President Marianne

User avatar
mingtown
Member
Posts: 1169
Joined: September 24th, 2014, 1:15 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN
GEMP Username: mingtown

Re: President Marianne

Post by mingtown »

rsersen wrote:
March 4th, 2020, 5:09 pm
A someone who voted for Sanders yesterday, I agree with every word of this. I had hoped that Bernie's campaign had been making inroads with the voters that he missed out on 4 years ago, but it does not appear to have happened. I've seen the same amount of angry fingerpointing at Warren, DNC and Biden, but never at Bernie's own campaign. I think a non-insignificant portion of Bernie's primary votes in 2016 came from Dems who simply voted against Hillary. Bernie's only slightly better performance seems to jibe with this theory.


Image Image
2018 WI State Champ
2019 MPC Consolation Top 4

User avatar
quickdraw3457
Multimedia and Special Projects Advocate
Posts: 26300
Joined: September 3rd, 2003, 5:10 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
GEMP Username: quickdraw

Re: President Marianne

Post by quickdraw3457 »

rsersen wrote:
March 4th, 2020, 5:09 pm
Bernie had 4 years to prepare for this run, and to learn the lessons from 2016. Years to build infrastructure and broaden his support among key demographics. Years to figure out how to better persuade moderates to his cause. He either didn't bother with any of that, or failed miserably trying.
The problem I have with this is it means he had 4 years to become more moderate, which would have destroyed the appeal to a lot of people anyway. He isn't a moderate, and either becoming more moderate or pretending to be moderate was going to lose him a lot of votes (to Warren likely) that he may have (but probably wouldn't have) got back from it.

I like Bernie because he's the only one that I actually trust that he believes what he's saying. He never was going to pretend to be moderate to get voters because that's now who he is, and that's why I (and surely others) like him.
Matt C. - Pittsburgh, PA
multimedia@starwarsccg.org
Image
Hunter wrote:quickdraw is right

User avatar
Gergall
Rules Advocate
Posts: 21063
Joined: December 9th, 2002, 1:14 am
Location: Long Island, NY

Re: President Marianne

Post by Gergall »

Great post quickdraw! :yes:

I can make my peace with this outcome. Bernie was his true self and millions of people support what he is offering. But if more people than that support a Biden/moderate candidate, then so be it. There doesn't need to be a scapegoat. It just is how it is.
Greg Zinn
Image

User avatar
JarJarDrinks
Member
Posts: 26439
Joined: November 4th, 2003, 10:01 am

Re: President Marianne

Post by JarJarDrinks »

My point wasn't to blame the DNC. Just to point out that they're usually a bunch of clumsy bumbling idiots, but a candidate that wants to get money out of politics comes along and starts getting a ton of support and all of sudden
Spoiler
Show
Image
dx_37 wrote:
October 2nd, 2019, 12:12 pm
I would be all for a reset if I get to be on the reset team
"Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking."
- Bill Maher

"How you play the game is important. But for me, it's about if you win or lose."
- Derek Jeter

rsersen
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1739
Joined: January 28th, 2017, 3:42 pm
Location: Hanover, PA
GEMP Username: rsersen
Contact:

Re: President Marianne

Post by rsersen »

The problem I have with this is it means he had 4 years to become more moderate, which would have destroyed the appeal to a lot of people anyway. He isn't a moderate, and either becoming more moderate or pretending to be moderate was going to lose him a lot of votes (to Warren likely) that he may have (but probably wouldn't have) got back from it.

I like Bernie because he's the only one that I actually trust that he believes what he's saying. He never was going to pretend to be moderate to get voters because that's now who he is, and that's why I (and surely others) like him.
I didn't mean to imply that he should become more moderate, or pretend to be. I also greatly respect Bernie for always sticking to his convictions, even if it's to his own detriment. It's sadly a rarity in politics.

But, I think he could have found ways to present his arguments to Democrats in ways that would have appealed more to moderates and older voters. Saying "we should do these things because it's the right thing to do, and everyone else does it" may be a no-brainer argument to progressives, but it's just not as effective with the rest of the party. For right or wrong, people want to know what they stand to gain from it.

So, instead of just hammering the point that "everyone deserves an education without being buried in debt", explain how it's a rising tide that would lift all boats. How having more college-educated young people, with more disposable income, getting better paying jobs earlier in life, would vastly improve local economies and the quality of life for entire communities. Leading to less crime, higher property values, better schools, etc. Walk through that entire domino effect, so that the 35 year old who already paid off their loans, but is now looking to settle down in their first home, has a reason to support that policy besides pure altruism. I'm sure M4A could be presented in a similar manner.

