931309124231168
Be a bit more cordial to someone who agrees with you on mostly everything is a thought I have.
6 Likes
I appreciate your effort in putting in the real work.
Will you help the nominee during the general?
Of course. Though I’ll admit, no matter who is the nominee, my ground game time is probably better spent for Ammar Campa-Najjar here than the presidential candidate in the general. In my district, Trump will win, but he ain’t winning CA. So I’ll probably spend the majority of my time working to flip the 50th.
7 Likes
Skydiver8,
Are you counting Boredsocial as a BernieBro?
No? I don’t think he is, but I didn’t imply it anywhere. On health care, Warren’s plan is basically Bernie’s plan, unless she came out with her own separate one in the last day (I was out all day today, so it could be possible).
That is a thing. I continued to post on 2p2 for this, though very recently I’ve basically stopped berating people there.
The plan is single payer healthcare and saving a trillion dollars per year on healthcare spending in this country while simultaneously providing coverage to everyone. Pete asked how we are going to pay for a plan that saves the American public a trillion dollars per year. I don’t care about your arguments that amount to pointing out that this one time Pete actually said X and you weren’t there to hear it so clearly you are wrong on everything related to Pete.
I care about the fact that we all heard Pete ask how we’re going to pay for a plan that saves the American public a trillion dollars per year. This is a line only used by Republicans, politicians bought by the for profit healthcare lobby, or people in the general public who have never studied the issue and are parroting Republicans or politicians bought by the for profit healthcare lobby. It’s completely disqualifying to use this line of attack. And quite frankly it’s upsetting to see anyone attempt to defend his use of this line of attack.
7 Likes
Why is being pragmatic a republican thing? Or is there some magical 30 trillion dollar money tree that will somehow materialize after we win our political revolution?
I can’t help but notice people were fine with Pete while he remained a cute little gay guy in the corner. I mean, this is the bullshit the media puts out (this is a screenshot because this tweet doesn’t deserve clicks). and lest you think that’s just some copy editor’s take, don’t worry, the same cringeworthy veiled homophobic line is in the text of the article, too.
Ryan Cooper is a Bernie/Warren supporter who’s entire live-tweet of the debate was a thread of “shut the fuck up Pete” So you can see why I’m over disingenuous attacks from “left wing” media that just get parroted here. Y’all are fairly transparent and I can pretty much pinpoint where you get your “news” based on the attacks.
I fail to see what is so wrong in what Tulsi said in the exchange that Kre8tive posted. In fact if I was American her anti regime change stance is something I could get behind.
1 Like
They believe it will cost more and consider it pragmatism. They have no evidence and to say it will definitely cost less is somewhat speculation too. The thing is the entire system is totally fucked and this is exactly the time to roll the dice. People die every day and its very very unlikely that things will be worse.
The larger issue is that this ‘wing’ of the party wholly believe in incrementalism. This approach seems to have failed us historically so we should make them own that history.
I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again. “How will you pay for it?” is a good question. M4A reduces overall costs but increases federal spending on healthcare by a factor of 3 iirc, something like two trillion per year. It is quite normal to ask where the single payer gets the extra money from, and of course that question has to be answered before it can become law.
It is weird that Warren has plans for everything but not this. It is weird and uncomfortable to watch her dodge the question over and over again. It makes her seem like a politician in the bad sense of the word. Bernie at least just says it. It is insulting to your potential voters or betrays a lack of confidence or perhaps disingenuousness to act as though people can’t possibly understand how they would still be better off even though their taxes might rise a bit. You have a pretty shitty status quo to contrast with; it’s not that hard to make the fucking case.
4 Likes
And once you make the plan, you can relieve people’s uncertainty by saying things like “under my plan, if you make under 40k your taxes don’t go up and your healthcare costs go to 0, if you make between 40 and 80k your taxes go up 1k per year on average, but you save 1.5k in costs,” or w/e. Telling people “we save so much money as a share of GDP” is a shitty abstract argument that means nothing to most people.
2 Likes
My other question is this: if a candidate doesn’t have a good articulate defense against these supposed “ republican talking points” now, what do you think they’re gonna be hit with in the general?
2 Likes
And tbh, I think DGAF Warren, before she became the front runner, would have answered exactly like Bernie. There’s actually no good reason not to. Is the only reason on offer still because it will give the GOP a tv sound bite about her wanting to raise taxes? Raising taxes is what Biden is going to do, Warren is going to confiscate and redistribute every last dollar in your retirement account to provide health insurance to illegal immigrants and MS-13 members; this sound bite would be a drop in the ocean.
And if you go Cloud Atlas on me and say “but what is an ocean, but a collection of drops” you’ll have a shank in your liver.
2 Likes
Ugh. Honestly, like a number of other people have stated, I like you and admire your passion and actually putting in work. But you do a little too much of this crap. Saying people liked him as “a cute little gay guy” is offensive to the thoughtful posters here, and frankly seems like little more than a cheap tactic to put interlocutors on the defensive.
Generally speaking, Pete had a bunch of support for a long time on this site–far more than his polling numbers would seem to suggest. The change from support to opposition was not because he “actually [dared] to get uppity.”
IIRC, his position on a public option has not changed much from when everyone generally like him, so why wasn’t his pragmatism called “uppity” before? It has been said scores of times by dozens of posters that the souring was because of how he started talking about M4A. Not his position, but his framing. His change seems aimed pretty much only at one person, and only once they became a front-runner. That seems cynical and self-serving, not pragmatic.
I’ve previously posted that I’m not writing Pete off. So how about give people like me some credit and answer our concerns. Don’t imply that I’m a bigot, or celebrate that I haven’t yet sent you any dick pics… pretend you’re canvassing for Pete and you knocked on my door and I said I was not happy with the way his objections to M4A seem cynical and politically motivated to attack the front-runner, and that’s harmful to the larger cause. What would you say to me?
8 Likes