Beto O’Rourke 2020 campaign megathread

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Or you could just criticize candidates you think deserve it and ignore the idiots who respond like that instead of stooping to their level.

[GoTfan]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Or you could just criticize candidates you think deserve it and ignore the idiots who respond like that instead of stooping to their level.

But you see, if I criticise them, I'm helping Trump do his job you see, so I'm forbidden from criticising them.

[Possiblymaybe]

Any progressive with any pretension of self awareness would know that Beto is an establishment shill with movie star looks, an attractive wife, and a nice home in whatever El Paso's version of Parkland, FL. He's ran a (frighteningly) good campaign against a popular incumbent basically arguing "vote for me 'cause I'm cool."

He's basically the white straight male version of Kamala Harris. I thought you'd all detest him, but I'm not surprised at certain posters who have neither 'nads nor spine. Any Democrat who would choose Beto over Kamala is basically an unconsciously bigoted person.  

I wonder if Beto has ever prosecuted anyone for marijuana or campaigned against a ballot measure to legalize it.

Oh wait, he's actually supported marijuana legalization since he was a City Councilman and campaigned for it in his first campaign for Congress too.

Not even remotely similar to Harris.

Yeah he’s defo been better than her on that  (although Harris actually created programs so low level drug offender didn’t have to go to prison ) but he has consistently voted to her right in congress.  He’s not exactly AOC. Especially on economic justice he’s really not that different from someone like Booker. Who happens to be pretty good on marijuana legislation..so.
While I like Beto and I am glad he’s running because I think he’s really good on social justice. I also think his candidacy ironically highlights white privilege. No POC could ever run for president if they’d been arrested several times.  Nor would they have a bunch of powerful people urging them to run if they just lost their race ( see Abrams and Gillum).
Also his his family is extremely wealthy and are able to fund campaigns in ways no other candidates can.
So no in that respect he’s not even remotely similar to Harris or Obama or whover people compare him to.

The difference between Beto and Abrams and Gillum is he's held a federal office, and was running in a far more inhospital state.

Statistically he got WAY more media coverage than Abrams which obviously helped his campaign. Also if the media had given Abrams as much attention as Beto she might have won and at least raised more money. And I wouldn’t necessarily agree that he had a tougher task, Texas was probably more difficult to flip in many ways but a black woman running against a guy who actively purged black people from voting registers is a whole other level of effed up sh**t.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Jesus Christ, have you ever participated in a debate in your life?

Your response to every single actual counterargument you face is "wah I'm not allowed to criticise other candidates". Maybe if you had something substantial to say instead of complaining that your initial salvos weren't accepted at face value, you would convince other people. Sitting on your hands and crying in every single post about how you're being silenced is pathetic and suggests you don't even know how to debate even if you wanted to.

For the record, nobody has said that you aren't allowed to complain about other candidates. You just happen to not be any good at it when you do it.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Or you could just criticize candidates you think deserve it and ignore the idiots who respond like that instead of stooping to their level.

But you see, if I criticise them, I'm helping Trump do his job you see, so I'm forbidden from criticising them.

I don't think that.

So some morons do. Solution? Ignore them.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Jesus Christ, have you ever participated in a debate in your life?

Your response to every single actual counterargument you face is "wah I'm not allowed to criticise other candidates". Maybe if you had something substantial to say instead of complaining that your initial salvos weren't accepted at face value, you would convince other people. Sitting on your hands and crying in every single post about how you're being silenced is pathetic and suggests you don't even know how to debate even if you wanted to.

For the record, nobody has said that you aren't allowed to complain about other candidates. You just happen to not be any good at it when you do it.

And somewhat ironically, that's actually pretty reminiscent of what Calthrina does.

[GoTfan]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Jesus Christ, have you ever participated in a debate in your life?

Your response to every single actual counterargument you face is "wah I'm not allowed to criticise other candidates". Maybe if you had something substantial to say instead of complaining that your initial salvos weren't accepted at face value, you would convince other people. Sitting on your hands and crying in every single post about how you're being silenced is pathetic and suggests you don't even know how to debate even if you wanted to.

For the record, nobody has said that you aren't allowed to complain about other candidates. You just happen to not be any good at it when you do it.

