Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign megathread

[Famous Mortimer]

I remember when Bernie used to talk about the issues. Now he just talks about how many women work for him and how many Black friends he has. Pathetic pandering crap. No one who hates him is going to give him any credit. Lots of people who like him are turned off by this and going to Yang.

[Famous Mortimer]

DSA National Political Committee was supposed to vote on endorsing Bernie tonight. The vote should be over by now but they still haven't posted the results on their website. The NPC was leaning towards endorsing Bernie but that may have been torpedoed by an open letter from the "DSA Afrosocialist and People of Color Caucus" which called on the NPC not to endorse because of Bernie's refusal to back slavery reparations.

At this point, the DSA is so insane (backing reparations, open borders, prison abolition, police abolition), that it might actually be a good thing for the Bernie campaign not to be endorsed by them.

[Famous Mortimer]

Okay, the DSA NPC did endorse him after all. They announced it on Twitter but not on their website. Again, not sure whether this is helpful or hurtful at this point. It's interesting in that it shows the more moderate (relatively) faction of the DSA is still clinging to leadership somehow.

[Famous Mortimer]

lol, as usual, DSA voting was a sh*tshow. The NPC probably voted to postpone making an endorsement but the person chairing the meeting said he "heard more voices" saying not to postpone but there were only 14 people in the room and he didn't actually count the votes. They then voted to endorse and actually did count the votes and it was 10 to 4. They all voted unanimously to call on Bernie to back slavery reparations.

Also in DSA news, I learned that the majority Momentum faction has actually stopped existing, although its former members still control the NPC. The next national convention/NPC election in August will likely be uncontested and won by members of Praxis, which now calls itself the Socialist Majority Caucus. So it's very possible the endorsement by be rescinded in August.

[Famous Mortimer]

Bold Prediction- Bernie will be the "centrist" candidate if Biden is not present

How would that be possible?

Very easily since most of the other candidates have the same views on economics as he does (albeit while not using the "socialist" label) and many of them are more radical on social/cultural issues (reparations, #metoo, immigration, making sure that white people are only ever brought up as a group in a negative context).

[Famous Mortimer]

Bold Prediction- Bernie will be the "centrist" candidate if Biden is not present

How would that be possible?

Very easily since most of the other candidates have the same views on economics as he does (albeit while not using the "socialist" label) and many of them are more radical on social/cultural issues (reparations, #metoo, immigration, making sure that white people are only ever brought up as a group in a negative context).

LOL.

"Bold" prediction: He will be endorsed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

What is inaccurate about my comment?

Also, how is AOC that much more radical than Kalama Harris, aside from label aesthetics?

[Famous Mortimer]

Bold Prediction- Bernie will be the "centrist" candidate if Biden is not present

How would that be possible?

Very easily since most of the other candidates have the same views on economics as he does (albeit while not using the "socialist" label) and many of them are more radical on social/cultural issues (reparations, #metoo, immigration, making sure that white people are only ever brought up as a group in a negative context).

LOL.

"Bold" prediction: He will be endorsed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

What is inaccurate about my comment?

Also, how is AOC that much more radical than Kalama Harris, aside from label aesthetics?

Sanders is progressive on immigration, #metoo is not a political issue, but Sanders is not supportive of sexual assault, reparations is a fringe issue (as taken literally and not with the media twisting some out of context statements by other candidates) and no candidate is openly anti-white (which would be odd as most are white.)

Kamala Harris is someone who invited AIPAC to her office, didn't support marijuana legalization until she was forced by her state's voters (and campaigned against it) and in her first run for statewide office ran to the right of her Republican opponent on three strikes laws and other issues of draconian sentencing.

Sanders is very left-wing on immigration but not as left-wing as the other candidates. He said a decade ago that we shouldn't be bringing in people who are willing to work for lower wages while there are Americans unemployed (which is basically Trump rhetoric). Just in the last year, he said that some of the people trying to claim asylum at the border might not have valid claims, maybe other candidates believe this too but none of them said it. He was also against abolishing ICE within the last year and had to be forced by his supporters to change position the way Harris was forced to change on marijuana. He does not support taking down existing border walls like O'Rourke or Gillibrand. He does not support decriminalizing migration like Castro.

Whether or not "metoo is a political issue" is a semantic question. It will have an effect on the campaign. It already has. Sanders has aligned himself with the less hysterical, more moderate voices that don't think just any claim by a woman should lead to automatic disqualification form office.

