2020 Democratic Primary

[Brenda Archer]

What I have heard is that vulnerable down ballot people think Biden is their best bet, Sanders their worst.

Definitely true in some states. Sanders needs to improve his ground game.

 

[Salome]

As I see it, Sanders energizes people who don't vote to vote.

There is no evidence for this. If it were true he wouldn't have lost in 2016 and wouldn’t be losing now.

But it looks like the DNC has made its choice.

No. Democratic voters have made their choices. And this narrative of assigning their votes as a conspiracy of the DNC is not only unproductive and silly, but largely based on the racist erasure and dismissal of the importance of the black vote by team Sanders.

We don't really have a left wing party in this country. We have a conservative party and a fascist party.

This is ridiculous, and the attitude that only the most far-left counts as left is why white progressives keep losing the center-left and kneecapping our progress.

 

[Jolene Benoir]

Speaking of SS.

Trump Calls for Social Security Cuts for the 4th Consecutive Year | The Motley Fool

In Trump's fiscal 2021 budget, he calls for a reduction in outlays to the Social Security program of $24 billion over the next decade. More than half of these savings would be derived from changes made to Social Security's Disability Insurance (SSDI) program.

The president's proposed "cut" to Social Security is of special concern to the 9.9 million people who received an SSDI benefit check last month. Of these 9.9 million people, almost 8.4 million are disabled workers, many of whom are reliant on the $1,258 a month that the program pays, on average.

In the fiscal 2018 budget, Trump's proposal called for disability program reforms, without much elaboration. However, the appendixes of the proposal laid out $72 billion in savings between 2018 and 2027, if implemented.

In Trump's fiscal 2019 budget proposal, a total of $64 billion in Social Security outlay reductions are forecast between 2019 and 2028. Again, the president chose to focus on perceived inefficiencies with SSDI. A notable chunk of the savings are expected to be derived from limiting retroactive SSDI pay to six months from the current 12 months that approved long-term disabled workers are allowed to collect.

 

[Salome]

As for all the rest, there's no way to run a controlled experiment to show who could win against Trump. We're all guided by our own best guesses.

FWIW, none of the polling indicates Biden or Bernie with any statistical advantage regarding their viability against Trump. They’re both within the margin of error of one another vs Trump. So voting Biden or Sanders should simply be about preference and personal instinct. It’s a primary.

 

[Brenda Archer]

Uncle Ralf is the Democratic party and its voters? Well, yes. Should the other cousin become the nominee, yes I fully expect you and others to honor the wishes of the voters you claim solidarity with. I understand that many Bernie voters wish to completely overtake the Democratic party as outlined in other posts within this thread (Dementor?), and that it is quite fashionable to shit upon the party, but you really, really should not shit upon its rank and file.

Do what you want for the primaries. As I think we've all stated, that is when you vote for what you truly want. But when the dirt hits the road, I certainly hope that Bernie supporters will help us remove the huge threat to us all (Bernie and Biden supporter alike), unlike last time. Should they refuse again? I wouldn't expect them to be allowed back into the tent, pretending to be Democrats.

Fantastical - Imaginative or fanciful; remote from reality

Most Bernie supporters are VoteBlueNoMatterWho. The privileged white male online faction is a problem, in the same sense their whole demographic can be a problem - people who are nominally against Trump, but not threatened by him personally. I think Stonekettle’s recent rant about this problem addressed it well.

As far as I’m concerned, they’re just Trump voters. They definitely do not speak for supporters of Sanders who are in other demographics.

 

[Beebo Brink]

Definitely true in some states. Sanders needs to improve his ground game.

Sanders needs to improve his BEHAVIOR.

There is a sharp rebuke inherent in losing states where Biden had no ground game at all. This is a clear "I'll take anyone but Sanders" statement from large numbers of voters. The problem is not that they didn't know about Sanders, quite the opposite. They really don't like Sanders.

 

[Brenda Archer]

Speaking of SS.

Trump Calls for Social Security Cuts for the 4th Consecutive Year | The Motley Fool

This is going to push even more disabled people into the streets. The whole reason for getting SSDI is that you used to have a job (people who never worked can’t get SSDI) and now you can’t work.

 

[Jolene Benoir]

Most Bernie supporters are VoteBlueNoMatterWho. The privileged white male online faction is a problem, in the same sense their whole demographic can be a problem - people who are nominally against Trump, but not threatened by him personally. I think Stonekettle’s recent rant about this problem addressed it well.

As far as I’m concerned, they’re just Trump voters. They definitely do not speak for supporters of Sanders who are in other demographics.

Yet, most Bernie supporters welcome them and claim solidarity with them, as evidenced by Cristalle saying Bubblesort is "on her side". At the very minimum, excuses are made for their attacks upon women and other minorities, all in the name of them being claimed "fellow Bernie supporters". Some/much of what is posted by the "vote blue, no matter who" Bernie supporters dips well into the same territory as well as conspiracy nonsense.

