Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 314: USPSBS

(+) Yeah! (+)

Look, you're free to not vote for Biden or whatever, I can't be bothered to give too much of a shit anymore. I'm just asking for a little honesty about it because I don't buy this specific excuse

Biden is also a cop

---

People are getting cold feet on Biden because they were hoping the VP would help them feel better about it, but it didn't. Kamala has a past that makes people uncomfortable, and it is about more than being 'a cop'. In addition to her previous work, she comes across as highly ambitious and fake. I think if Biden had picked someone that seemed like an olive branch to the left, people would be able to make themselves feel better about biting the bullet, but Kamala either made people feel worse, or the same. Like that twitter post from Shaun King, Kamala and Biden share in common a lot of the same concerns, which only magnifies those concerns, rather than assuaging them.

GentlemanGamer posted...

I think if Biden had picked someone that seemed like an olive branch to the left,

The problem with this is that she is. Her voting record is very, very progressive.

People are getting hung up on the "cop" thing and don't want to look further than that.

---

GentlemanGamer posted...

People are getting cold feet on Biden because they were hoping the VP would help them feel better about it, but it didn't.

right, so the problem isn't that the VP is bad, it's that Biden is terrible and needs the perfect unicorn VP like Bernie or Warren or the squad members half the country hates in order to cover for him


---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Also, get ready for awkward times in the white house.

https://twitter.com/PoorlyAgedStuff/status/1293329622566830082?s=19

IT. WAS. A. DEBATE!

*laughs hysterically*

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

IT. WAS. A. DEBATE!

*laughs hysterically*

This was for the shoulder touching stuff that Biden owned up to, not the Reade allegation.

---

I'm still in the boat of "no plans to vote for Biden due to the Tara Reade accusation."

---

StealThisSheen posted...

I mean either they weren't gonna vote to begin with, or

StealThisSheen posted...

I think anybody just going "She's a cop, fuck her" and not actually looking into anything is pathetic, to be perfectly honest.

Oh come on, the narrative around Kamala is that shes a cop, 90% of people dont look at actual records and you know it. Optics are what matter here, and I think its undeniably uncomfortable optics to pick the cop at this time.

Ive already said I think Kamala being the thing turning a Biden voter into a not-voter is fucking weird, but what is understandable are the people who were holding out for a candidate they were comfortable with before deciding theyre not playing this game.

Im not so naive that I expected (or wanted) a Bernie VP pick, but I WAS holding out for a sliver of a dark horse pick that had future potential, this short game shit for the Dems is so disappointing.

Thinking ahead to 2024, I think Duckworth would have been a slam dunk in that regard, because the Democrats are anti-American straight-up wont work against an amputee war veteran, as opposed to Kamala who is Progressive from Commifornia, and I think shes gonna struggle unless these next four years are wonderful.

---

The model's out and if you believe the numbers (not quite sure I buy that Trump's odds are this high given that I think we can definitively rule out a competent covid response emerging from the WH), they're terrifying!

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/

---

GentlemanGamer posted...

Like that twitter post from Shaun King

which one lmao

https://twitter.com/notcapnamerica/status/1293353773100863489

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

because the Democrats are anti-American straight-up wont work against an amputee war veteran

Did you forget Kerry getting swiftboated in 2004? Reality doesn't matter when it comes to GOP attacks.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The model's out

wow nate is such a troll getting PTSD from the 30% again.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

I'd bet a good 95% of people making it a point to flaunt "NOW I'm not voting!" on the internet weren't voting to begin with and were just waiting for a convenient enough excuse.

I'd also bet a good percentage of them didn't vote in the primary, either.

Funny, because I'd be willing to bet upwards of 80% of them are trolls and propagandists trying to inspire other people (like ltm) into not voting. We saw the exact same shit in 2016, and it's why I immediately got pissed at ltm yesterday for coming out with that crap.

Yeah it is pretty obvious most of them aren't Americans or good faith actors.

