The Democratic Presidential Debates

brianlux

mrussel1 said:

pjl44 said:

rgambs said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

The Juggler said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

Some descriptions/comments I've seen recently

An interesting tactic to take no responsibility for things one types.

The word you're looking for is "liar" if you'd like to go ahead and say it. 

My opinion is that you are posting things like this to elicit responses - specifically to try and anger people who you believe oppose your views.  The response I have is to laugh & to find the humor in idiotic statements like this -

 "I fucking despise Pete Buttigieg, and the insufferable whiteness of the secure cis gays who support him.".

Am I allowed to have an opinion?

It's a discussion board: the goal of most posts is to elicit responses.

And, no, I'm not trying to anger people. I'm responding to the numerous people on this thread (and others) who literally can't imagine that such people exist (see the entire "QueersagainstPete" exchange).

All of the people I quoted above plan to vote in the general election (I'm not sure if they plan to participate in their respective Democratic primaries/caucuses), yet this board seems to think that the only votes to be gained or lost are the moderates. I think it's worthwhile to point out that's not the case. People her keep talking around the concept of "electability" (i.e. who can beat Trump), but many of you seem to imagine that all voters are like you or to your right. 

You're quoting a few of your friends here and, I guess, somehow extrapolating those few opinions towards millions of voters. 

When you have the chance, could you get back to us with your Aunt's neighbor's son's opinion on Joe Biden please? Thank you. 

I'm not extrapolating anything. I'm challenging the notion that courting the middle is desirable. 

So ask your friends. If Pete gets the nomination, will they vote trump? Stay home? Or vote democrat.

K. I’ll get back to you. 

I look forward to hearing what they say.

2nd response. Queer black man in his 30s. Says he doesn't think he could bring himself to vote for Buttigieg or Klobuchar, citing specifically their anti-black policies/actions. 

That just makes me shake my head.  You know your choice is _____ or Trump and you can't bring yourself to vote for _____?

People are worn out on The Lesser Evil. They'll stay home. They need a reason to vote *for* someone.

They stayed home in 16, didn't in 08 and 12. Look at what staying home has wrought compared to the Obama years.

Weird how the interest ebbs and flows.  America is a strange tide.  But lately, not many great waves.

ecdanc

benjs said:

ecdanc said:

rgambs said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

The Juggler said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

Some descriptions/comments I've seen recently

An interesting tactic to take no responsibility for things one types.

The word you're looking for is "liar" if you'd like to go ahead and say it. 

My opinion is that you are posting things like this to elicit responses - specifically to try and anger people who you believe oppose your views.  The response I have is to laugh & to find the humor in idiotic statements like this -

 "I fucking despise Pete Buttigieg, and the insufferable whiteness of the secure cis gays who support him.".

Am I allowed to have an opinion?

It's a discussion board: the goal of most posts is to elicit responses.

And, no, I'm not trying to anger people. I'm responding to the numerous people on this thread (and others) who literally can't imagine that such people exist (see the entire "QueersagainstPete" exchange).

All of the people I quoted above plan to vote in the general election (I'm not sure if they plan to participate in their respective Democratic primaries/caucuses), yet this board seems to think that the only votes to be gained or lost are the moderates. I think it's worthwhile to point out that's not the case. People her keep talking around the concept of "electability" (i.e. who can beat Trump), but many of you seem to imagine that all voters are like you or to your right. 

You're quoting a few of your friends here and, I guess, somehow extrapolating those few opinions towards millions of voters. 

When you have the chance, could you get back to us with your Aunt's neighbor's son's opinion on Joe Biden please? Thank you. 

I'm not extrapolating anything. I'm challenging the notion that courting the middle is desirable. 

So ask your friends. If Pete gets the nomination, will they vote trump? Stay home? Or vote democrat.

K. I’ll get back to you. 

I look forward to hearing what they say.

2nd response. Queer black man in his 30s. Says he doesn't think he could bring himself to vote for Buttigieg or Klobuchar, citing specifically their anti-black policies/actions. 

