Sal wrote:
That's the crux of the matter. Floridatexan is entirely correct - Republicans are gonna run on fear, because it's literally all they've got. "Socialism" is just a bogeyman. This country has been a funky stew of ideas and models from it's very inception - we identify a problem or need, and then we invent or steal an idea to address it (at least, we used to). The fact of the matter is that this country is in dire need of more socialism at this point.
Possibly so... but it's a lot easier to fight off a label if the person it's being stuck to at least creates some doubt that the label
fits. The public, overall, finds socialists the least electable. I linked to that earlier (and also backed it up by pointing out that even though I'd love an atheist president, that's
also not gonna fly well with the public. It's to my chagrin, yes, but it is what it is. https://news.gallup.com/poll/183713/socialist-presidential-candidates-least-appealing.aspx
It sucks, but ya gotta accept in life that what
you like is not always what the public likes. And, in an election, what they like overrules anything else. You aren't gonna just talk 150 million or so voters into buying into something because we assure them it's good.
Not that I think pure socialism is good, because it isn't. If we were talking pure socialism, I'd give that a big nope... but we
aren't talking pure socialism, not even close. Pure
anything is not good, politically. Ya gotta take some capitalism here, some socialism there, blend it, keep what works, ditch what doesn't. That way we can move an economy,
and have things like a fire department. Or maybe even better healthcare. Could we use
more socialism? Yeah, probably. Would Bernie's level of it work? Fuck naw. The sonofabitch has championed people like Castro who created nightmares... and the GOP has film of him doing it, which will destroy him in the eyes of the public in no time once they unleash it. They're just waiting for us to make that mistake.
Look at how many times Republicans "take up for" Bernie, claim he got "cheated." Look at how many Russian bots push for him. That's because they know he's poison to the Democratic party.
That said, Warren's plans are more reasonable, and would create just enough doubt in the public to maybe give her a chance. People know by now that Republicans are extremist idiots who are going to label their opposition the absolute
worst of whatever suits them.
Hell, they watched them try to turn Obama into a boogeyman... and, honestly, most of the public loved the guy and still do. Which is why the Republicans hate him so much -- he was something they haven't been in decades,
a successful president! Trying to claim that
that guy was this "socialist nightmare" just made the Republicans look like idiots, because Obama obviously wasn't that. If the public is allowed to doubt that what the Republicans are saying about a Democrat are true, then that Democrat stands a chance.
Bernie's the only one who doesn't have that in his favor. He attracts people who already believe in socialism... and shoves away everyone else. Warren doesn't have nearly as much of that problem.
Sal wrote:
Where is this "middle"??, because this country has swung so violently to the right over the past decades, I'm not even sure what that means anymore. If the middle means people who support a wealth tax, because an overwhelming number of people support that when it's explained to them correctly, then OK, I'm down with that. If the middle means the people who Obama described as clinging to their Bibles and their guns or Hillary described as "deplorables", then fuck 'em. They're a lost cause. If you're so paralyzed by fear of change that you can't be moved to act against the cancer devouring our body politic in the form of today's GOP, then SIT DOWN, SHUT UP, and GET - THE FUCK - OUT OF THE WAY. You had your chance, and look at where it got us.
Actually, damn near every Democrat I know is that middle.
The far-right and the far-left seem to have one goal in common: painting the Democratic party as a far-left party. We aren't. America doesn't have a "far left" party, at least not in any number that actually registers in national elections.
Before Trump, we had a right-wing party and a centrist party. Post-Trump, we have a far-right (or even alt-right, and also theocratic) party, and a centrist party. Trump has made Republicans so unviable for anyone except right-wing extremists that Democrats could run the table on everyone else. I mean, Jesus, fucking
Max Boot is probably gonna vote Democratic this year.
Bill Kristol will probably vote Dem!
The middle has never been the "deplorables" or the people clinging to guns and Bibles -- I'm not sure where you're even coming up with that, because that was
never who Obama or Hillary were talking about. Those are the right-wingers. They've never been counted as anybody the Dems are trying to court. Because they
are a lost cause. I don't think anyone's ever tried arguing otherwise on that (although Biden occasionally stupidly tries to be "nice" and give Republicans more credit than they deserve... but, Biden's a clumsy guy. I like him, but that's one of his flaws. Like I said, all our candidates have 'em).
It's not "fear of change," it's just
sense. You're not going to win an election appealing only to Michael Moore. (While I'm on that, honestly, I don't think Michael Moore would ever back a candidate who had a chance at winning, anyway -- Michael Moore is the same kind of fucking political
coward that Pkr is. Guys like that will never admit to backing
anybody who could actually win an election, because then they might have to actually pony up and be
responsible for things in the real world... which is not a thing that pieces of garbage like them do. "Libertarian" is just a slang term for "conservative chickenshit").
If you're really afraid of change, then... back Bernie. Because Bernie's
not gonna win. And then you won't actually change anything, and won't have to be responsible. The Bernie-or-Busters are all still sitting around Caucus99 and saying, "The world would be so much better if people had listened to me, blah blah blah." Which is the safest thing in the goddamned world for a person to do, when they know damn well nobody's gonna listen to 'em. It's like, "You can't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson!" Which is pretty much like, "Nothing's my fault, because instead of voting I got in the bathtub and peed in my own face."
I mean, voting for Gary Johnson is about
that effective when it comes to making real change. That's some safety-first-clyde business, there. Bernie, same-same. Ain't gonna win, but his followers can always console themselves with "not
my fault." When, actually, yeah, yeah it
really fucking is. No Bernie in 2016? No Donald Trump in the White House. You can
bank on that. It's provable by the number of Jill Stein voters in swing states.
Bernie fucking got us Trump. So we should be doing everything we can right now to kill that fucking guy's candidacy, because he's damn sure on track to do it again. I'm already hearing the
exact same shit out of his supporters that I heard last time.
If you're not afraid of change, then vote for somebody who
can win. Because that's the one who'll actually get to pass legislation and do things. If you like Warren, go with Warren. If it's Biden or Buttegeig or Klobachar or whoever, go with them... in the primary. After that, vote for whoever the nominee is. And drag everyone else you can to vote for them, too. Doesn't matter if you like 'em, doesn't matter if you don't... if you're smart, you'll like 'em better than Trump.
Home