Harris refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchin when he was foreclosing on elderly people. She also has an extremely sketchy record on criminal justice. O'Rourke meanwhile has a Chamber of Commerce rating of 47%. A Democrat with that high a CoC rating should not be worshipped as the Democratic saviour. The fact that both of them are shows just how lost the Democratic Party is as an institution.

[Possiblymaybe]

Any progressive with any pretension of self awareness would know that Beto is an establishment shill with movie star looks, an attractive wife, and a nice home in whatever El Paso's version of Parkland, FL. He's ran a (frighteningly) good campaign against a popular incumbent basically arguing "vote for me 'cause I'm cool."

He's basically the white straight male version of Kamala Harris. I thought you'd all detest him, but I'm not surprised at certain posters who have neither 'nads nor spine. Any Democrat who would choose Beto over Kamala is basically an unconsciously bigoted person.  

I wonder if Beto has ever prosecuted anyone for marijuana or campaigned against a ballot measure to legalize it.

Oh wait, he's actually supported marijuana legalization since he was a City Councilman and campaigned for it in his first campaign for Congress too.

Not even remotely similar to Harris.

Yeah he’s defo been better than her on that  (although Harris actually created programs so low level drug offender didn’t have to go to prison ) but he has consistently voted to her right in congress.  He’s not exactly AOC. Especially on economic justice he’s really not that different from someone like Booker. Who happens to be pretty good on marijuana legislation..so.
While I like Beto and I am glad he’s running because I think he’s really good on social justice. I also think his candidacy ironically highlights white privilege. No POC could ever run for president if they’d been arrested several times.  Nor would they have a bunch of powerful people urging them to run if they just lost their race ( see Abrams and Gillum).
Also his family are extremely wealthy and are able to fund campaigns in ways no other democrats running can.
So no in that respect he’s not even remotely similar to Harris or Obama or whover people compare him to.

Lol at Harris supporters who try to use her congressional record as proof of anything but an extension of her campaign.

If Harris was white the video of her laughing at POC mothers being locked up would have ended her campaign months ago.

Look whatever you think of that policy it shouldn’t be misrepresented. Nobody was locked up.
She addressed this in her recent root interview, I’ll post in that thread and we can continue the discussion there if you like since this is the Beto thread

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Jesus Christ, have you ever participated in a debate in your life?

Your response to every single actual counterargument you face is "wah I'm not allowed to criticise other candidates". Maybe if you had something substantial to say instead of complaining that your initial salvos weren't accepted at face value, you would convince other people. Sitting on your hands and crying in every single post about how you're being silenced is pathetic and suggests you don't even know how to debate even if you wanted to.

For the record, nobody has said that you aren't allowed to complain about other candidates. You just happen to not be any good at it when you do it.

Harris refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchin when he was foreclosing on elderly people. She also has an extremely sketchy record on criminal justice. O'Rourke meanwhile has a Chamber of Commerce rating of 47%. A Democrat with that high a CoC rating should not be worshipped as the Democratic saviour. The fact that both of them are shows just how lost the Democratic Party is as an institution.

Look at that, you posted something and weren't immediately struck by a lightning bolt. Looks like your fear of being silenced by some invisible force the second you made an (admittedly skeletal) argument was completely unjustified.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Any progressive with any pretension of self awareness would know that Beto is an establishment shill with movie star looks, an attractive wife, and a nice home in whatever El Paso's version of Parkland, FL. He's ran a (frighteningly) good campaign against a popular incumbent basically arguing "vote for me 'cause I'm cool."

He's basically the white straight male version of Kamala Harris. I thought you'd all detest him, but I'm not surprised at certain posters who have neither 'nads nor spine. Any Democrat who would choose Beto over Kamala is basically an unconsciously bigoted person.  

I wonder if Beto has ever prosecuted anyone for marijuana or campaigned against a ballot measure to legalize it.

Oh wait, he's actually supported marijuana legalization since he was a City Councilman and campaigned for it in his first campaign for Congress too.

Not even remotely similar to Harris.