And I'll admit that I did not watch every debate, or listen to every stump speech this cycle, so maybe he did try that and it just fell flat. But I don't recall hearing anything like this in the couple weeks leading up to Super Tuesday, and as someone who also voted Bernie, I really wish I had.
PC Foils/AI/Chips Haves & Wants - let's make a deal
stubbly wrote:Echo Base Trooper is the Siri of SWCCG
Image Image

User avatar
BrenDerlin
Member
Posts: 3572
Joined: November 3rd, 2002, 12:34 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: President Marianne

Post by BrenDerlin »

Hey Ryan, I like you and you made valid points so I'm sorry to give you the Hunter treatment, but I just wanted to push back on a few things.
rsersen wrote:
March 4th, 2020, 5:09 pm
I think the Sanders camp and his supporters need to accept some of this blame amongst themselves, rather than just scapegoating Warren or the DNC or the MSM or whatever the excuse of the hour is.

Bernie had 4 years to prepare for this run, and to learn the lessons from 2016. Years to build infrastructure and broaden his support among key demographics. Years to figure out how to better persuade moderates to his cause. He either didn't bother with any of that, or failed miserably trying.
I think you're half right, half wrong on this - The Bernie campaign did in fact spend the last several years building campaign infrastructure, beefing up staffing and policy proposals, and doing outreach to key communities (specifically latino, muslim and immigrant communities more broadly). No state got more time and investment than California - a state he lost to Clinton in 2016 - and his strong performance here is 100% due to a year+ of constant organizing by both paid staffers and an army of volunteers, and since it's a big part of why he's still in the race, I would hardly call a miserable failure.

But ultimately the campaign didn't go far enough to build ties with African American communities, especially in the south. Even though the 2020 campaign is a marked improvement on 2016 in this regard, it clearly missed the mark and I hope there is some soul searching within the campaign about what exactly went wrong and what (if anything) can be done to salvage that going forward.
rsersen wrote:
March 4th, 2020, 5:09 pm
Instead:

1) He made great promises without adequately explaining how they'd be paid for, let alone how he could work with both parties to get them through Congress. Something his rivals hit him with early and often. His answer of "How much time do you have" when asked to explain how M4A would be funded has to rank as one the all-time worst debate answers. Dismissive and condescending response to a completely legitimate question. No surprise that voters just started assuming he was full of hot air.
He's answered the funding question dozens of times at this point, has a page on his website laying out detailed answers, and yet the question keeps getting asked as if it's the first time anyone's thought to ask it. It definitely comes across as an innocuous question since it's asked so often, but it's very telling that it's only asked of those trying to justify social programs and almost never to those trying to justify war, incarceration, or corporate subsidies. Maybe it's because it's a bad faith question meant to force a frame of "fiscal responsibility" only onto one side of the debate - it really seems like a question meant only to get a candidate to say the word "tax" so the moderators can cut them off and move on. And our current president ran on a policy of building an enormous wall, and we all remember HIS answer of how to pay for it - I'm a bit surprised you think that Sanders' answer was worse.

As far as passing legislation through congress, yeah his full answer isn't convincing to many people because it'd be unprecedented and it's not immediately obvious what he means when he only has 90 seconds to answer. I don't want to get into it here for similar reasons but I will say that passing laws through congress is an issue for literally every president, and the assumption is that because Sanders' plans go farther than what's typical in post-Reagan American politics that he wouldn't be able to pass anything. I think it's likely he wouldn't be able to pass his policies exactly as he's running on them now (especially within the first two years) and would have to compromise and scale them back to pass them through congress. But that happens with every piece of legislation that's passed, and personally I'd rather have a compromised version of a bold policy than a compromised version of a less ambitious one.

Consequently, this is also why he doesn't give a snappy answer to "how do you pay for it" because he's honest about how congress works. He has a menu of options of how to pay for things, but it'll ultimately depend on what can pass through congress. He doesn't fall into the trap of picking one because it sounds good, which may ultimately be hurting him because most everyone else is more than willing to say whatever if they think it's what people want to hear.
rsersen wrote:
March 4th, 2020, 5:09 pm
2) Continued to rail against centrists and "the establishment", which only served to turn off the moderate voters he needed. And his supporters (particularly in online communities like Reddit and Twitter) were just as toxic, going scorched earth on anyone who dared support any another candidate. And - spoiler alert - they're not taking today very well either. Just in the last few hours I've read no less than 3 dozen comments hoping that Biden and baby boomers die from Coronavirus, that black people are too stupid to know what's good for them, or that Democrats in southern states just shouldn't be able to vote because, idk, reasons. Really hard to imagine why more people didn't feel the Bern.
I mean, I've been in enough online communities to know that toxicity comes from all stripes of the political spectrum (and reddit in particular can be REAL bad, even if they're just talking about videogames). But generally I agree; * on people might help get your own side riled up but it's not an effective way to persuade others and Bernie would likely be better off if they would knock it off. To be fair, there's also reports of Russian troll farms trying to sow division and "helping" Bernie by posing as supporters online - which if true I don't think would totally explain the issue away but it would help explain why it seems so amplified.