Sanders opposes reparations and other candidates claim to support them. You can say that their claims are disingenuous (and they very well might be) but that doesn't change the fact that they are positioning themselves to the left of Sanders and Sanders is letting them do it. Furthermore, calling reparations a "fringe issue" is a dodge. It's not a fringe issue in the Democratic primary, enough primary voters support it that candidates feel the need to support it/pretend to support it. How can it be fringe?

As to hating white people, this is a matter of opinion. You may not think the Democrats attitude towards white people is hateful but many white people do feel that way. If any of those white people are still voting in the Democratic primary (and inexplicably some still are), they will gravitate towards the most colorblind candidates, of which Sanders is one. He is trying to get away from his image as being colorblind but he was colorblind in the past and he still puts less emphasis on fighting vague "white supremacy" and "systemic racism" that the other candidates who make it the center of the campaign.

[Famous Mortimer]

but whatever, I'm someone who is considered a horrible racist, sexist bigot by everyone on this board. I think Sanders is a much better candidate than Harris or Gillibrand or Booker. If you want to vote for a candidate I like and convince yourself he's actually the most radical, why should I try to convince you otherwise?

[Famous Mortimer]

but whatever, I'm someone who is considered a horrible racist, sexist bigot by everyone on this board. I think Sanders is a much better candidate than Harris or Gillibrand or Booker. If you want to vote for a candidate I like and convince yourself he's actually the most radical, why should I try to convince you otherwise?

Yeah, I can’t possibly imagine why anyone might consider you a horrible sexist bigot

It's unpopular to say but I really do believe there are a lot of misguided women who would allow themselves to get "raped" rather than just say "no" even though saying "no" would likely stop many of the "rapists" Because if they said "no" and the guy did stop, then they wouldn't be able to complain about the omnipresent "rape culture"

I know it seems weird but my friends post articles on Facebook all the time, I see comments on Jezebel and other websites.

At first I thought they were poorly constructed parodies but everyone appears to be taking them at face value. If anyone is even mildly critical, they are shouted down.

The story is always the same: Girl in college. Guy asks her out. She doesn't want to but agrees out of pity. She allows herself to get drunk. She agrees to go back to his place. She makes out with him even though she doesn't want to, again out of pity. They have sex. She doesn't say "no" but she either doesn't move or she says something like "slow down" or "please wear a condom" It's rape. After the rape, she may agree to hang out with him several more times, again apparently out of pity. She may even get "raped" a couple more times. The writer will then make clear that the worst part is this person doesn't even know he's a rapist! But they are!

I've seen variations on that story so many times over the past couple years.

Also, just to be clear, nothing like that has ever happened to me. I always wait for enthusiastic consent and use a safe word even when I'm not doing anything particularly kinky, just because I'm terrified of these chicks being out there.

Those groups definitely exist but I still do think there are women who seek out the attention that being "raped" brings. I once knew in a girl, IRL, who claimed her long term boyfriend raped her because he got her to go along with sex even though she was sick and didn't feel like it. She admitted she didn't say "no" she just acquiesced to having sex with the guy she lived with and shared a bed with. She kept going out with the guy for 2 years after that also. Of course, after she told that story, everyone in the room told her what a brave, beautiful survivor she was. That's why some women try to read rape into all their past sexual encounters, the attention, it's like Munchhausen syndrome.

Of course, I don't think things like this constitute a majority of rape accusations, but they do exist. People practically brag about their rapes the way people used to brag about their bad childhoods to show how deep and interesting they are.

If a girl agrees to go on a date with you and agrees to go back to your place after that date, that would seem to be fairly clear implied consent to most people. If that's not the case, the girl needs to give a clear "no" to cancel out the mixed messages.

"Do you want to come up to my place for a drink?" = "do you want to have sex?"

Everyone knows that because it's been repeated in every piece of media ever.

Anyone who doesn't know that is either a vegetable or being disingenuous.

Obviously if you agree to a drink and say "NO" you mean "NO"

but if you agree to a drink and you don't say anything, you will come off as being coy, and that's probably your intention unless you're mentally ill or an idiot.

And as a bonus, we also have this gem regarding eugenics:
 

The mentally disabled should not be killed. They are humans. At the same time, they are absolutely a burden to society and anyone who says they are a blessing is clearly just trying to make themselves feel better about the horrible situation they are in. To minimize their burden to society, the government should run care homes where these people can be taken care of. If people want to take care of their own mentally retarded relatives by themselves, they should of course be allowed but if there are quality care homes, very few will choose that option. Also, as soon as a mental disability is diagnosed, a fetus should be aborted.This should not be mandated by law, just encouraged by society. People whose families have a history of mental retardation should also be discouraged from having children, again, not by the law, just by society. Eugenics is fine as long as it's not racial.

