The Democratic Presidential Debates

brianlux

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Can we all just agree that Biden and Warren will steal and split Bernies thunder post tonights debate?

I'm not a big fan on any of the Dem candidate.  just want one of them- any of them- to beat Trump.

pjl44

brianlux said:

pjl44 said:

brianlux said:

pjl44 said:

brianlux said:

pjl44 said:

I think people are missing the point on the Sanders story.

1. It's very much in character for him to praise Castro. It's his ideology and not the first time. In a vacuum he is certainly free to do that.
2. There are many Cuban (or Venezuelan) immigrants and children of who will have a VERY negative reaction to an American politician praising Castro (or Chavez) for any reason. Many live in Florida.
3. These House *Democrats* from Florida and elsewhere came out swiftly with strongly worded rebukes because they know this is a HUGE issue for a large portion of their constituents. They themselves have seats to defend in November. 

This is not a manufactured issue. If you know or run into a Cuban-American, ask them about Castro. I had 3 Cuban coworkers at my last job. Best of luck in explaining to them how they should apply some nuance and not blow a comment out of proportion. I would be very interested to hear how that goes.

Please back this up with some verifiable statements made by Sanders that praise Castro.  Thanks.

https://www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-fidel-castro-1985-video-debate-2016-3

Hardly praise and decades old.  OK.

For the third time, this is not about what you and I think about what he said. My point is that his comments will give him trouble with Florida voters and create problems for other Democrats running in that state. That's the only thing I've posted about because it's the only aspect of this story I find interesting. 

As a side note, I posted exactly what you asked for and it's obvious you asked just so you could bicker more. You have no interest in listening to what I'm trying to say. Google it yourself next time.

For the first time, What???  I didn't say what I think about this.  Where did you come up with that?

And "bickering"?  WTF?  Where was I "bickering"?  Get a grip.

You're nitpicking what constitutes praise. That would be you saying what you think about it. 

CM189191

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Can we all just agree that Biden and Warren will steal and split Bernies thunder post tonights debate?

oh shit there's debates tonight?!

good thing I bought beer yesterday!

brianlux

pjl44 said:

brianlux said:

pjl44 said:

brianlux said:

pjl44 said:

brianlux said:

pjl44 said:

I think people are missing the point on the Sanders story.

1. It's very much in character for him to praise Castro. It's his ideology and not the first time. In a vacuum he is certainly free to do that.
2. There are many Cuban (or Venezuelan) immigrants and children of who will have a VERY negative reaction to an American politician praising Castro (or Chavez) for any reason. Many live in Florida.
3. These House *Democrats* from Florida and elsewhere came out swiftly with strongly worded rebukes because they know this is a HUGE issue for a large portion of their constituents. They themselves have seats to defend in November. 

This is not a manufactured issue. If you know or run into a Cuban-American, ask them about Castro. I had 3 Cuban coworkers at my last job. Best of luck in explaining to them how they should apply some nuance and not blow a comment out of proportion. I would be very interested to hear how that goes.

Please back this up with some verifiable statements made by Sanders that praise Castro.  Thanks.

https://www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-fidel-castro-1985-video-debate-2016-3

Hardly praise and decades old.  OK.

For the third time, this is not about what you and I think about what he said. My point is that his comments will give him trouble with Florida voters and create problems for other Democrats running in that state. That's the only thing I've posted about because it's the only aspect of this story I find interesting. 

As a side note, I posted exactly what you asked for and it's obvious you asked just so you could bicker more. You have no interest in listening to what I'm trying to say. Google it yourself next time.

For the first time, What???  I didn't say what I think about this.  Where did you come up with that?

And "bickering"?  WTF?  Where was I "bickering"?  Get a grip.

You're nitpicking what constitutes praise. That would be you saying what you think about it. 

Then you must be doing the same and thus this becomes pointless.  Later.

Spiritual_Chaos

Bernie Staffer Mocked Warren’s Looks, Pete’s Sexuality on Private Twitter Account'

After this report was published, Mike Casca, the Sanders campaign’s communications director, told The Daily Beast that “we are running a multiracial, multigenerational campaign for justice where disgusting behavior and ugly personal attacks by our staff will not be tolerated.”

Mora, the Sanders campaign confirmed, has been fired.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/bernie-sanders-staffer-mocked-elizabeth-warrens-looks-pete-buttigiegs-sexuality-on-private-twitter-account

HughFreakingDillon

Ledbetterman10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

CM189191 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

The Juggler said:

Praising Fidel Castro. 

https://twitter.com/shaunking/status/1231809944921477120?s=20

exactly. 

exactly what now?