Contrary to what you might think, the campaign has done SOME work to persuade moderates - especially at their doors - but due to diminishing returns of a strategy like that in field crowded with moderate candidates, it's been mostly been confined to early states like Iowa. If you're a moderate voter and there are 4+ moderates running as well as a socialist (along with a Harvard professor who's somewhere in between, and uh... whatever Yang is) the socialist is gonna have an uphill battle getting you to listen to him because you have so many other options. The fact that Bernie won the popular vote in a deeply moderate/conservative state like Iowa should tell you something about how possible it is, as long as you're able to mobilize your base as well (which admittedly has been their focus).

If this had stayed a crowded field, just mobilizing the (fairly sizable) base could've been an effective strategy by itself, but obviously since Pete and Amy detonated their suicide vests that's no longer an option, and while I'm sure Bernie's team knew a consolidation was coming eventually, no one expected it to happen so suddenly right before Super Tuesday. Ultimately it's all academic at this point because now that it's a 1 v 1 race, they have to draw a stark contrast with the voters' only other real option - and it's gonna be way easier to draw that contrast with Joe than it would've been with Pete/Amy/Kamala or even Liz. I'm not saying it'll be easy or even likely, but Joe is vulnerable, which has been evident the whole time even if the events of the past week might make it hard to see.
rsersen wrote:
March 4th, 2020, 5:09 pm
3) Pinned his hopes on a voting bloc that simply does not, and never has, shown up when it matters. 13% turnout for the 18-29 demographic is abysmal, there's no way to sugarcoat it. When it comes to starting a revolution, apparently they have time to post on social media, but standing in line to actually cast a vote is a bridge too far.
The youth turnout hasn't been astronomically higher but it is trending up from comparable elections (when only one party is holding a primary). Yes, some were predicting a huge blowout youth vote which didn't happen, but I don't think it's accurate to say that the campaign was pinning all their hopes on that. Maybe pundits were, and if it had worked out that way we would be talking about if Biden could keep it close with Bernie instead of the other way around. Also, you don't really think that the people who posted about Bernie online are the same people who didn't vote, do you?

But it's impossible to deny that Sanders' numbers with the other end of the age spectrum are abysmal, and 65+ has always been Biden's strongest voting block. If Bernie has a chance of winning or at least keeping it close, he'll have to make the case to those voters, and there is no way to sugarcoat it - that won't be easy.

The campaign is currently running ads in upcoming states contrasting Bernie's record on Social Security with Biden's, as well as ones hitting Joe on trade (a big issue for people in the Rust Belt who lost their factory jobs in the 80s and 90s). We'll see if that gives him any traction, it might help some but I think what Bernie needs most is some sort of earned media attention. I doubt it's possible to do anything on the scale of what Biden got in the 72 hours after South Carolina, but something along the lines of Warren endorsing him would help (who knows, maybe along with Yang and any of the other former candidates who haven't endorsed anyone yet). I'm less and less confident that will actually happen, but this race has already been so volatile, and Biden has about 16% of the total delegates, Bernie has about 14%. As long as it stays relatively close through the next round of voting on Tuesday, so that they're on even footing for the 1 v 1 debate that's coming soon after, you could start to see a shift.
WUBBA LUBBA DUB DUB!
Brad Eier wrote:i have no idea who matt thorton is, possibly the son of billy bob?

AdmiralMotti89
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2114
Joined: February 28th, 2016, 3:38 pm
Location: Nebraska, USA

Re: President Marianne

Post by AdmiralMotti89 »

Eric Garchow
My eBay Store 10% off orders of 10+ items, plus free shipping on orders of $50+
My videos/photos of opening sealed SWCCG + other SWCCG things.
My Frequently Updating SWCCG Wants List

The Franchise
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 12749
Joined: January 26th, 2005, 9:20 pm
Location: Akron

Re: President Marianne

Post by The Franchise »

Today i learned:

Bernie was apparently still in the race as of yesterday? Who knew

Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic”