GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently September 21 19, 7:44 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: August 30 19, 1:24 pm 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Chicago, IL
thrill wrote:
I would be interested to hear the perspective/line of thinking from people who rank Warren high and Sanders low, or vice-versa. No agenda. Genuinely interested in your perspective.


I don’t want to end capitalism

I do want to end the filibuster

I find Warren more engaging, smarter, better on policy, younger, less grievance-y, and all around more personally as a person and statesman.

I’ve become worn down on Sanders also by the angry white mansplainy crowd that so vocally echoes him which makes me dislike Sanders a bit whether that’s fair or not and also wonder why I liked him so much the last time around.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 30 19, 1:28 pm 
Offline
darjeeling sipping elite
User avatar

Joined: October 17 06, 11:19 am
Posts: 36901
Location: Huis Clos
33anda3rd wrote:
thrill wrote:
I would be interested to hear the perspective/line of thinking from people who rank Warren high and Sanders low, or vice-versa. No agenda. Genuinely interested in your perspective.


I don’t want to end capitalism

I do want to end the filibuster

I find Warren more engaging, smarter, better on policy, younger, less grievance-y, and all around more personally as a person and statesman.

I’ve become worn down on Sanders also by the angry white mansplainy crowd that so vocally echoes him which makes me dislike Sanders a bit whether that’s fair or not and also wonder why I liked him so much the last time around.

Sorta like when snorcob said you were turning him to Trump

/I’m paraphrasing


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 30 19, 2:35 pm 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Chicago, IL
He would never vote Trump, he's a two-time Obama voter who believes the same things the majority of the political posters here believe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 30 19, 3:08 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: October 12 06, 2:21 pm
Posts: 16879
Location: Baseball Ref Bullpen
thrill wrote:
I would be interested to hear the perspective/line of thinking from people who rank Warren high and Sanders low, or vice-versa. No agenda. Genuinely interested in your perspective.

Sanders would be up there if he was 20 years younger. I don't want another old dude in the white house.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 30 19, 3:49 pm 
Offline
Don't tone police me bro!
User avatar

Joined: July 1 06, 7:24 pm
Posts: 10486
Location: Lost in the Cloud
I have a friend who thinks Warren is the Smartest Person Evar but thinks that Bernie is too dumb to talk his way out of a paper bag


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 30 19, 7:46 pm 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Chicago, IL
Schlich wrote:
I have a friend who thinks Warren is the Smartest Person Evar but thinks that Bernie is too dumb to talk his way out of a paper bag


To watch both of them speak, or watch both of them share a debate stage, and find Sanders the more intelligent would be sincerely problematic.

Sanders is not helped by the stuff like Abramson that I was harping on earlier this week. There are some truther/birther factions of the Sanders movement that don't exist in the Warren, Biden, Booker, Harris camps and it that delegitimizes Sanders.

Two weeks ago a chef I know posted on Facebook "Does anyone have a good reason for me to not vote Bernie?" Here's unedited, save names, an exchange I had with Mike, who I've never met before:

Spoiler: show
Me: A great one is: Bernie does not want to end the filibuster in the Senate. Because the Senate map cannot be drawn in a way that gets you to 60 blue seats--enough to break a filibuster--there will effectively be nothing until it's gone. No assault rifle ban. No Green New Deal. etc. Warren, Beto, Pete and Inslee have been outspoke (23 likes)

Me: Another great one is: Warren and he align on almost everything and Warren is better on policy. Warren's deal is: "I propose a 2% wealth tax on everything over $50 million. The first $50 million we don't touch, but just 2 cents on every dollar over that pays for childcare, and public school all the way through public college." Whereas Sanders is more like a list of complaints. "The 1% have too much." Cool, Bernie, same page. But what are you going to do about it? What do you propose we do? Warren crushes him on actual policy. (21 likes)

Me: Another one is disposition. I can better imagine Warren being tough on Kim, Putin, Netanyahu in a thorough, concise, policy-driven way, and I see Sanders giving them a list of grievances. (22)

Me: Another is inspiration. See Warren with little girls, those videos of them doing a pinky shake and Warren telling the little girls to dream big? Who does Bernie inspire other than angry white guys? (21, mostly little hearts from female friends, I'll stop w/ the like-mentions save when notable, you get the point)

Me: Another is the cult of personality. So many Sanders acolytes, and what does Bernie ever tell us about Bernie? Warren tells us a lot of "When I was a little girl in Oklahoma..." and "My daddy didn't have money to send us to fancy college so I went to commuter college for fifty dollars....." and Sanders avoids telling us things about himself almost like it's a detriment for us to know Bernie, rather than just Bernie's list of grievances. Warren is way more empathetic to other people, and deserves more empathy. As a human, I'll take her every day.