There's a big gap between praising their education system and praising Castro

Cuba's medical system is beyond reproach as well. 

you can praise one thing about one person and it not be all-encompassing. just because harvey weinstein is a rapist doesn't mean I am pro-rape if I say he's a good movie producer. 

This should be true, but unfortunately, it isn’t the case these days. Too many people today seem to have an “all or none” mentality with that sort of thing. To them, it IS all-encompassing. 

Look at Trump. If you say anything positive about something he does, or if there’s an aspect of his presidency that actually you like, a lot of people will call you racist or whatever other extreme insult you can call a Trump supporter. Even if your positive comment is inconsequential. Say, for example, someone on this board said that they liked his speech in India the other day. Some of the people around here would assume that person loves Trump and lump them in with Maga-hat wearers. That isn’t fair.

I agree with you 100%. I was called a trump supporter (HAHA) because I didn't draw and quarter him on an issue some time back. it's ludicrous. 

HughFreakingDillon

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

CM189191 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

The Juggler said:

Praising Fidel Castro. 

https://twitter.com/shaunking/status/1231809944921477120?s=20

exactly. 

exactly what now?

There's a big gap between praising their education system and praising Castro

Cuba's medical system is beyond reproach as well. 

you can praise one thing about one person and it not be all-encompassing. just because harvey weinstein is a rapist doesn't mean I am pro-rape if I say he's a good movie producer. 

This should be true, but unfortunately, it isn’t the case these days. Too many people today seem to have an “all or none” mentality with that sort of thing. To them, it IS all-encompassing. 

Look at Trump. If you say anything positive about something he does, or if there’s an aspect of his presidency that actually you like, a lot of people will call you racist or whatever other extreme insult you can call a Trump supporter. Even if your positive comment is inconsequential. Say, for example, someone on this board said that they liked his speech in India the other day. Some of the people around here would assume that person loves Trump and lump them in with Maga-hat wearers. That isn’t fair.

Name an inconsequential positive things one could say about Trumps presidency without it being a far fetched "Say, for example"-example like him having a good speech.

Well I didn’t see the speech so I can’t speak to whether it was good or not. Typical of you to focus on that and ignore the point though. The point is that Hugh’s “all-encompassing” argument goes tenfold for Trump. 

I know. It just made me curious about Trump and him having positives. 

there actually was something he did a while back that was praised on both sides. I wish I could recall what it was. there has been so much shit it's hard to wade through. 

dignin

HughFreakingDillon said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

CM189191 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

The Juggler said:

Praising Fidel Castro. 

https://twitter.com/shaunking/status/1231809944921477120?s=20

exactly. 

exactly what now?

There's a big gap between praising their education system and praising Castro

Cuba's medical system is beyond reproach as well. 

you can praise one thing about one person and it not be all-encompassing. just because harvey weinstein is a rapist doesn't mean I am pro-rape if I say he's a good movie producer. 

This should be true, but unfortunately, it isn’t the case these days. Too many people today seem to have an “all or none” mentality with that sort of thing. To them, it IS all-encompassing. 

Look at Trump. If you say anything positive about something he does, or if there’s an aspect of his presidency that actually you like, a lot of people will call you racist or whatever other extreme insult you can call a Trump supporter. Even if your positive comment is inconsequential. Say, for example, someone on this board said that they liked his speech in India the other day. Some of the people around here would assume that person loves Trump and lump them in with Maga-hat wearers. That isn’t fair.

Name an inconsequential positive things one could say about Trumps presidency without it being a far fetched "Say, for example"-example like him having a good speech.

Well I didn’t see the speech so I can’t speak to whether it was good or not. Typical of you to focus on that and ignore the point though. The point is that Hugh’s “all-encompassing” argument goes tenfold for Trump. 

I know. It just made me curious about Trump and him having positives. 

there actually was something he did a while back that was praised on both sides. I wish I could recall what it was. there has been so much shit it's hard to wade through. 

Criminal reform.

pjl44

brianlux said:

pjl44 said:

brianlux said:

pjl44 said:

brianlux said:

pjl44 said:

brianlux said:

pjl44 said:

I think people are missing the point on the Sanders story.

