Poll of the Day > Buttigieg dropped out.

(+) Yeah! (+)

nt
---

Lol, Warren ain't giving up though. Booty-gig never had a shot in the first place. Too many homophobes.

---

So did Tom and Amy

Moderate Voltron, assemble

---

And Klobachars dumbass.

Shes endorsing Biden.

Theyre gonna steal from Bernie again. Just hope we survive the next 4 years of Trump.

---

lol everyone is dropping out to get behind biden

are these people fucking stupid? I would gladly vote for trump over Biden. At least trump is fucking hilarious.

---

So the only way they think they can beat Bernie... is to have a republican be the head of the DNC

---

what even is Bidens platform?

guize I worked with obama

---

Lokarin posted...

So the only way they think they can beat Bernie... is to have a republican be the head of the DNC

They believed their own lie that the reason Bernie is ahead is because the moderate vote is being split amongst too many other candidates.

Either A) theyre dumb and are banking that Bernie isnt everyone elses second choice or B) It doesnt matter because theyve already rigged the game.

Trump got impeached trying to fuck over Biden. How smart would it had been if Biden wasnt even the front runner. But nope... Democrats are experts at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. And its starting to become more and more evident that theyre just there to make it SEEM as if we, the people, have a say in policies. Notice how DNC policies are put in place and removed not long after. But shit like Reagans tax cuts, that benefit the rich, have remained for decades. Even with 2 full term democrat presidents in place since then.

Its all a fucking show. Land of the free my ass.

---

Obama is holding off any endorsement until after the nominee is chosen to actually try to unite the party

Any candidates dropping out and endorsing someone now are just trying to put their thumb on the scales, again. They really learned no lessons from 2016.

---

HornedLion posted...

And Klobachars dumbass.

Shes endorsing Biden.

Theyre gonna steal from Bernie again. Just hope we survive the next 4 years of Trump.

Its not like bernie could beat trump anyways

---

Muscles posted...

Its not like bernie could beat trump anyways

Not the point.

The thought of "I win because you lost" is why a 2 party system is inherently broken.

---

Mead posted...

Obama is holding off any endorsement until after the nominee is chosen to actually try to unite the party

Any candidates dropping out and endorsing someone now are just trying to put their thumb on the scales, again. They really learned no lessons from 2016.

Every single democrat(with the exception of the squad and Bernie) would rather see Trump in office than Bernie. Its what their bosses(donors) want. You think theyre not being warned to NOT allow Bernie to win?

The time for a revolution is long overdue.


---

I mean, it should be the point because none of these idiots were ever going to beat trump, none of these guys are charasmatic or moderate enough to get the moderate vote away from trump

The DNC is so out of touch with what voters want, if anything they should have ran a centrist republican

---

Lokarin posted...

Not the point.

The thought of "I win because you lost" is why a 2 party system is inherently broken.

Indeed. It sucks that we've devolved to this level. I can't think of a more shallow-ass reason to vote for somebody than "Who can win the popularity contest against the rival?"

Actual plans for the betterment of the country be damned.

---

Muscles posted...

get the moderate vote away from trump

Are all Republicans just constantly high

---

Moderate democrats rarely do well for the presidency. The idea that anyone is gonna be fired up to go out and vote for a centrist that wants to maintain a status quo while so many people are struggling is an indulgent delusion.

Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry. All moderate Democrats.

---

I'm not a Republican by any means, I hate trump and hoped the DNC could find another obama or slick willy that could actually be charismatic and steal the moderate vote, but they were stupid and keep going further left

---

okay muscles

thanks for your usual wisdom

---

Say what you want but trump's winning again because the Democrats are going too far left and picked a bunch of lame ducks that aren't charismatic enough to steal voters

---

Muscles posted...

I'm not a Republican by any means, I hate trump and hoped the DNC could find another obama or slick willy that could actually be charismatic and steal the moderate vote, but they were stupid and keep going further left

He really just said that.

---

Mead posted...

okay muscles

thanks for your usual wisdom

Well, in this particular case, he's not wrong. Since Clinton and Obama, the Demo party has indeed swayed farther left (more "niche" with each election). But, as we've discussed in the other topic about the polarity of the two-party system, primaries inherently weed out moderates, by design (since voters hate compromise).