Me: n closing: Warren 2020

Mike: remember how Elizabeth ‘capitalist to my bones’ Warren was a republican for the majority of her adult life and gave DJT a standing ovation at the sotu for saying we’d never be a socialist country? Can you see how some of us on the left are skeptical about her ideological commitments?

Mike: wait so Bernie focuses on talking about goals and not yammering on about himself and Senator Warren spins yarns about her down-home Oklahoma childhood and yr point is that Bernie’s supporters are a cult of personality? Or is it vice versa. I’m confused.

Mike: you’re mistaken my guy

Mike: Crushes Sanders on which policy? Her entire policy platform, like every other D in the field, is more/less a plagiarism of Bernie ‘16. His campaign has set the tone for every major policy prescription currently fashionable among D contenders.

Mike: It seems like if warren were the more broadly appealing and personally inspiring candidate the sanders campaign wouldn’t have such a commanding lead in grassroots support, small donors, event attendance, etc, no?

Me: I like when angry white dudes who are attracted to the Sanders campaign like moths to a lightbulb (or angry young white dudes to the Trump campaign) mansplain the world to me based on their misperceptions of political reality. It helps me sleep better at night knowing that we have the internet and the Bernie Bros so that if you honestly answer the question "give me a reason to vote for someone other than Sanders" they are out there being Very Online to talk down at me. Warren leads Sanders in the polls. Warren raised more money in Q2 than Sanders. Warren is crushing Sanders in Iowa, the first state to vote and the state that gives the first real push of momentum. Warren has outshined Sanders in the first two rounds of debates. Warren is heading up, as a fairly unknown candidate. Sanders is heading down, far below what is 2016 results were and he's a known entity who isn't winning over new voters on the campaign trail. He will not win. He might win two states. If he stays in the race after Super Tuesday, way down to Biden and Warren, he will be a wrench in the process and will be detrimental to Warren beating Biden. His best function now is as a guy who introduces far-left stances so they can be integrated into the mainstream, much like happened with stuff like LGBTQ marriage and legal weed and common sense gun laws and public healthcare and stuff like that that was considered radically left 20 years ago and is now fairly common.

Julie: Mike, it's not accurate (or fair) to say that Warren plagiarized Sanders's 2016 platform. She has been studying and developing policy to rectify economic inequality and corporate malfeasance for decades.

MIke: There’s no anger about it man. I love it when white liberals accuse other white ppl of being white. That’s like one of my favorite moves.

Mike: 33, you seem like a guy who might be really into Five Thirty-Eight

Mike: Like the fact that you would even mention the ‘debates’ tells me all I need to know about your frame of reference for political reality... and that’s all of course yr prerogative but I think it’s really boring and perhaps not as hi-fi as you imagine.

Mike: You seem well-meaning and earnest (like every other tepid liberal who affectedly deifies Obama) but yr accusatory tone really hurts! I was just trying to give a good faith cross-exam of your 6-post run on Senator Warren. My grave apologies for doing a mansplain on you.

Mike: Here’s that nerd’s blog w Warren 8pts behind Sanders who is 10pts back from drooling senile weird uncle joe (posts image of Harris X poll pulled from 538 that shows Sanders is ahead of Warren and way behind Sanders)

Me: My Bernie Bros Bingo Card, as I stamp "Nate Silver Slander," is now a winner. I'll come down and collect my prize. I love how ranting about the work of a U Chicago grad and one of the world's leading data scientists is now a hallmark of a movement mostly supported by people with a fraction Silver's education. It's the Climate Change Denial of the far left: we don't like polls because they tell us our unpopular candidate is unpopular and we don't understand that polling is a vital science in our process so we [expletive] it. Except when they say Sanders is doing great then we use it as an I-told-you-so. It's also fun when people who don't understand political polls talk down to explain them to me. HarrisX has polled the *same* 1350 people every day for months and publishes a three-day average every day. They started with their set of respondents months ago and it doesn't change. Rasmussen, who runs it and launched it last year, is not interested in temporary opinion but rather sustained shifts. Therefore he slowly tracks starting from a biased baseline, with that bias often being skewed by fame. He's interested in how those people change over a whole election cycle so he can determine inflection points, he's not interested in a daily number you can wave at people on the internet to inflate Sanders' chance of winning, which dwindles with every passing news cycle. Those voters are still polling on name brand recognition, most of them are not Very Online like you and paying nano-level attention to the candidates at this point.

Me: Trump 2016: Most Americans Are Losers And It's Not Fair. Sanders 2016/2020: Most Americans Are Losers And It's Not Fair. Warren 2020: I Have A Series Of Policies With Specifics On How To Improve Disparity. No wonder she draws a different crowd than the other two.

Mike: Nate Silver commands so little respect these days because he’s so frequently wrong... but whatever fella you can ride that wave if u wanna. Happy trails.

Emily: Voting for an old white man - who is also a populist - is the least progressive choice.

Mike: Emily what does the word populist mean to you

Emily: I’m getting the sense that you don’t think I meant what I said...

Mike: Emily, no I’m genuinely curious about what that word means to you, what it connotes, etc

Emily: Michael, I am seeing how you’re engaging with other people in this thread and it isn’t out of sincere curiosity. The word populist doesn’t have a meaning “to me” it has a meaning in English and it’s a meaning that applies to both Bernie and Donald. Feel free to google it.

MIke: so by that same line of reasoning any word that can apply to two people at the same time will render those people equal in some vital capacity?

Mike: a politician who appeals to ordinary people who feel their interests are neglected by an elite and powerful class is the gist of the google definition... I am trying to figure out why that is de facto non-progressive in yr estimation

Mike: I mean it’s absolutely your right to make reductive, simplistic remarks and then refuse to explain them. Ppl do it every day.

Mike: Just seems kinda cheap

Emily: hahahahahaha

Mike: Emily oh wow I just checked yr profile and u still got the HRC worship going full-tilt huh. Yikes

Emily: I haven't done a lot of research on you (really, not super interested) but from what I'm getting I bet you're a really great guy to get to know unless one happens to be a woman with a divergent opinion. Then you get even MORE fun!\

Mike: It’s 2019 dude any expression of support or affection for Hillary [expletive] Clinton marks you as either a bad-faith cynic or a dullard. Which one are you?

Emily: uh oh... someone stuck a choorddd... went from mocking and passive aggressive to name calling. It only took like an hour!

Mike: Emily nah I was asking! But my wife calls people like you ‘Fischer-Price feminists’ as in ‘I worship a plainly untalented woman who owes her entire career to the accumulated goodwill toward her rapist husband, I’m a feminist!’

Emily: hahahahaha you're such a wacko

Julie: Michael, I don't usually defend Hillary Clinton (I voted for Sanders in the 2016 primary), but she did, you know, get into the top undergrad institution open to women at the time, as well as Yale Law, all without Bill's help. And I don't usually comment on discussions that have gone so far off the rails, but you have to admit that the way you've been talking about female candidates on this thread is not a good look for Bernie Bros.

Mike: Julie, I don’t think it’s gonna bear much consequence and again, you seem like a bad person to consult with regarding what represents a ‘good look’

Mike: Also I haven’t said anything remotely disparaging about Senator Warren. I mean I coulda gone after the fact that she lied to Harvard and multiple employers about her family history and ethnicity but that all seems kinda irrelevant

Julie: I'm sorry, I don't understand your comment. What is not going to "bear much consequence"? Why am I not a good person to consult regarding a "good look"?

Julie: You did say something disparaging about her. You said she plagiarized Sanders's 2016 platform.

Mike: Julie, there may be a total of 5 ppl following this Facebook thread. That’s a generous estimate. And I don’t typically value aesthetic or rhetorical counsel from internet strangers. that's just facts, homie.

Julie: My comment about your aggression and your disparagement of female candidates was a suggestion that you reflect on how you appear to people whose views differ from yours. I understand you are not interested in making friends here, but neither will your approach convince anyone that Sanders is the right choice this time around. Just offering some food for thought. Thanks for the conversation.

Mike: Not a single reason on this whole thread that you couldn’t pull off some frappuccino-guzzling Fisher-Price blogger’s Medium posts from two years ago

Me: This is a really cute comment from a guy trashing 538 and poll science then wielding the latest HarrisX poll like it's the sharpest knife in the deck. It's not a good look for anyone to be a condescending mansplaining dick on the internet when that person doesn't understand what they're talking about.

Mike: I’m wondering what the word mansplain means to you

Mike: also man I’m not really interested in yr opinion about what constitutes a ‘good look’

Me: Much like was said to you earlier there is no "to you", you can look up the definition yourself if you're unclear. It's when a guy is patronizing and condescending, usually to a woman but in the case of the Bernie Bros the mansplaining knows no gender.