1. It's very much in character for him to praise Castro. It's his ideology and not the first time. In a vacuum he is certainly free to do that.
2. There are many Cuban (or Venezuelan) immigrants and children of who will have a VERY negative reaction to an American politician praising Castro (or Chavez) for any reason. Many live in Florida.
3. These House *Democrats* from Florida and elsewhere came out swiftly with strongly worded rebukes because they know this is a HUGE issue for a large portion of their constituents. They themselves have seats to defend in November. 

This is not a manufactured issue. If you know or run into a Cuban-American, ask them about Castro. I had 3 Cuban coworkers at my last job. Best of luck in explaining to them how they should apply some nuance and not blow a comment out of proportion. I would be very interested to hear how that goes.

Please back this up with some verifiable statements made by Sanders that praise Castro.  Thanks.

https://www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-fidel-castro-1985-video-debate-2016-3

Hardly praise and decades old.  OK.

For the third time, this is not about what you and I think about what he said. My point is that his comments will give him trouble with Florida voters and create problems for other Democrats running in that state. That's the only thing I've posted about because it's the only aspect of this story I find interesting. 

As a side note, I posted exactly what you asked for and it's obvious you asked just so you could bicker more. You have no interest in listening to what I'm trying to say. Google it yourself next time.

For the first time, What???  I didn't say what I think about this.  Where did you come up with that?

And "bickering"?  WTF?  Where was I "bickering"?  Get a grip.

You're nitpicking what constitutes praise. That would be you saying what you think about it. 

Then you must be doing the same and thus this becomes pointless.  Later.

And somehow we arrive back at "I'm not talking about what either of us thinks about it." Aye yi yi.

Spiritual_Chaos

The GOD DAMN commies that are Biden supporters. When will the pundits on cable news take a stand against them?

cincybearcat

HughFreakingDillon said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

CM189191 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

The Juggler said:

Praising Fidel Castro. 

https://twitter.com/shaunking/status/1231809944921477120?s=20

exactly. 

exactly what now?

There's a big gap between praising their education system and praising Castro

Cuba's medical system is beyond reproach as well. 

you can praise one thing about one person and it not be all-encompassing. just because harvey weinstein is a rapist doesn't mean I am pro-rape if I say he's a good movie producer. 

This should be true, but unfortunately, it isn’t the case these days. Too many people today seem to have an “all or none” mentality with that sort of thing. To them, it IS all-encompassing. 

Look at Trump. If you say anything positive about something he does, or if there’s an aspect of his presidency that actually you like, a lot of people will call you racist or whatever other extreme insult you can call a Trump supporter. Even if your positive comment is inconsequential. Say, for example, someone on this board said that they liked his speech in India the other day. Some of the people around here would assume that person loves Trump and lump them in with Maga-hat wearers. That isn’t fair.

I agree with you 100%. I was called a trump supporter (HAHA) because I didn't draw and quarter him on an issue some time back. it's ludicrous. 

Yes, many of us have been

mrussel1

CM189191 said:

Ronald Reagan — 'If you're explaining, you're losing.'

This is exactly right and the sum of Bernie's problem from Sunday night.  It leaves him vulnerable to attacks and really,  honestly,  a rookie mistake for a seasoned pol. 

cincybearcat

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

CM189191 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

The Juggler said:

Praising Fidel Castro. 

https://twitter.com/shaunking/status/1231809944921477120?s=20

exactly. 

exactly what now?

There's a big gap between praising their education system and praising Castro

Cuba's medical system is beyond reproach as well. 

you can praise one thing about one person and it not be all-encompassing. just because harvey weinstein is a rapist doesn't mean I am pro-rape if I say he's a good movie producer. 

This should be true, but unfortunately, it isn’t the case these days. Too many people today seem to have an “all or none” mentality with that sort of thing. To them, it IS all-encompassing. 

Look at Trump. If you say anything positive about something he does, or if there’s an aspect of his presidency that actually you like, a lot of people will call you racist or whatever other extreme insult you can call a Trump supporter. Even if your positive comment is inconsequential. Say, for example, someone on this board said that they liked his speech in India the other day. Some of the people around here would assume that person loves Trump and lump them in with Maga-hat wearers. That isn’t fair.

Name an inconsequential positive things one could say about Trumps presidency without it being a far fetched "Say, for example"-example like him having a good speech.

Well I didn’t see the speech so I can’t speak to whether it was good or not. Typical of you to focus on that and ignore the point though. The point is that Hugh’s “all-encompassing” argument goes tenfold for Trump. 