---

HornedLion posted...

The time for a revolution is long overdue.

What type of revolution you talking here?

BeerOnTap posted...

What type of revolution you talking here?

The type where we run a train on your mom.

---

BeerOnTap posted...

What type of revolution you talking here?

Turn 360 degrees then walk away

---

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
-Thomas Jefferson


---

The field is narrowing, but that makes the chicanery inside the Democratic Party more obvious.

It's disgusting.

---

Blighboy posted...

Moderate Voltron, assemble

lol

Mead posted...

Any candidates dropping out and endorsing someone now are just trying to put their thumb on the scales, again. They really learned no lessons from 2016.

Completely disagree.
They're not obligated to run any longer than they decide to, and they're free to endorse whoever the fuck they want.
First Past the Post voting means whichever side (moderate vs. left wing) has less major candidates running wins. That's how it is. You seem unwilling to accept that fact, but that's your problem.

It's really just:

Blighboy posted...

Moderate Voltron, assemble

:D

It's just a shame there wasn't a single charismatic, left-of-center candidate that could've taken the "moderate" mantle and instead we have boring ol' Biden.

streamofthesky posted...

They're not obligated to run any longer than they decide to, and they're free to endorse whoever the fuck they want.

They certainly are free to do what they want but I think Obama has the right idea as far as party unity goes

Putting thumbs on the scale instead of listening to voters is exactly how the DNC sabotaged themselves in 2016

---

if bernie gets fucked by Biden, I will de-register to vote

---

Mead posted...

They certainly are free to do what they want but I think Obama has the right idea as far as party unity goes

Putting thumbs on the scale instead of listening to voters is exactly how the DNC sabotaged themselves in 2016

Obama, sure. And it makes sense. He wasn't running, and he's basically "above" elections at this point.

These are people who were competing w/ Bernie, Biden, and Warren. Who voters in many states were about to go out tomorrow and vote for. So them directing their preferred recipient of those votes makes sense. Doesn't mean voters will listen. Might even be a backlash at how quick and coordinated it feels like. (The reality is....only 3 days between SC primary and the biggest primary day of the year basically forced things this way. If it really were "rigged", they'd have done this much earlier and spread out)

Muscles posted...

Its not like bernie could beat trump anyways

He can now and he could've in 2016.
---

DirtBasedSoap posted...

lol everyone is dropping out to get behind biden

are these people fucking stupid? I would gladly vote for trump over Biden. At least trump is fucking hilarious.

trump is fucking hilarious? you mean intentionally funny?

GanonsSpirit posted...

He can now and he could've in 2016.

That's debatable (both figuratively and literally). Even brushing aside his socialism / free stuff talking points, his weak-ass "diplomacy solves everything" foreign policy will drive moderates towards Trump (since not all democrats are anti-military). Just watch his Colbert interview, if you get the chance. He actually says he wants to take people who have been indoctrinated to swear "Death to America" since their very childhood, and "sit them down in a room" to talk out our differences.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHq6xauQOcs

The guy quite literally wants to negotiate with terrorists.

---

shipwreckers posted...

The guy quite literally wants to negotiate with terrorists.

you mean the exact thing the trump administration just did yesterday?

---

Mead posted...

you mean the exact thing the trump administration just did yesterday?

That's a fair point. Both Trump and Obama made multiple attempts to talk things out with groups like the taliban (Trump's efforts have been going on for a while, actually).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/10/trumps-taliban-invite-is-one-most-shameful-moments-his-presidency/

At least Obama had enough sense to do these negotiations behind closed doors, and both Obama and Trump had enough sense to NOT make it a campaign platform during their elections.

Also, nobody is saying that diplomacy SHOULDN'T be pursued if it's an option. But a "diplomacy solves everything" approach is going to be considered naive at best in foreign policy debates.


---

AirJordan2345 posted...

you mean intentionally funny?

no lol

---

What's weird is people are calling Bernie the "radical left" when if he was running in Canada he'd be center-right

---

Lokarin posted...

What's weird is people are calling Bernie the "radical left" when if he was running in Canada he'd be center-right

I'm not sure I'd say that. Political issues are different so it's difficult to copy paste politicians to other countries. However, the thing in most countries with universal healthcare is that an attack on universal healthcare is political suicide. Nobody does it regardless of where they sit on the spectrum.