Mike: (emoji of someone sleeping)

Mike: hey man we absolutely do not have to do this. You’re not gonna back me down or score some kinda kill shot on me that’s gonna make you feel any better about this interaction. Maybe just log off and make yrself a Campari spritzer.

Mike: If you don’t I will bc you’re [expletive] boring and I am exhausted

Me: You're invincible!

Mike: ah tyvm my guy. you’re a blinkered normie who overestimates himself


Now, we could go through unpacking all that. The repeated need to literally have how dictionary definitions of words works twice when you're acting like a huge dick and pretending the other person doesn't know how words work? Waving polls around that you don't know the methodology of as proof while simultaneously trashing polls and the person you pulled the poll from? Accusing people of being oh so bourgeois that you need your fainting couch? Trashing people then saying "I didn't trash them" in an act of just pure gaslighting. This is without any of the Abramson Classics that give us "Only Bernie Can Beat Trump" and "Bernie Would Have Won In 2016" and such.

It would go a very long way for the Sanders movement if the Sanders movement did not breed complete a-holes like Mike. Or at least pair with social media to make unintelligent angry a-holes like Mike think that they're smart and deserve an intellectual perch to talk down to people while he's spewing utter nonsense. Mike doesn't argue with any of the reasons I gave for preferring Sanders, he just wants to villify me as the devil because I'm not on board the Sanders train and therefore must be some Nate Silver spewing Campari and soda sipping dilettante stuck in middle class nowhere who can't see the truth, man. And I'm 50 times smarter, more worldly, wiser, more experienced, more educated than him on my worst day and his best. Sanders doesn't help that by largely speaking in soundbites about how life is not fair, and Warren helps elevate herself out of that by speaking in really wonky policy-based terms while also being far better at engaging people on a personal level. So there's a big reason Sanders comes across less sharp than Warren, and it has to do with Sanders, the way he presents, and the reactions that he and the way he presents inspire in people. It is, objectively, not unfounded or unfair that people have that impression and it's part of the reason that Sanders isn't going to win.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 30 19, 8:02 pm 
Offline
darjeeling sipping elite
User avatar

Joined: October 17 06, 11:19 am
Posts: 36901
Location: Huis Clos
You should probably quit accusing people of mansplaining. You may have inadvertently helped understand the term gaslighting.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 30 19, 8:58 pm 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Chicago, IL
lukethedrifter wrote:
You should probably quit accusing people of mansplaining. You may have inadvertently helped understand the term gaslighting.


And you should try to argue with the post and not the poster. Argue with the point that Sanders and his campaign have drawn some pretty lowest-common-denominator angry white American male failures who are as fueled by disinformation and a need to fight over grievances and finger-pointing as they are by policy. Argue over my assertion that they hamper instead of help his campaign. Why are none of the other heroes of the new left, most of them female, not endorsing him? Let's talk about that instead of you finding me to be a know-it-all. Either way, I can take it, I've been a pariah on this board for being forceful about something I'm right about that people didn't want to hear as long as I've been on this board.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 30 19, 9:13 pm 
Offline
darjeeling sipping elite
User avatar

Joined: October 17 06, 11:19 am
Posts: 36901
Location: Huis Clos
A) at some point the post and the poster are one (I believe that was Confucius)
B) 话不投机半句多 (it’s a Chinese proverb i learned last night reading about John Chau viewtopic.php?f=4&t=58261&start=110#p1923151
C) I’m pretty much on your side so consider them friendly words


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: September 3 19, 9:23 am 
Offline
bronoun enthusiast
User avatar

Joined: April 14 06, 10:45 pm
Posts: 28444
Location: extremely online
33anda3rd wrote:
thrill wrote:
I would be interested to hear the perspective/line of thinking from people who rank Warren high and Sanders low, or vice-versa. No agenda. Genuinely interested in your perspective.


I don’t want to end capitalism

I do want to end the filibuster

I find Warren more engaging, smarter, better on policy, younger, less grievance-y, and all around more personally as a person and statesman.

I’ve become worn down on Sanders also by the angry white mansplainy crowd that so vocally echoes him which makes me dislike Sanders a bit whether that’s fair or not and also wonder why I liked him so much the last time around.

You aren't really who I am interested in hearing from because you have Bernie in your second tier. I'm more confused by the people who might rank one of the two progressives (B or W) high and the other low. Like why would you rank Bernie tier 1 and Warren tier 3/4 or vice versa. Is it the "S" word for better or worse? Is it something identity-related (gender/religious)?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group