I know. It just made me curious about Trump and him having positives. 

there actually was something he did a while back that was praised on both sides. I wish I could recall what it was. there has been so much shit it's hard to wade through. 

Criminal reform.

Yup I was going to say that but I couldn't remember the exact reform!

mickeyrat

 https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/25/why-bernie-sanderss-repeating-cuban-propaganda-rankles-so-many-latinos/

Why Bernie Sanders’s repeating Cuban propaganda rankles so many Latinos
By Francisco Toro
February 25 at 2:08 PM EST
Come along with me on a little thought experiment. Imagine that, horrified by the creeping authoritarianism in Donald Trump’s America, you decided you could take no more and you moved to New Zealand, say, for a fresh start.

Now imagine that, as an immigrant to New Zealand, you saw a radical right-wing politician rise to national prominence. Naturally, some enterprising local journalist would eventually ask that politico about his views on President Trump. Now imagine the response sounded something like, “Well, while we certainly wouldn’t want Donald Trump’s divisiveness and authoritarianism here in New Zealand, it is a fact that he presided over the greatest economy in U.S. history and he certainly made America great again.”

This, I suspect, would drive you crazy. And it would drive you crazy for a good reason: not so much because it’s wrong, specifically, but because it’s propaganda.

Like all good propaganda, our New Zealand politician’s response blends a pinch of truth (the unemployment rate really is very low and the stock market has performed very well) with a willful ignorance of history (the economy was doing well long before Trump reached power) and a determined effort to obscure a deeper, much more pernicious dynamic (no amount of economic health is worth sacrificing the basics of democracy and the separation of powers).

Hearing it, you’d instantly see as hollow the politician’s assertion that he didn’t want Trumpian divisiveness in his country. How could you trust a person so ready to swallow and repeat a propaganda whopper like that?

  

mickeyrat

article continues below.

you can thank the fucking draft abomination for the multiposts

mickeyrat

  If you can imagine your reaction to this right-winger, you can begin to glimpse the enormous concern Venezuelans and Cubans feel when we hear Bernie Sanders praise Fidel Castro’s education system.

The first thing to grasp is that Cuba’s global reputation for having an excellent education system isn’t a result of the quality of its education system. As scholars have long known, Cuba’s overall educational performance is middling for the region: roughly similar to that of many other Latin American countries that brought their literacy rates from round-about 75 percent in the 1950s to not-far-from 100 percent today.

Yes, Cuba made education available free to everyone through the university level. But so did countries such as Argentina, Ecuador, Uruguay and Mexico. There was never any need to build a police state to bring people to school — an insight so obvious, it’s ludicrous to even have to write it.

In reality, Cuba’s reputation for educational prowess is mostly a product of a relentless, multi-decade propaganda campaign. Virtually every speech by every Cuban diplomat and regime admirer for the past seven decades has made a point of praising Cuba’s supposed literacy miracle. Cubans who have left know the propaganda only too well, and understand why a government desperate to establish its legitimacy in the face of the mass impoverishment of its population would turn to it again and again.

To Cubans and Venezuelans — who have witnessed much the same kind of propaganda — talk of Cuban educational prowess grates not because it’s wrong, exactly, but because it serves as a simple way to identify who’s ready to be duped by regime apologists. We know propaganda doesn’t need to be entirely false to be profoundly damaging. So we despair when we hear it parroted by those who ought to know better.

The bottom line is that when you associate yourself with an ideology whose past contains some of history’s worst crimes, you take on a special duty to denounce. When those denunciations come hedged with qualifiers that rest on propaganda lines, they ring entirely hollow.

Germans get this. Angela Merkel’s party, the conservative Christian Democratic Union, always understood that if you’re going to stand even half an inch to the right of center in the country that Hitler once ran, you must go to very great lengths to put distance between yourself and anything even vaguely reminiscent of Nazism. Which is one reason the center-right in Germany is one of the most doggedly pro-democracy forces in Europe.

Sanders needs to understand he’s in a similar position. He has chosen to describe himself using the same word that totalitarian leaders have chosen to describe themselves. He must take on a special responsibility to make it entirely unambiguous that he’s wise to the propaganda games authoritarian socialists use to bolster their power. Holding him to that standard is in no way unreasonable.

When Sanders parrots Fidel’s propaganda, he fails the test. And many Latinos and people in Latin America notice. We have a hyper-developed nose for propaganda. It sends us reeling. Because we know this game from the inside.