That just makes me shake my head.  You know your choice is _____ or Trump and you can't bring yourself to vote for _____?

That’s not the only choice. 

Wouldn't that depend on what your goal is? If your goal is to prevent a Trump victory, you have two ways to influence the election in a meaningful way - don't give your vote to him, and do give your vote to the candidate likeliest to beat him (which will be the nominee from the DNC). If you choose not to give your vote to him, you have done 50% of what you can do in total to help him lose. The other 50% is tied in with voting for the Democrat contender.

Politics are not coextensive with elections. 

ecdanc

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

The Juggler said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

Some descriptions/comments I've seen recently

An interesting tactic to take no responsibility for things one types.

The word you're looking for is "liar" if you'd like to go ahead and say it. 

My opinion is that you are posting things like this to elicit responses - specifically to try and anger people who you believe oppose your views.  The response I have is to laugh & to find the humor in idiotic statements like this -

 "I fucking despise Pete Buttigieg, and the insufferable whiteness of the secure cis gays who support him.".

Am I allowed to have an opinion?

It's a discussion board: the goal of most posts is to elicit responses.

And, no, I'm not trying to anger people. I'm responding to the numerous people on this thread (and others) who literally can't imagine that such people exist (see the entire "QueersagainstPete" exchange).

All of the people I quoted above plan to vote in the general election (I'm not sure if they plan to participate in their respective Democratic primaries/caucuses), yet this board seems to think that the only votes to be gained or lost are the moderates. I think it's worthwhile to point out that's not the case. People her keep talking around the concept of "electability" (i.e. who can beat Trump), but many of you seem to imagine that all voters are like you or to your right. 

You're quoting a few of your friends here and, I guess, somehow extrapolating those few opinions towards millions of voters. 

When you have the chance, could you get back to us with your Aunt's neighbor's son's opinion on Joe Biden please? Thank you. 

I'm not extrapolating anything. I'm challenging the notion that courting the middle is desirable. 

So ask your friends. If Pete gets the nomination, will they vote trump? Stay home? Or vote democrat.

K. I’ll get back to you. 

I look forward to hearing what they say.

2nd response. Queer black man in his 30s. Says he doesn't think he could bring himself to vote for Buttigieg or Klobuchar, citing specifically their anti-black policies/actions. 

Interesting. Cause I know I have some built in benefits so a 2nd trump term likely won’t effect me personally a whole lot. But I would think it would effect a queer black man pretty directly. So I would have assumed (apparently wrongfully) that he’d be anyone but trump. 

In my admittedly limited circle, POC and other marginalized groups commonly reject the false dichotomy (lesser evilism), because they’re accustomed to mobilizing for change in other ways. In other words, they don’t often buy that elections are the be-all-end-all of politics. 

ecdanc

rgambs said:

ecdanc said:

rgambs said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

The Juggler said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

Some descriptions/comments I've seen recently

An interesting tactic to take no responsibility for things one types.

The word you're looking for is "liar" if you'd like to go ahead and say it. 

My opinion is that you are posting things like this to elicit responses - specifically to try and anger people who you believe oppose your views.  The response I have is to laugh & to find the humor in idiotic statements like this -

 "I fucking despise Pete Buttigieg, and the insufferable whiteness of the secure cis gays who support him.".

Am I allowed to have an opinion?

It's a discussion board: the goal of most posts is to elicit responses.

And, no, I'm not trying to anger people. I'm responding to the numerous people on this thread (and others) who literally can't imagine that such people exist (see the entire "QueersagainstPete" exchange).

All of the people I quoted above plan to vote in the general election (I'm not sure if they plan to participate in their respective Democratic primaries/caucuses), yet this board seems to think that the only votes to be gained or lost are the moderates. I think it's worthwhile to point out that's not the case. People her keep talking around the concept of "electability" (i.e. who can beat Trump), but many of you seem to imagine that all voters are like you or to your right. 

You're quoting a few of your friends here and, I guess, somehow extrapolating those few opinions towards millions of voters. 