I have plenty of misgivings about Biden and Harris, but RBG isn't getting any younger and Trump has killed a lot of Americans with his failed pandemic policies so I mean, any rational good faith person should see this as obvious.

---

https://twitter.com/crampell/status/1293527774951616515?s=21

What a piece of shit

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The model's out and if you believe the numbers (not quite sure I buy that Trump's odds are this high given that I think we can definitively rule out a competent covid response emerging from the WH), they're terrifying!

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/

That just about where they had 2016 at the end. Still below where prediction markets have Trump.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The model's out and if you believe the numbers (not quite sure I buy that Trump's odds are this high given that I think we can definitively rule out a competent covid response emerging from the WH), they're terrifying!

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/

What? If anything it is surprising they aren't higher tbqh.

---

red sox 777 posted...

That just about where they had 2016 at the end. Still below where prediction markets have Trump.

They do note on an accompanying article that if the election were today the model would have Biden at like 93% or something (so the bulk of the uncertainty is coming from the time until the election, not the polls themselves).

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

They do note on an accompanying article that if the election were today the model would have Biden at like 93% or something (so the bulk of the uncertainty is coming from the time until the election, not the polls themselves).

Yes, and that's a limitation on their model. It's based on the existing polling data, so it can't be as aggressive as, say, prediction markets in forecasting a move in the polls toward Trump over the next 3 months.

As someone who went 48/50 in 2016 I put Trump's odds above 50% right now. Maybe something like 70/30 in his favor. Much of this is because I think Biden is a bad candidate and as the campaign gets going in earnest (with debates, etc) he's not going to be able to keep up.

---

I know we have bigger problems but can we please hold ourselves to the same standards we put on ulti, and refrain from sharing things from known grifters? Seeing Shaun King's tweets is as bad as seeing tweets from Alex Jones

---

Peace___Frog posted...

I know we have bigger problems but can we please hold ourselves to the same standards we put on ulti, and refrain from sharing things from known grifters? Seeing Shaun King's tweets is as bad as seeing tweets from Alex Jones

That was the point I was demonstrating there!

---

red sox 777 posted...

Much of this is because I think Biden is a bad candidate

he is but he's way better than hillary.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

he is but he's way better than hillary.

I'm not sure that he is. Hillary at least appeared to have a plan on what she would do as President. I haven't heard a single policy idea out of Biden. Meanwhile, Trump is moving very very aggressively, probably unconstitutionally, on economic relief. But he's clearly trying to help and has ideas for how to do it, ideas that are putting money in the pockets of voters.

---

GentlemanGamer posted...

she comes across as highly ambitious

fucking woof

---

I think literally everyone in congress but Bernie is highly ambitious.

Bernie is just having fun out there <_<

---

Being ambitious is a requirement to run for president and Bernie did it twice.

Hell. putting out progressive policies and pushing the public conscious further left is more ambitious than anyone else on stage that's too afraid of pushback to tout good policy. Being an activist is by definition ambitious, and we very much need that.

Ambition is not at all a negative trait, it only has that connotation when used towards women.

---

For some reason the word just doesn't fit for me with Bernie, but that may be because the word has gotten the short end of the stick recently, I think 'driven' but really they mean the same thing.


---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Thinking ahead to 2024, I think Duckworth would have been a slam dunk in that regard, because the Democrats are anti-American straight-up wont work against an amputee war veteran, as opposed to Kamala who is Progressive from Commifornia, and I think shes gonna struggle unless these next four years are wonderful.

You really think Republicans wouldn't go after Duckworth? Tucker Carlson has already been attacking her as someone who hates this country.

---

I think it's much easier if you look at policies - most obviously climate change where ambition specifically is very much required right now.

---

Nah I can admit you have the right of it, of course Bernie is very ambitious, I just tend to have a slightly negative slant on the word for no good reason!