---

shipwreckers posted...

The guy quite literally wants to negotiate with terrorists.

Negotiating with terrorists means offering them things to prevent them from terrorizing. Sitting down and talking with a terrorist to settle ideological differences isn't negotiation, it's conversation.

That, and as nice as "we don't negotiate with terrorists" is as a slogan, it's really quite silly to take such an absolute approach to anything. Generally, it's a bad idea because you're trading short-term safety for long-term harm (since giving them what they want tends to result in them using the same tactics again when they want something new), but sometimes it can actually be best for long-term safety. Ruling it out absolutely for the sake of patriotic posturing isn't the most intelligent idea.

---

adjl posted...

Negotiating with terrorists means offering them things to prevent them from terrorizing. Sitting down and talking with a terrorist to settle ideological differences isn't negotiation, it's conversation.

That, and as nice as "we don't negotiate with terrorists" is as a slogan, it's really quite silly to take such an absolute approach to anything. Generally, it's a bad idea because you're trading short-term safety for long-term harm (since giving them what they want tends to result in them using the same tactics again when they want something new), but sometimes it can actually be best for long-term safety. Ruling it out absolutely for the sake of patriotic posturing isn't the most intelligent idea.

I don't disagree with you. But, as Trump learned (the hard way) back in 2019, you can't always give people who have sworn to unravel western civilization the benefit of the doubt. THANKFULLY, the Taliban showed their true colors the day before their scheduled Camp David visit (which caused Trump to cancel the meeting, as explained in the article I linked earlier).

Trust is a difficult thing to earn (like Kim Jong-un trying to be "diplomatic" with Trump, after so many years of vicious threats). But, at least Kim Jong-un has an actual country where his livelihood is at stake. Diplomacy can still work, even for selfish reasons. But when hatred has been fostered WITHOUT anything to lose (e.g. suicidal terrorists focused on twisted ideology, not just self-preservation) diplomacy tends to fail.

I guess that's the dividing line (the personal motivations of the other party you're negotiating with). You can extend olive branch after olive branch in the name of "diplomacy," but until there is some reciprocated integrity (which, let's face it, is extremely rare from indoctrinated martyrs), your diplomatic efforts aren't merely in vain, they are an immense risk to your own people's safety (which, again, Trump learned the hard way).

---

Taliban showed their true colors the day before their scheduled Camp David visit (which caused Trump to cancel the meeting, as explained in the article I linked earlier).

So bernie saying we can solve conflicts with diplomacy scares you(a statement the vast majority of the world would agree with), but trump inviting taliban leaders to US soil right before September 11th is perfectly ok

lol

---

Mead posted...

So bernie saying we can solve conflicts with diplomacy scares you(a statement the vast majority of the world would agree with), but trump inviting taliban leaders to US soil right before September 11th is perfectly ok

lol

You must have missed the rest of the conversation. Trump and Obama both proved the FOLLY of negotiating with Taliban. Trump was an absolute moron to attempt that meeting. Even pro-Trump followers called him out on his stupidity.

Nobody is saying diplomacy is bad. But, using it as a blanket-sweep solution (especially in a campaign) is not the greatest idea (especially when actual presidents on both sides of the aisle have already proven how bad of an idea it is).

Now, if I was DEFENDING Trump's actions, you'd have a valid point.

---

shipwreckers posted...

You must have missed the rest of the conversation. Trump and Obama both proved the FOLLY of negotiating with Taliban. Trump was an absolute moron to attempt that meeting. Even pro-Trump followers called him out on his stupidity.

Nobody is saying diplomacy is bad. But, using it as a blanket-sweep solution (especially in a campaign) is not the greatest idea (especially when actual presidents on both sides of the aisle have already proven how bad of an idea it is).

Now, if I was DEFENDING Trump's actions, you'd have a valid point.

Hmm...

shipwreckers posted... That's debatable (both figuratively and literally). Even brushing aside his socialism / free stuff talking points, his weak-ass "diplomacy solves everything" foreign policy will drive moderates towards Trump (since not all democrats are anti-military). Just watch his Colbert interview, if you get the chance. He actually says he wants to take people who have been indoctrinated to swear "Death to America" since their very childhood, and "sit them down in a room" to talk out our differences.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHq6xauQOcs

The guy quite literally wants to negotiate with terrorists.