When you have the chance, could you get back to us with your Aunt's neighbor's son's opinion on Joe Biden please? Thank you. 

I'm not extrapolating anything. I'm challenging the notion that courting the middle is desirable. 

So ask your friends. If Pete gets the nomination, will they vote trump? Stay home? Or vote democrat.

K. I’ll get back to you. 

I look forward to hearing what they say.

2nd response. Queer black man in his 30s. Says he doesn't think he could bring himself to vote for Buttigieg or Klobuchar, citing specifically their anti-black policies/actions. 

That just makes me shake my head.  You know your choice is _____ or Trump and you can't bring yourself to vote for _____?

That’s not the only choice. 

It is.  The Democratic nominee will be President or Trump will be President. 
Anything other notion is wishing in one hand and shitting in the other.

I wish it wasn't this way as much as anyone, but it just IS.  

So the only things that affect people’s lives are presidential elections?

ecdanc

Halifax2TheMax said:

pjl44 said:

rgambs said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

The Juggler said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

Some descriptions/comments I've seen recently

An interesting tactic to take no responsibility for things one types.

The word you're looking for is "liar" if you'd like to go ahead and say it. 

My opinion is that you are posting things like this to elicit responses - specifically to try and anger people who you believe oppose your views.  The response I have is to laugh & to find the humor in idiotic statements like this -

 "I fucking despise Pete Buttigieg, and the insufferable whiteness of the secure cis gays who support him.".

Am I allowed to have an opinion?

It's a discussion board: the goal of most posts is to elicit responses.

And, no, I'm not trying to anger people. I'm responding to the numerous people on this thread (and others) who literally can't imagine that such people exist (see the entire "QueersagainstPete" exchange).

All of the people I quoted above plan to vote in the general election (I'm not sure if they plan to participate in their respective Democratic primaries/caucuses), yet this board seems to think that the only votes to be gained or lost are the moderates. I think it's worthwhile to point out that's not the case. People her keep talking around the concept of "electability" (i.e. who can beat Trump), but many of you seem to imagine that all voters are like you or to your right. 

You're quoting a few of your friends here and, I guess, somehow extrapolating those few opinions towards millions of voters. 

When you have the chance, could you get back to us with your Aunt's neighbor's son's opinion on Joe Biden please? Thank you. 

I'm not extrapolating anything. I'm challenging the notion that courting the middle is desirable. 

So ask your friends. If Pete gets the nomination, will they vote trump? Stay home? Or vote democrat.

K. I’ll get back to you. 

I look forward to hearing what they say.

2nd response. Queer black man in his 30s. Says he doesn't think he could bring himself to vote for Buttigieg or Klobuchar, citing specifically their anti-black policies/actions. 

That just makes me shake my head.  You know your choice is _____ or Trump and you can't bring yourself to vote for _____?

People are worn out on The Lesser Evil. They'll stay home. They need a reason to vote *for* someone.

And those Berniebrosises deserve everything they get and then some. Reap what ye shall sow, yo!

”The lesser evil.” LOL.

Is it really so strange to say “I can’t vote for a person who has helped perpetuate racism?”

ecdanc

Halifax2TheMax

ecdanc said:

Really offensive and really dangerous. Oh the hysteria.

ecdanc

Halifax2TheMax said:

ecdanc said:

Really offensive and really dangerous. Oh the hysteria.

Do you think Sara Nelson is a Russian bot?

oftenreading

ecdanc said:

So pointing out that some union members have health coverage, for which they have fought as an benefit of their employment, is now offensive to those union members who don't have health coverage? Particularly as Buttigieg himself pointed out that they "fought hard", and yet she argue against this by saying that they "had to fight like hell". 

I fail to see how that makes sense. Perhaps some context is lost in the snippet of the tweet that you've posted. 

mrussel1

ecdanc said:

Where does Pete say "every union member"? Does Sara lack reading comprehension skills or is she simply disingenuous?

