Current Events > Democratic primary general topic 2

(+) Yeah! (+)

I'd be down for Nina Turner tbh
---

Let's be honest, be it Warren or Turner, he'd still be getting a minority either way which helps

Though, it'd be better if neither of them were his picks

Tryhaptaward posted...

Let's be honest, be it Warren or Turner, he'd still be getting a minority either way which helps

Though, it'd be better if neither of them were his picks

Who should he pick, in your opinion?

---

Tammy Baldwin seems like a reasonable choice, given the importance of Wisconsin

https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1230559446901772289

Gotta be bad news for Bloomberg
---

ThyCorndog posted...

There's absolutely no way sanders picks Warren as his VP after everything that's unfolded over the last month or two

He won't pick Warren that empties two Senate seats for the Democrats.

---

Antifar posted...

Tammy Baldwin seems like a reasonable choice, given the importance of Wisconsin

https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1230559446901772289

Gotta be bad news for Bloomberg

I was thinking of a different Tammy. Duckworth

---

Hows Sanders doing with the minority vote? Seems like he isnt getting much support there.

---

Kazi1212 posted...

Hows Sanders doing with the minority vote? Seems like he isnt getting much support there.

He polls better with minorities than white voters in basically every poll, thanks in large part to his strength among Hispanics.
https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/1227267134268624896
https://twitter.com/CANCEL_SAM/status/1229750196193591298
https://twitter.com/KirstenPowers/status/1229827821674958853

Unrelated:
https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1230602929834467328

These are pre-debate polls, but early voting has started in all these states.
---

Antifar posted...

https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1230559446901772289

Gotta be bad news for Bloomberg

Why?
---

Phantom_Nook posted...

Why?

Means a whole lot of people saw him eat shit.
---

Phantom_Nook posted...

Why?

because a lot of people saw him flop

related to the question about Bernie and minority voters; although the media rarely discusses them, I think Bernie does well with Asian American voters, too. There are more asian american democratic voters than black democratic voters in California, so that helps to explain Sanders strength there along side his popularity among latinos and very liberal whites

---

Good to know minorities are backing Sanders, I hardly see it in my Bangladeshi immigrant community here, maybe because of the antisemitism

---

Kazi1212 posted...

Good to know minorities are backing Sanders, I hardly see it in my Bangladeshi immigrant community here, maybe because of the antisemitism

to be honest it's almost entirely an age thing, latinos and asians are younger on average than whites and blacks

how old would you say the median age is in your community?

---

Its 40+ I would say. Age thing is probably true though

---

I can't speak to Bangladeshis specifically, but Muslim groups have tended to back him: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/20/sanders-wins-backing-of-top-muslim-political-group-116284
---

I find that shocking personally, maybe its just my neck of the woods but someone always tends to bring up "oh but hes a jew" whenever Sanders name is brought up.

---

Ex-Kefiroth posted...

Voted for Sanders in TX today, btw

Nice.
---

I honestly don't understand how people can listen to Sanders and Warren on the same stage and think "oh, Bernie clearly has things more well thought out than her."

Perhaps it just doesn't matter. Perhaps it's just the image of being pure.

---

COVxy posted...

I honestly don't understand how people can listen to Sanders and Warren on the same stage and think "oh, Bernie clearly has things more well thought out than her."

Perhaps it just doesn't matter. Perhaps it's just the image of being pure.

perhaps you have your own cognitive biases

---

Balrog0 posted...

perhaps you have your own cognitive biases

Do you find Sanders to be an eloquent and convincing speaker, in comparison to Warren?

---

No. Do you think that being an eloquent speaker means you understand things?

---

Balrog0 posted...

No. Do you think that being an eloquent speaker means you understand things?

Usually that correlation is pretty strong, yes.

---

Sanders is just more....trustworthy or comes off as such in relation to Warren

---

Well, there's your bias.

---

Balrog0 posted...

Well, there's your bias.

Is it a bias? Or do people who have things well thought out usually just simply have more fluid answers to questions?

Inference is not the same as bias.

---

COVxy posted...

Balrog0 posted...

perhaps you have your own cognitive biases

Do you find Sanders to be an eloquent and convincing speaker, in comparison to Warren?

How does being an eloquent and convincing speaker help Warren in terms of having more thought out planning when she rolls back on things like M4A or mining regulations in the same debate? Lol
---

COVxy posted...

Is it a bias? Or do people who have things well thought out usually just simply have more fluid answers to questions?

shouldn't you know that better than I do?