---

Looking at it from the outside (which is almost bu default from the left) Biden seems much, much more friendly to progressives than Hillary, and he also has a comprehensive climate plan for the first time. He seems like a significant step up from the typical Democratic offering despite still being not good in a vacuum.

And frankly hell do good on climate alone.

---

Dancedreamer posted...

You really think Republicans wouldn't go after Duckworth? Tucker Carlson has already been attacking her as someone who hates this country.

Its not a question of whether or not some republicans would try it, its about how credible the attack might seem to voters. Theoretically more people would see through the disingenuous attack when pointed at Duckworth.

of course I dont know that it would make enough of a difference to really matter, but there are definitely some republicans who would be put off by that kind of attack directed at a troop.
---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

of course I dont know that it would make enough of a difference to really matter, but there are definitely some republicans who would be put off by that kind of attack directed at a troop.

Most of those Republicans are already voting for Biden, though.

---

https://twitter.com/DavidGriscom/status/1293295620837584896?s=19

---

Kamala didn't change anything for me, I was merely responding to how I interpreted people who were effected by it. Having said that, the idea that ambition is positive or only used negatively against women is absolutely not what I was suggesting- my point is that she is ambitious to the point where her perceived progressive voting record is viewed as disingenuous or unreliable, particularly to how she would manage an executive, by many as a result of her past actions as a prosecutor and attorney general. Much like how Hillary Clinton once championed universal healthcare and later declared it impossible- people make political adjustments to achieve their ambitions.The fact someone who called out Joe Biden as a rapist and a racist would not only endorse him, but join his ticket, is yet another sign of her ambition taking priority over her principles. I don't understand why the pick would change anything from a personal standpoint, but I do understand why it would effect/dishearten people who were already very reluctant or waffling in their support from the start. People like to talk about Bernie or Busters, but the kind of people turned off by a Kamala pick are the same kind of people for whom Bernie was a compromise to begin with, and for whom Bernie is not an infallible cult leader like he is portrayed, but someone who is far too cozy with power and the establishment in their eyes. The appeal for many of Bernie is his principled stands over a long time, so endorsing Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton who are also clearly ambitious career politicians without principles hurts his standing with voters who care about principles. These are not 'democrats', but voters for whom Joe Biden was already a difficult thing to come to terms with, let alone paired with someone who shares many of his major weaknesses. It really does seem like many people have no interest in understanding these kinds of voters, but merely in condemning them. That is up to you, but please stop pretending to understand people who you spend absolutely no time trying to understand, and merely wish to handwave away.

I pretty much agree with that but also think a pandemic isn't the time to get hung up on things. I have to imagine there's a strong correlation between people for who Kamala is a dealbreaker and people who don't think COVID is that big of a deal.

---

red sox 777 posted...

I'm not sure that he is. Hillary at least appeared to have a plan on what she would do as President.

i'm not sure if hillary's policies were preferable to biden's nothing.

also, i know it's been awhile but i hope people haven't forgotten how insanely unsympathetic hillary was. biden is a thousand times more likable. i'm fairly sure he'll do better in the presidential debates.

---

I just want someone for whom Kamala is a dealbreaker (emphasis on the dealbreaker) to A) explain their reasoning beyond cop, B) explain their viable alternative prior to the decision, and C) explain why they think Trump/Pence would better address their concerns.

---

I will say, if I was in a Battleground state, I would vote Biden. As is, Maryland is going blue 100% of the time anyway.

Biden has done nothing to earn my vote, and I am super not excited for President Harris two years in so I'd rather buoy the third parties as much as I can in the vain and desperate hopes that the two party system will crumble one day and we won't have to settle for the least shit candidate all the time.

---

I can agree with the lot of that but I can't possibly understand what the expectation is (short of dismantling the government obviously). Everyone running for President is crazy. If Bernie Sanders isn't good enough (and I agree he still has the faults of a politician) then who is out here desperately searching for a principled politician? Maybe I'm just jaded now but I care less and less about "principles" and more about what a politician is offering and the leverage that can be exerted over them.