H2M is dead on... it's a tweet filled with histrionics. 

ecdanc

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

Where does Pete say "every union member"? Does Sara lack reading comprehension skills or is she simply disingenuous?

H2M is dead on... it's a tweet filled with histrionics. 

Y'all both might want to chill with the gendered dog-whistling. 

ecdanc

oftenreading said:

ecdanc said:

So pointing out that some union members have health coverage, for which they have fought as an benefit of their employment, is now offensive to those union members who don't have health coverage? Particularly as Buttigieg himself pointed out that they "fought hard", and yet she argue against this by saying that they "had to fight like hell". 

I fail to see how that makes sense. Perhaps some context is lost in the snippet of the tweet that you've posted. 

You might want to put a little more emphasis on her last sentence. 

mrussel1

ecdanc said:

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

Where does Pete say "every union member"? Does Sara lack reading comprehension skills or is she simply disingenuous?

H2M is dead on... it's a tweet filled with histrionics. 

Y'all both might want to chill with the gendered dog-whistling. 

Scary.

Halifax2TheMax

ecdanc said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

ecdanc said:

Really offensive and really dangerous. Oh the hysteria.

Do you think Sara Nelson is a Russian bot?

I think her hysteria is misdirected. Where was Sara when Repub governors and legislatures were gutting unions? Oh, but big bad scary gay Pete is the real enemy. Only because he threatens Bernie’s anointment. Give me a break.

ecdanc

Halifax2TheMax said:

ecdanc said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

ecdanc said:

Really offensive and really dangerous. Oh the hysteria.

Do you think Sara Nelson is a Russian bot?

I think her hysteria is misdirected. Where was Sara when Repub governors and legislatures were gutting unions? Oh, but big bad scary gay Pete is the real enemy. Only because he threatens Bernie’s anointment. Give me a break.

You do know who you're talking about, right? Where was she?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/22/business/sara-nelson-flight-attendant-union.html

oftenreading

ecdanc said:

oftenreading said:

ecdanc said:

So pointing out that some union members have health coverage, for which they have fought as an benefit of their employment, is now offensive to those union members who don't have health coverage? Particularly as Buttigieg himself pointed out that they "fought hard", and yet she argue against this by saying that they "had to fight like hell". 

I fail to see how that makes sense. Perhaps some context is lost in the snippet of the tweet that you've posted. 

You might want to put a little more emphasis on her last sentence. 

Where is the evidence that Buttigieg has caused an injury with his tweet?

oftenreading

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

The Juggler said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

Some descriptions/comments I've seen recently

An interesting tactic to take no responsibility for things one types.

The word you're looking for is "liar" if you'd like to go ahead and say it. 

My opinion is that you are posting things like this to elicit responses - specifically to try and anger people who you believe oppose your views.  The response I have is to laugh & to find the humor in idiotic statements like this -

 "I fucking despise Pete Buttigieg, and the insufferable whiteness of the secure cis gays who support him.".

Am I allowed to have an opinion?

It's a discussion board: the goal of most posts is to elicit responses.

And, no, I'm not trying to anger people. I'm responding to the numerous people on this thread (and others) who literally can't imagine that such people exist (see the entire "QueersagainstPete" exchange).

All of the people I quoted above plan to vote in the general election (I'm not sure if they plan to participate in their respective Democratic primaries/caucuses), yet this board seems to think that the only votes to be gained or lost are the moderates. I think it's worthwhile to point out that's not the case. People her keep talking around the concept of "electability" (i.e. who can beat Trump), but many of you seem to imagine that all voters are like you or to your right. 

You're quoting a few of your friends here and, I guess, somehow extrapolating those few opinions towards millions of voters. 

When you have the chance, could you get back to us with your Aunt's neighbor's son's opinion on Joe Biden please? Thank you. 

I'm not extrapolating anything. I'm challenging the notion that courting the middle is desirable. 

So ask your friends. If Pete gets the nomination, will they vote trump? Stay home? Or vote democrat.

K. I’ll get back to you. 

I look forward to hearing what they say.