How are we to know the difference? How are we to judge which supporters can be counted upon and which cannot?

 

[Jolene Benoir]

This is going to push even more disabled people into the streets. The whole reason for getting SSDI is that you used to have a job (people who never worked can’t get SSDI) and now you can’t work.

Which is why, in my analogy, I spoke of Trump attacking people's livelihoods, among other crucial basic needs. Doesn't get much more basic than that.

 

[Salome]

 

[Cristalle]

Yet, most Bernie supporters welcome them and claim solidarity with them, as evidenced by Cristalle saying Bubblesort is "on her side". At the very minimum, excuses are made for their attacks upon women and other minorities, all in the name of them being claimed "fellow Bernie supporters". Some/much of what is posted by the "vote blue, no matter who" Bernie supporters dips well into the same territory as well as conspiracy nonsense.

How are we to know the difference? How are we to judge which supporters can be counted upon and which cannot?

All I meant by him being on the same side is by being pro-Bernie, not Bernie or Bust. SINCE I'VE SAID MULTIPLE FUCKING TIMES THAT I'M NOT BERNIE OR BUST.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I can't tell where you're coming from. Are you denying Joe has put Social Security on the table in the past, or are you unaware of it, or are you thinking he won't do it again, or are you thinking it won't be a bad thing if he does it again?



So...let's elect someone who doesn't even want what Sanders wants?

I've said it before. The first step to getting change is to elect someone who wants change.

While obviously I don't have a vote in this election, and don't face the same issues as do you, I fear I must disagree, in that I think the first step to getting change is to elect someone who you think not only wants change but is also capable of delivering it in a timely and competent manner.

When I read about the damage done by Trump and his minions and sycophants, whether through neglect, incompetence or political malice and meddling, to the US professional civil service, it occurs to me -- unless, that is, Trump is correct when he says such reports are so much fake news put about by the Deep State and lying mainstream media to be mean to him -- that in order to work out the detailed plans for moving from the present shambolic system of paying for people's health care to a more rational and fairer system that delivers treatment for free at the point of delivery based on clinical need and not the patient's ability to pay, President Sanders is going to need an effective and functioning civil service.

You're talking about huge sums of money here -- 17% of US GPD, apparently -- and you have to have robust systems in place to collect and distribute it, and to audit it all.

Setting up the systems to do that, and then running them, is going to require a great deal of work by skilled professionals of the kind who've apparently been leaving the US civil service in droves over the last three years, so President Sanders is going to have to recruit a lot of specialist help, first, before anything gets very far.

That's in addition, of course, to the task of managing whatever the Covid-19 epidemic/pandemic has turned into by this time next year, and what it's done to the US healthcare system, along with all the as-yet-unknown and unknowable effects it's going to have on the US and world economies.

And, of course, healthcare reform, while important, isn't the only item President Sanders will find in his in-tray, and won't be the most urgent one.

Is the Sanders campaign addressing these issues? Because if I were a US citizen I'd be very worried about Sanders trying push through his much-needed reforms without the administrative infrastructure in place, and the whole thing going catastrophically wrong, to the delight of Republicans looking for proof that socialised medicine doesn't work.

Alternatively, how are his more radical supporters going to react when, at the end of his first term, he comes up for reelection with no significant public healthcare reforms to show for it because he's been too busy fixing all the damage done by his predecessor?

That's what would worry me.

 

[Cristalle]

Biden has been trying to cut Social Security and Medicare for 40 years. Obama and Biden put Social Security on the table in a "Grand Bargain" and the only reason it wasn't cut was because Republicans were too belligerent to compromise and take yes for an answer. There is plenty reason to expect that Biden as president would enter into another "Grand Bargain" because he's been agreeing with that for DECADES. Saying there is no reason to think Biden would do that now is straight delusional. He may protest, but Biden is a habitual liar. He's been lying about his non-existent civil rights activism, lied about getting arrested in South Africa to see Mandela, lied about his own past involvement in the Iraq War and plagiarism and he's lying about not being willing to cut Social Security.


This features a piece from an interview in 2007 when he was running against Obama and Hillary. The "Grand Bargain" offer occurred in 2010 because in Washington, the "adult" thing to do is to be willing to hurt the most vulnerable among us. People like Biden are why the country is as it is, why people have been clamoring for change for three elections now. Asking the arsonist to become a firefighter is a stupid thing to do. The man has been on the wrong side of every major mistake this country has made in the last 40 years.

 

[Cristalle]

That's in addition, of course, to the task of managing whatever the Covid-19 epidemic/pandemic has turned into by this time next year, and what it's done to the US healthcare system, along with all the as-yet-unknown and unknowable effects it's going to have on the US and world economies.

And, of course, healthcare reform, while important, isn't the only item President Sanders will find in his in-tray, and won't be the most urgent one.