You're not "defending Trump", just saying that Bernie's statement will drive voters to Trump, who's actually acted on the same exact sentiment (I recall actions speaking louder than...something something...), then criticize Bernie for talking about doing the thing Trump has already done.

Yeah, that's fucking horse shit

streamofthesky posted...

You're not "defending Trump", just saying that Bernie's statement will drive voters to Trump, who's actually acted on the same exact sentiment (I recall actions speaking louder than...something something...), then criticize Bernie for talking about doing the thing Trump has already done.

Yeah, that's fucking horse shit

Meh, I guess that's the sucky part of campaigning. It has nothing to do with "right" vs. "wrong," or effective vs. ineffective. It's all about what SOUNDS good (like Trump with the whole "America First" / "We don't negotiate with terrorists," which as everybody knows, IS horseshit).

Come to think of it, MOST campaign promises are shit. Bernie DOES deserve to be criticized for bad ideas (regardless of who the hell has done it before, just as THEY TOO deserve to be criticized. As I mentioned earlier, Trump was indeed ripped apart even by his own die-hard followers for his stupidity.)

Since when did negotiating with indoctrinated psychopaths ever become a good idea for ANY leader (ideologically or practically)? Granted, I understand Bernie's sentiment (and, if there was some way to actually resolve centuries of Middle East hatred by sheer diplomacy alone, that would be fantastic). Sadly, it's just not feasible by any measure of historical evidence (regardless of who happened to be warming the seat in the Oval Office at the time).

It's odd how much animosity there is in these comments, when fundamentally, we're actually all in somewhat agreement here. BAD IDEA IS BAD! (Trump, Bernie, Obama, Napoleon, Constantine, etc.)

---

And if you criticized him compared to someone against negotiating w/ terrorists, then fine.

But no, you were specifically comparing him to Trump. Trump invited the Taliban on U.S. soil near the anniversary of 9/11. You don't get to criticize Bernie for saying that while talking about Trump. Period.

And that's kind of the point. People break campaign promises all the time. We don't know if Bernie actually would do that. We do know Trump would, b/c he's already tried. So if it's Sanders/Trump, the whole "he'd negotiate w/ terrorists!" fearmongering is not applicable and should be aggressively called out as bs any time it's attempted.

Like I said, at least "fundamentally" we're saying the same thing. Bernie's hardest sell is the free stuff he keeps promising (which also, is arguably horseshit). Free college for literally every person SOUNDS great, but so much money would be needed through additional taxing (not to mention school prices would need to be regulated, similar to how healthcare pricing is regulated). That's a slippery slope.

I'd like to see the man succeed, but you'll have to forgive the mass skepticism (I actually made a whole topic about it).


---

shipwreckers posted...

Like I said, at least "fundamentally" we're saying the same thing. Bernie's hardest sell is the free stuff he keeps promising (which also, is arguably horseshit). Free college for literally every person SOUNDS great, but so much money would be needed through additional taxing (not to mention school prices would need to be regulated, similar to how healthcare pricing is regulated). That's a slippery slope.

I'd like to see the man succeed, but you'll have to forgive the mass skepticism (I actually made a whole topic about it).

Heh, I voted for Bernie in the 2016 primary and probably will again this year if I bother to change from unaffiliated. I like him a lot.
I am 100% against free college. Just makes a bachelor's degree the new HS diploma. Not everyone needs to go to college, nor should they. And colleges are just stupidly overpriced, partly the fault of the students themselves for going w/ the spiffy looking renovated beautiful campus grounds type places w/o even looking at the price tag. Why subsidize that shit MORE?

I can support him anyway, because I know it'll never happen so long as Republicans have merely a nearly even split in one house of Congress....probably would need to be far in the minority since a bunch of moderate Dems won't vote for it, either.
So yeah, I know it's bs. I'm sure he truly means to do it, but he should realize it's not gonna happen.

I can support him specifically because I know that campaign promise that I loathe is complete bs. Ironic...

shipwreckers posted...

so much money would be needed through additional taxing

If only there was a small group of people with billions of dollars who we could tax at a percentage comparable to everyone else...

---