COVxy posted...

Inference is not the same as bias.

That's true, so what's your evidence for your assertion here if it isn't just based on anecdotes?

To be honest with you my personal stance is that only an idiot judges a candidate based on a debate. But even settting that aside, I would argue Warren's style is her draw among (mostly white, though I think that's an artifact of other social processes) people with graduate degrees. It's less that you think she knows what she's talking about and more that you identify with the way she speaks about it

Remember you're just a monkey flinging shit too!

---

MaxEffingBemis posted...

No, his likely VP pick is Nina Turner I think

I don't have anything personally against Nina Turner, but I've always found it weird how much some of his younger supporters project a sort of Bernie cronyism onto him that I don't think he has.

Like largely 2016 and a bit less in 2020 was "Alright Bernie's cabinet will be Tulsi Gabbard, Tim Canova, Nina Turner...<insert list of just anyone who said anything nice about Bernie at all>"

---

She's so eloquent that she doubled back on her belief that the person with the most votes should win

Balrog0 posted...

It's less that you think she knows what she's talking about and more that you identify with the way she speaks about it

Eh, I don't buy that at all. If someone can come up with a comprehensive answer to a question vs. stumbling and then simply insisting that they are correct (i.e. Trumpian debate tactics), I think it's fair to say that the first person has thought about the issues more deeply.

---

Warren is Bob Dylan to Sanders' Utah Phillips

He doesn't need to be eloquent because he has a simpler message for simpler folks

---

So why do you think that?

---

Yeah, I honestly don't know who Bernie's VP pick will be, but my best guest is that they'll be at least two of the following: female, POC, young. Nina Turner happens to check all of those boxes and is beloved in Berner circles(I certainly like her). His VP pick is a bit more fraught, both because he pins a lot on his VP being willing to rip up Senate rules, but also because he's 78 years old and would be more likely to be his successor. Not even just if he dies: he may not have two terms in him. The point of electing Bernie is that he belongs to this leftist movement, and the hope is that he would use his presidency to advance leftist politicians.
I don't think Warren would be a great VP pick, because she's not much younger than Bernie and there seems to be some animosity between them now(and much of the difference between the two has been Warren all-but-yelling she wouldn't rock the boat to the political establishment). Plus, she would probably be more useful(and influential) in the Senate.

Balrog0 posted...

So why do you think that?

Because generating novel information typically is less fluid than old information.

You don't find that when you encounter a new argument, it takes you longer to come up with an answer? And when time pressured, you might just fail? Meanwhile, if this is something you've thought about before, it comes quickly? Like, this is one of the key elements that people look for in academic job talks, the Q&A portion.

It's also why you see candidates pivot to talking points that are completely irrelevant to the question, because they have actually practiced and thought about the irrelevant question that they are answering.

---

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Yeah, I honestly don't know who Bernie's VP pick will be, but my best guest is that they'll be at least two of the following: female, POC, young. Nina Turner happens to check all of those boxes and is beloved in Berner circles(I certainly like her). His VP pick is a bit more fraught, both because he pins a lot on his VP being willing to rip up Senate rules, but also because he's 78 years old and would be more likely to be his successor. Not even just if he dies: he may not have two terms in him. The point of electing Bernie is that he belongs to this leftist movement, and the hope is that he would use his presidency to advance leftist politicians.

You're mixing approaches here though. It doesn't matter that people in Bernie circles like her, they're already voting for Bernie. You're sort of half-assing "balancing the ticket". Like if you're someone who is legitimately concerned about Bernie's health, why would the VP being a female POC matter to you? Especially one with very little national experience of any sort.

---

COVxy posted...

Because generating novel information typically is less fluid than old information.

You don't find that when you encounter a new argument, it takes you longer to come up with an answer? And when time pressured, you might just fail? Meanwhile, if this is something you've thought about before, it comes quickly? Like, this is one of the key elements that people look for in academic job talks, the Q&A portion.

It's also why you see candidates pivot to talking points that are completely irrelevant to the question, because they have actually practiced and thought about the irrelevant question that they are answering.

I just sincerely have no idea how this is an answer to my question about why you think a better debate performance is a reason to think someone is more knowledgeable. Sorry.

e.g., why doesn't it just show someone did better debate prep for example

---

Balrog0 posted...

I just sincerely have no idea how this is an answer to my question about why you think a better debate performance is a reason to think someone is more knowledgeable. Sorry.