It's weirdly even handed that even when you're attempting to paint me as a rape apologist, you include my comments where I clearly state that if a woman says "no", you should stop.

I was hesitant to make those comments 5 years ago but the preceding 5 years and the #metoo movement have only served to show that I was absolutely right.

My comments about eugenics being good as long as it's not racial are also completely true and reasonable. Cousin marriage is banned on purely eugenics grounds. If you think eugenics is categorically bad or untrue you should support the right of people to have children with their first cousins. You probably don't though and thus, are a eugenicists whether you admit it or not.

[Famous Mortimer]

But anyway, Bernie Sanders is one of the more conservative Democrats in the race right now. I explained how and no one was able to refute my claims other than to simply say that I'm a bad person. So my point stands.

[Famous Mortimer]

https://mobile.twitter.com/thehill/status/1114971900269219841

No serious person supports open borders in the first place.


It's just a scare word.

Bernie's comments were interesting. A lot of his defenders are saying basically what the people here are saying "NO Democrat is for open borders" implying he has the same open-borders-in-everything-but-name policy that every other Democrat has.

His comments went further than any other Democrat though. Not only did he say he was against open borders, more tellingly, he explained WHY. He said the country would be flooded with poor people if we had open borders.

That is not something that any of Democrat (except maybe Yang) would admit. Every other Democrat thinks that attracting a lot of poor people is good and they would become magically rich once they got here. Other Democrats, in effect, deny they are for open borders but can't really explain why they are against them or they are against them but only because they think having unlimited immigration but making everyone fill out a form doesn't qualify as open borders.

Sanders has said explicitly that unlimited immigration by the global poor would hurt American standards of living. That is not something I can see Biden or Harris or Booker or Gillibrand saying.

[Famous Mortimer]

I'm sorry, I "agree" with Bernie Sanders on almost everything, but I cannot stand him. The problem is that his supporters are absolutely hideous. At this point I'll even take Joe Biden over him.

I have to admit his die hard suppoters are some of the ugliest people I've ever come across, and I am torn between him and Biden, but his recent comments have me leaning toward Bernie.

If Bernie is the only way we can get a Democrat who is not slobbering over social justice in the White House, then he has my vote.

So you are looking to support a Democrat who will jettison the concerns of some of the party's most important members of their coalition? I really don't get how social justice became such a dirty word. Oh wait, I do. The right wing setting the narrative, as usual.

Just because Bernie is not actively catering to the social justice left (in fact, he's striking me as wanting to run a more pragmatic campaign this time) doesn't mean he won't look to solve their concerns in office. Like last time, there's not a dichotomy here: he can tackle both economic and social inequality with his vision for the country.

Bernie is catering to the social justice left though. He talks constantly about Black people, the civil rights movement, how there's so many women of color working for his campaign, how there's an illegal immigrant working for his campaign. He talks about social justice all the time but but he shouldn't, he gets no credit.

He thinks talking like this is going to help him with Black people. It won't. This type of rhetoric doesn't actually appeal to Black people. It appeals to middle class white women but that demographic actively hates him and is not going to change. Black people don't hate him and their support could change, they just largely don't know who he is. Right now, most Black people support Biden, who is one the least Social Justice-y candidates but he has high name recognition.

[Famous Mortimer]

I'm sorry, I "agree" with Bernie Sanders on almost everything, but I cannot stand him. The problem is that his supporters are absolutely hideous. At this point I'll even take Joe Biden over him.

I have to admit his die hard suppoters are some of the ugliest people I've ever come across, and I am torn between him and Biden, but his recent comments have me leaning toward Bernie.

If Bernie is the only way we can get a Democrat who is not slobbering over social justice in the White House, then he has my vote.

So you are looking to support a Democrat who will jettison the concerns of some of the party's most important members of their coalition? I really don't get how social justice became such a dirty word. Oh wait, I do. The right wing setting the narrative, as usual.

Just because Bernie is not actively catering to the social justice left (in fact, he's striking me as wanting to run a more pragmatic campaign this time) doesn't mean he won't look to solve their concerns in office. Like last time, there's not a dichotomy here: he can tackle both economic and social inequality with his vision for the country.

Bernie is catering to the social justice left though. He talks constantly about Black people, the civil rights movement, how there's so many women of color working for his campaign, how there's an illegal immigrant working for his campaign. He talks about social justice all the time but but he shouldn't, he gets no credit.