2nd response. Queer black man in his 30s. Says he doesn't think he could bring himself to vote for Buttigieg or Klobuchar, citing specifically their anti-black policies/actions. 

Interesting. Cause I know I have some built in benefits so a 2nd trump term likely won’t effect me personally a whole lot. But I would think it would effect a queer black man pretty directly. So I would have assumed (apparently wrongfully) that he’d be anyone but trump. 

In my admittedly limited circle, POC and other marginalized groups commonly reject the false dichotomy (lesser evilism), because they’re accustomed to mobilizing for change in other ways. In other words, they don’t often buy that elections are the be-all-end-all of politics. 

Absolutely elections are not all of politics, but the question wasn’t “what else are your friends doing in terms of activism?”, it was who would they vote for in this election, given certain options. 

ecdanc

oftenreading said:

ecdanc said:

oftenreading said:

ecdanc said:

So pointing out that some union members have health coverage, for which they have fought as an benefit of their employment, is now offensive to those union members who don't have health coverage? Particularly as Buttigieg himself pointed out that they "fought hard", and yet she argue against this by saying that they "had to fight like hell". 

I fail to see how that makes sense. Perhaps some context is lost in the snippet of the tweet that you've posted. 

You might want to put a little more emphasis on her last sentence. 

Where is the evidence that Buttigieg has caused an injury with his tweet?

You're asking the communist that?

ecdanc

oftenreading said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

The Juggler said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

ecdanc said:

F Me In The Brain said:

Some descriptions/comments I've seen recently

An interesting tactic to take no responsibility for things one types.

The word you're looking for is "liar" if you'd like to go ahead and say it. 

My opinion is that you are posting things like this to elicit responses - specifically to try and anger people who you believe oppose your views.  The response I have is to laugh & to find the humor in idiotic statements like this -

 "I fucking despise Pete Buttigieg, and the insufferable whiteness of the secure cis gays who support him.".

Am I allowed to have an opinion?

It's a discussion board: the goal of most posts is to elicit responses.

And, no, I'm not trying to anger people. I'm responding to the numerous people on this thread (and others) who literally can't imagine that such people exist (see the entire "QueersagainstPete" exchange).

All of the people I quoted above plan to vote in the general election (I'm not sure if they plan to participate in their respective Democratic primaries/caucuses), yet this board seems to think that the only votes to be gained or lost are the moderates. I think it's worthwhile to point out that's not the case. People her keep talking around the concept of "electability" (i.e. who can beat Trump), but many of you seem to imagine that all voters are like you or to your right. 

You're quoting a few of your friends here and, I guess, somehow extrapolating those few opinions towards millions of voters. 

When you have the chance, could you get back to us with your Aunt's neighbor's son's opinion on Joe Biden please? Thank you. 

I'm not extrapolating anything. I'm challenging the notion that courting the middle is desirable. 

So ask your friends. If Pete gets the nomination, will they vote trump? Stay home? Or vote democrat.

K. I’ll get back to you. 

I look forward to hearing what they say.

2nd response. Queer black man in his 30s. Says he doesn't think he could bring himself to vote for Buttigieg or Klobuchar, citing specifically their anti-black policies/actions. 

Interesting. Cause I know I have some built in benefits so a 2nd trump term likely won’t effect me personally a whole lot. But I would think it would effect a queer black man pretty directly. So I would have assumed (apparently wrongfully) that he’d be anyone but trump. 

In my admittedly limited circle, POC and other marginalized groups commonly reject the false dichotomy (lesser evilism), because they’re accustomed to mobilizing for change in other ways. In other words, they don’t often buy that elections are the be-all-end-all of politics. 

Absolutely elections are not all of politics, but the question wasn’t “what else are your friends doing in terms of activism?”, it was who would they vote for in this election, given certain options. 

Yes, but then people here changed the conversation. 

Halifax2TheMax

ecdanc said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

ecdanc said:

Really offensive and really dangerous. Oh the hysteria.

Do you think Sara Nelson is a Russian bot?

Nah, a commie.