You don't honestly know how:
"Previously thought ideas are generated faster than novel ideas"
is an answer to the question:
"Why do you think [a more fluid candidate is an indication that they have thought about a topic]?"

??

---

COVxy posted...

You don't honestly know how:
"Previously thought ideas are generated faster than novel ideas"
is an answer to the question:
"Why do you think [a more fluid candidate is an indication that they have thought about a topic]?"

??

Nope, not at all. I do understand why it appeals to you, though, mr. its what they tell us about academic interviews

---

COVxy posted...

It's also why you see candidates pivot to talking points that are completely irrelevant to the question, because they have actually practiced and thought about the irrelevant question that they are answering.

I feel like you're not giving enough credit to people pivoting because it would be stupid for them to answer the question.

---

Balrog0 posted...

e.g., why doesn't it just show someone did better debate prep for example

How is debate prep not prepping on policy?

The important questions asked during a debate (of which there are often few) are about policy.

If you cannot talk about your policy in a fluid and flexible way, I don't have any confidence that you've spent the due diligence thinking about your ideas. In the same way that when an academic gives a talk, and someone asks a blindingly obvious question and the talker flounders, you know that they haven't thought about what they've presented deeply.

---

Anteaterking posted...

You're mixing approaches here though. It doesn't matter that people in Bernie circles like her, they're already voting for Bernie. You're sort of half-assing "balancing the ticket". Like if you're someone who is legitimately concerned about Bernie's health, why would the VP being a female POC matter to you? Especially one with very little national experience of any sort.

Because it's important that the Democratic ticket is going to be representative not just of the Democratic Party and Bernie's support base, but the country as well!
There also aren't really a lot of white dudes who fit the bill, if we're talking about that.
I suppose how important "balancing the ticket" is(whatever that means) depends on how decisively Bernie wins: it's plausible if he enters a brokered convention he could win by accepting a more establishment VP(Kamala Harris springs to mind). But, ultimately, almost no one cares about who the VP is, unless it's some one as manifestly dumb and unqualified as Sarah Palin(and even then, the object lesson of Dan Quayle suggests that she probably wasn't a big factor!) If Bernie wins decisively, he can have whoever he wants as VP. Personally, I don't think that it will be Nina Turner: I think he'll go with some one with more national political experience and have Nina be his chief of staff or some other important executive role. We'll just have to wait and see.

Anteaterking posted...

You're mixing approaches here though. It doesn't matter that people in Bernie circles like her, they're already voting for Bernie. You're sort of half-assing "balancing the ticket". Like if you're someone who is legitimately concerned about Bernie's health, why would the VP being a female POC matter to you? Especially one with very little national experience of any sort.

Can't speak for anyone else but I think it has less to do with any fears about Bernie's health and more to do with looking beyond a Sanders administration. Having a young WoC on his ticket sets up a future run for whoever that person might be, which is important for continuing the work of the movement. Having someone who Bernie's people are good with is paramount, but having someone who also checks the boxes that the idpol liberals are looking for (a woman, a minority) isn't anything to sneeze at.

---

Balrog0 posted...

Nope, not at all. I do understand why it appeals to you, though, mr. its what they tell us about academic interviews

idk, I think I value being able to answer questions about the things you've thought about...

sorry bro.

---

Anteaterking posted...

I don't have anything personally against Nina Turner, but I've always found it weird how much some of his younger supporters project a sort of Bernie cronyism onto him that I don't think he has.

Like largely 2016 and a bit less in 2020 was "Alright Bernie's cabinet will be Tulsi Gabbard, Tim Canova, Nina Turner...<insert list of just anyone who said anything nice about Bernie at all>"

This is a good take.
---

COVxy posted...

How is debate prep not prepping on policy?

How is being able to correctly identify the thing that lester holt's bosses are going to tell him to ask you an indication you understand a policy better than someone else?

COVxy posted...

The important questions asked during a debate (of which there are often few) are about policy.

'Important' to whom?? Most voters aren't driven by policy concerns.That's why Warren was primed to attack Bloomberg over personal conduct and not his policies, for example.

COVxy posted...

If you cannot talk about your policy in a fluid and flexible way, I don't have any confidence that you've spent the due diligence thinking about your ideas. In the same way that when an academic gives a talk, and someone asks a blindingly obvious question and the talker flounders, you know that they haven't thought about what they've presented deeply.

Yes and I understand exactly why you feel that way. I'm just saying you've given pretty thin reasons to actually think its true.

---