And while most everyone at the federal level is a career politician this isn't necessarily true at a local level within communities, although it can end up this way. I imagine this type of person is more likely to be involved at this level, and part of the issue is bridging the gap. But to do that we need people in office who will at least pretend to listen to demands.

---

FFDragon posted...

Biden has done nothing to earn my vote, and I am super not excited for President Harris two years in so I'd rather buoy the third parties as much as I can in the vain and desperate hopes that the two party system will crumble one day and we won't have to settle for the least shit candidate all the time.

People always say this, but do they really feel they're accomplishing anything with a third-party vote?

We need to push for ranked-choice voting. Then we need to push to teach people what ranked choice voting is, because it hasn't really done Australia as much good as it could. That's a whole different fight altogether, and can't be reached through voting third party and hoping they somehow get a solid percent of the vote to get recognition (only to watch them run away with their tail between their legs as soon as they come close to winning an election)

---

Dancedreamer posted...

People always say this, but do they really feel they're accomplishing anything with a third-party vote?

Voting their conscience
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Voting their conscience

So...no, then?

---

I never understand the "morals" position from people relying on others to make the *tough choices that they're to prideful to sully themselves with.

---

biden excels at touch choices, you are correct

---

Reg posted...

Funny, because I'd be willing to bet upwards of 80% of them are trolls and propagandists trying to inspire other people (like ltm) into not voting. We saw the exact same shit in 2016, and it's why I immediately got pissed at ltm yesterday for coming out with that crap.

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Yeah it is pretty obvious most of them aren't Americans or good faith actors.

I have plenty of misgivings about Biden and Harris, but RBG isn't getting any younger and Trump has killed a lot of Americans with his failed pandemic policies so I mean, any rational good faith person should see this as obvious.

Please dont take this as an insult, but this is the kind of stuff thats so out of touch I have a hard time believing youre serious.

Do you talk to ANYONE who isnt politically plugged in? Do you read anything that isnt stereotypical liberal media? How often do you engage with alt media on either side? These people are real.


---

These people exist, but they aren't the majority and if they aren't politically plugged in then they wouldn't be posting on political subreddits stirring the pot. I know people feel this way in a minority, but the fact that so many stir up this stuff and use Bernie as a dog whistle that anything less isn't PuRe enough is just silly.


---

you have to kill baby hitler.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

These people exist, but they aren't the majority and if they aren't politically plugged in then they wouldn't be posting on political subreddits stirring the pot. I know people feel this way in a minority, but the fact that so many stir up this stuff and use Bernie as a dog whistle that anything less isn't PuRe enough is just silly.

It's not that Bernie is ideologically pure so much as that he doesn't put his focus on identity politics. The other Democrats have proven time and again that they prioritize identity politics far above politics based on economic policy.

---

red sox 777 posted...

It's not that Bernie is ideologically pure so much as that he doesn't put his focus on identity politics. The other Democrats have proven time and again that they prioritize identity politics far above politics based on economic policy.

Trust me, I am aware! But also even with that said Biden/Harris is much better for workers than Trump is in that they probably won't kill six figures of them

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Trust me, I am aware! But also even with that said Biden/Harris is much better for workers than Trump is in that they probably won't kill six figures of them

Biden and Harris will never give the working class dignity or a voice. That's worth more than money, and many people like our founding fathers believed it's even more important than life, although truth be told at this point Trump is straight up way better for workers financially too. Like, Trump is saying, I want to do XYZ, if you want those things, vote for me. Biden is saying, you have to vote for me because you have no other options. One is asking voters for their vote, one is trying to bully them. Sort of odd that the bully in chief is not the bully here, but Trump treats people above him and below him very differently.

It's a shame because I don't think Biden was like this at the beginning of his career. But at some point, probably in the 90s, he tasted too much of the power and wealth the Democrats got from targeting the upper middle class. And now, the upper middle class completely runs the party.

---