Is the Sanders campaign addressing these issues? Because if I were a US citizen I'd be very worried about Sanders trying push through his much-needed reforms without the administrative infrastructure in place, and the whole thing going catastrophically wrong, to the delight of Republicans looking for proof that socialised medicine doesn't work.

Alternatively, how are his more radical supporters going to react when, at the end of his first term, he comes up for reelection with no significant public healthcare reforms to show for it because he's been too busy fixing all the damage done by his predecessor?

That's what would worry me.

That is implicit to every administration and the American people by and large don't get down into these kinds of weeds. Nobody demanded that level of detail from Obama, who famously campaigned on "hope" and "change." This "he can't get anything done" narrative is a pernicious smear that Hillary trotted out to make it seem like Bernie hasn't done anything, but as I have previously posted, that is a lie. Bernie Sanders has a long record of compromise and advocacy, but because he isn't a narcissistic self-promoter, people don't know that.

We have an enormous bureaucracy that survives no matter what administration is in power. And there are a large amount of progressive activists and academics who are qualified to take up many of these positions. Sanders is not Trump. He cares about good governance and it's rather insulting to assume that he wouldn't seek out good people or that good people wouldn't step up to take those positions.

 

[Salome]

 

[Anya Ristow]

Uncle Ralf is the Democratic party and its voters?

I thought the abusive bastard we were talking about was Trump?

but you really, really should not shit upon its rank and file.

I'm not. I have no beef with voters. Somewhere the rank and file got the idea that Sanders' railing against the establishment was an attack on rank and file. I told Salome that I hope Sanders is aware of this perception, since it is a problem for him to deal with. But me? I've asked for help understanding where this shit is coming from, but if I don't get it, I don't have the same burden that Sanders does. I can think you're just gaslighting me and it doesn't really matter if I'm right.

 

[Jolene Benoir]

The abusive bastard came from Uncle Ralf. He set me up with the fucker. My own damned cousin. You want me to turn away the fantastical partner I found outside the family for the other cousin Uncle Ralf is trying to set me up with?

I thought the abusive bastard we were talking about was Trump?

I'm not. I have no beef with voters. Somewhere the rank and file got the idea that Sanders' railing against the establishment was an attack on rank and file. I told Salome that I hope Sanders is aware of this perception, since it is a problem for him to deal with. But me? I've asked for help understanding where this shit is coming from, but if I don't get it, I don't have the same burden that Sanders does. I can think you're just gaslighting me and it doesn't really matter if I'm right.

I quote, "The abusive bastard came from Uncle Ralf. Clearly, Uncle Ralf is not Trump. I also quote, "the other cousin that Uncle Ralf is trying to set me up with?

Well, who is Uncle Ralf, eh? It's quite reasonable to assume you mean the Democratic party as "the other cousin" has to be Biden, and you say that Uncle Ralf is trying to set you up with him. It leaves little doubt.

Who is gaslighting who here?

 

[Beebo Brink]

I have no beef with voters. Somewhere the rank and file got the idea that Sanders' railing against the establishment was an attack on rank and file.

That's because "the establishment" is not as divorced from the average "rank and file" Democrat as you believe it to be. Not everyone shares your disdain for the establishment and for leadership. An attack upon them is seen as an attack on all Dems, because there is a party cohesion and unity of purpose that Sanders does not seem to recognize or respect.

There are times I have disliked specific people within the Democratic establishment (DWS comes immediately to mind), but they are the exception rather than the rule. When Sanders rails against the Democratic establishment as some monolithic entity, I just can't go there with him. There are people in that level of leadership -- such as Pelosi -- that I admire and respect. There are always specific actions that can be criticized with some validity, but these broad-sides are just so much noise.

 

[Salome]

That's because "the establishment" is not as divorced from the average "rank and file" Democrat as you believe it to be. Not everyone shares your disdain for the establishment and for leadership. An attack upon them is seen as an attack on all Dems, because there is a party cohesion and unity of purpose that Sanders does not seem to recognize or respect.

Once Bernie started using “the establishment“ against Planned Parenthood and leaders like Jim Clyburn, it’s become pretty clear that it’s now not just a disconnect, but a dogwhistle, imho. Looking at the way Dems are voting, I’m not alone in that feeling.

 

[Anya Ristow]

You're overthinking this, but okay...

I quote, "The abusive bastard came from Uncle Ralf. Clearly, Uncle Ralf is not Trump.

Trump is the abusive bastard. Uncle Ralf begat the abusive bastard.

"the other cousin" has to be Biden

Well, who is Uncle Ralf, eh? It's quite reasonable to assume you mean the Democratic party

no

Remember, Uncle Ralf begat Trump, so how would that be the Democratic party? Hyperbolic blaming of them notwithstanding.

Uncle Ralf is just a cynical view of the American leadership class, from which the millionaire pundits working for their billionaire handlers choose our leaders.

It's also possible the story was just malformed trash.