He thinks talking like this is going to help him with Black people. It won't. This type of rhetoric doesn't actually appeal to Black people. It appeals to middle class white women but that demographic actively hates him and is not going to change. Black people don't hate him and their support could change, they just largely don't know who he is. Right now, most Black people support Biden, who is one the least Social Justice-y candidates but he has high name recognition.

He talks about black people?! The horror!!

He sounds like the dad from Get Out.

[Famous Mortimer]

Boston bomber thing will hurt him in the general but no one voting in the Democratic primary cares.

Now if they had asked him about James Fields, that would have put him in a tough position.

[Famous Mortimer]

TBF to Bernie convicts can already vote in Vermont.

Of course he could articulate that in his response, 'Hey it's legal in two states, it'll be no big deal' but he doesn't. When you really think about it he's just going to be out of his depth in a GE, running in VT just pales in comparison to what he'll face if he's the nominee.

Two states with the fewest violent convicts. I know Maine has the lowest violent crime rate. Vermont is pretty close behind if not number 2.

[Famous Mortimer]

All 22 Democratic candidates are going to endorse the eventual nominee. It doesn't even really have to be said. There's literally 0 chance it doesn't happen.

[Famous Mortimer]

Bernie's only path at this point is use his $$ advantage and run negative ads against Biden non stop in the early states. It's the only way to stop him, negative ads work and there's so much material to work from.

Possible it could work in theory but in practice, the types of "negative" ads that Bernie's SJW advisors would tell him to run would be ads about how Biden put gang members in jail in the early 90s, such ads would actually help Biden.

[Famous Mortimer]

I've noticed that Sanders seem to be doing about as well with white as non-white voters in national polls this time around. But he still seems to be polling pretty poorly in say South Carolina and I'm not seeing much evidence he's doing well with black voters. Does this mean he made inroads with Hispanic voters? Or is it more that his support has gone down more with white voters compared to in the past.

He just doesn't do that well in the south. He does better with northern blacks.

This is probably a function of education. Sanders does better with college educated people among all demographics.

[Famous Mortimer]

Bernie Sanders is not good at debating. He just yells the same 5 talking points over and over. This kind of worked in a one on one race with Hillary Clinton where she disagreed with some of the talking points. Against 20 people who all agree with every one of them, it's really not a good tactic at all. Bernie is going to struggle. I wouldn't be surprised if he failed to win a single state at this point, however my prediction as of this moment is that he'll win only Vermont and Minnesota.

Additionally, he's going to get eaten alive when he's in a debate with Castro and de Blasio and they attack him over his past immigration positions. He'll agree with them and apologize of course but it will just make him look weak and he won't get any credit.

[Famous Mortimer]

Bernie has a 0% chance at this point.

The only question at this point is whether he will do so badly (less than 10% in the first four states) that he'll basically have to drop out or if he will be able to scrap up 15% everywhere and justify symbolically staying in until the convention as he has announced his intention to do.

We saw the Bernie playbook in 2016. We heard his one speech. There are no tricks left in his bag and even the old tricks don't work as well because all the other candidates are doing them too. Nothing is going to save him.

[Famous Mortimer]

Bernie has a 0% chance at this point.

The only question at this point is whether he will do so badly (less than 10% in the first four states) that he'll basically have to drop out or if he will be able to scrap up 15% everywhere and justify symbolically staying in until the convention as he has announced his intention to do.

We saw the Bernie playbook in 2016. We heard his one speech. There are no tricks left in his bag and even the old tricks don't work as well because all the other candidates are doing them too. Nothing is going to save him.

I don't see him dropping out though. He might even stay in until the convention again.

He didn't drop out in 2016 because he knew Clinton would pivot to the center the moment he was gone. That won't be the case this time.

He "knew" something would happen that ended up not actually happening?

Clinton adopted much of Sanders's platform. Say what you want about whether or not you think that was sincere. If you think it's not sincere, then stop acting like there is anything she could have actually done to appease Sanders voters on "the left" because there's no way she could falsify the belief that she was actually going to govern like a progressive.

The two main difference between Sanders and Clinton were that Sanders backed single payer (Hillary never adopted this position) and that Sanders opposed the Iraq War (it was impossible for Hillary to change her position on this without a time machine).

Aside from Biden, most of the candidates running against Sanders now 1) have backed single payer and 2) weren't in office when the Iraq War was voted on.

This is why Sanders did relatively well against Clinton but is struggle to remain in the double digits when faced with Warren, Harris, O'Rourke, etc.