Spiritual_Chaos

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

Ronald Reagan — 'If you're explaining, you're losing.'

This is exactly right and the sum of Bernie's problem from Sunday night.  It leaves him vulnerable to attacks and really,  honestly,  a rookie mistake for a seasoned pol. 

Looks like a mistake out of complete hubris. Like he doesn't feel like he needs to read the room (read: country) because it's going his way (for the time being) and he is so sure of being "right".

pjl44

mickeyrat said:

  If you can imagine your reaction to this right-winger, you can begin to glimpse the enormous concern Venezuelans and Cubans feel when we hear Bernie Sanders praise Fidel Castro’s education system.

The first thing to grasp is that Cuba’s global reputation for having an excellent education system isn’t a result of the quality of its education system. As scholars have long known, Cuba’s overall educational performance is middling for the region: roughly similar to that of many other Latin American countries that brought their literacy rates from round-about 75 percent in the 1950s to not-far-from 100 percent today.

Yes, Cuba made education available free to everyone through the university level. But so did countries such as Argentina, Ecuador, Uruguay and Mexico. There was never any need to build a police state to bring people to school — an insight so obvious, it’s ludicrous to even have to write it.

In reality, Cuba’s reputation for educational prowess is mostly a product of a relentless, multi-decade propaganda campaign. Virtually every speech by every Cuban diplomat and regime admirer for the past seven decades has made a point of praising Cuba’s supposed literacy miracle. Cubans who have left know the propaganda only too well, and understand why a government desperate to establish its legitimacy in the face of the mass impoverishment of its population would turn to it again and again.

To Cubans and Venezuelans — who have witnessed much the same kind of propaganda — talk of Cuban educational prowess grates not because it’s wrong, exactly, but because it serves as a simple way to identify who’s ready to be duped by regime apologists. We know propaganda doesn’t need to be entirely false to be profoundly damaging. So we despair when we hear it parroted by those who ought to know better.

The bottom line is that when you associate yourself with an ideology whose past contains some of history’s worst crimes, you take on a special duty to denounce. When those denunciations come hedged with qualifiers that rest on propaganda lines, they ring entirely hollow.

Germans get this. Angela Merkel’s party, the conservative Christian Democratic Union, always understood that if you’re going to stand even half an inch to the right of center in the country that Hitler once ran, you must go to very great lengths to put distance between yourself and anything even vaguely reminiscent of Nazism. Which is one reason the center-right in Germany is one of the most doggedly pro-democracy forces in Europe.

Sanders needs to understand he’s in a similar position. He has chosen to describe himself using the same word that totalitarian leaders have chosen to describe themselves. He must take on a special responsibility to make it entirely unambiguous that he’s wise to the propaganda games authoritarian socialists use to bolster their power. Holding him to that standard is in no way unreasonable.

When Sanders parrots Fidel’s propaganda, he fails the test. And many Latinos and people in Latin America notice. We have a hyper-developed nose for propaganda. It sends us reeling. Because we know this game from the inside.

Great read

pjl44

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

Ronald Reagan — 'If you're explaining, you're losing.'

This is exactly right and the sum of Bernie's problem from Sunday night.  It leaves him vulnerable to attacks and really,  honestly,  a rookie mistake for a seasoned pol. 

Looks like a mistake out of complete hubris. Like he doesn't feel like he needs to read the room (read: country) because it's going his way (for the time being) and he is so sure of being "right".

Don't you think it's just that he doesn't have as much of a filter as a typical politician? Even though I disagree with a lot of his platform, I've always respected him for shooting pretty straight. Maybe we're kinda saying the same thing, but I've never known him to be adverse to letting it all hang out.

HughFreakingDillon

pjl44 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

Ronald Reagan — 'If you're explaining, you're losing.'

This is exactly right and the sum of Bernie's problem from Sunday night.  It leaves him vulnerable to attacks and really,  honestly,  a rookie mistake for a seasoned pol. 

Looks like a mistake out of complete hubris. Like he doesn't feel like he needs to read the room (read: country) because it's going his way (for the time being) and he is so sure of being "right".

Don't you think it's just that he doesn't have as much of a filter as a typical politician? Even though I disagree with a lot of his platform, I've always respected him for shooting pretty straight. Maybe we're kinda saying the same thing, but I've never known him to be adverse to letting it all hang out.

seems like he's trying to use the trump playbook to be honest. no one ever held trump to account on any of his promises or claims. maybe he's hoping for the same.