Yeah he’s defo been better than her on that  (although Harris actually created programs so low level drug offender didn’t have to go to prison ) but he has consistently voted to her right in congress.  He’s not exactly AOC. Especially on economic justice he’s really not that different from someone like Booker. Who happens to be pretty good on marijuana legislation..so.
While I like Beto and I am glad he’s running because I think he’s really good on social justice. I also think his candidacy ironically highlights white privilege. No POC could ever run for president if they’d been arrested several times.  Nor would they have a bunch of powerful people urging them to run if they just lost their race ( see Abrams and Gillum).
Also his his family is extremely wealthy and are able to fund campaigns in ways no other candidates can.
So no in that respect he’s not even remotely similar to Harris or Obama or whover people compare him to.

The difference between Beto and Abrams and Gillum is he's held a federal office, and was running in a far more inhospital state.

Statistically he got WAY more media coverage than Abrams which obviously helped his campaign. Also if the media had given Abrams as much attention as Beto she might have won and at least raised more money. And I wouldn’t necessarily agree that he had a tougher task, Texas was probably more difficult to flip in many ways but a black woman running against a guy who actively purged black people from voting registers is a whole other level of effed up sh**t.

1-That's true, but running against someone as known and controversial as Ted Cruz is way more interesting to most people than the Governorship of Georgia.
2-Abrams raised plenty of money. She raised more than any Democrat in Georgia history. Lack of money wasn't a problem, she was already at the diminishing returns level.
3-Yes what Kemp did was utterly reprehensible but that's not Beto's fault.

[GoTfan]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Jesus Christ, have you ever participated in a debate in your life?

Your response to every single actual counterargument you face is "wah I'm not allowed to criticise other candidates". Maybe if you had something substantial to say instead of complaining that your initial salvos weren't accepted at face value, you would convince other people. Sitting on your hands and crying in every single post about how you're being silenced is pathetic and suggests you don't even know how to debate even if you wanted to.

For the record, nobody has said that you aren't allowed to complain about other candidates. You just happen to not be any good at it when you do it.

Harris refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchin when he was foreclosing on elderly people. She also has an extremely sketchy record on criminal justice. O'Rourke meanwhile has a Chamber of Commerce rating of 47%. A Democrat with that high a CoC rating should not be worshipped as the Democratic saviour. The fact that both of them are shows just how lost the Democratic Party is as an institution.

Look at that, you posted something and weren't immediately struck by a lightning bolt. Looks like your fear of being silenced by some invisible force the second you made an (admittedly skeletal) argument was completely unjustified.

Well that makes it a first, considering I'd usually be told to shut up and get back in line.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Jesus Christ, have you ever participated in a debate in your life?

Your response to every single actual counterargument you face is "wah I'm not allowed to criticise other candidates". Maybe if you had something substantial to say instead of complaining that your initial salvos weren't accepted at face value, you would convince other people. Sitting on your hands and crying in every single post about how you're being silenced is pathetic and suggests you don't even know how to debate even if you wanted to.

For the record, nobody has said that you aren't allowed to complain about other candidates. You just happen to not be any good at it when you do it.

Harris refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchin when he was foreclosing on elderly people. She also has an extremely sketchy record on criminal justice. O'Rourke meanwhile has a Chamber of Commerce rating of 47%. A Democrat with that high a CoC rating should not be worshipped as the Democratic saviour. The fact that both of them are shows just how lost the Democratic Party is as an institution.

Look at that, you posted something and weren't immediately struck by a lightning bolt. Looks like your fear of being silenced by some invisible force the second you made an (admittedly skeletal) argument was completely unjustified.

Well that makes it a first, considering I'd usually be told to shut up and get back in line.

A counterargument does not equal "shut up and get back in line" which was the point of my post.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yeah I'm pretty sure I've never seen anyone say that any candidate must not be criticized. The closest thing is a few of the dimmer Harris supporters basically saying "Non-issue, doesn't matter", which is incredibly annoying and bad debate form, but not "shut up and get back in line."

[GoTfan]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Jesus Christ, have you ever participated in a debate in your life?

Your response to every single actual counterargument you face is "wah I'm not allowed to criticise other candidates". Maybe if you had something substantial to say instead of complaining that your initial salvos weren't accepted at face value, you would convince other people. Sitting on your hands and crying in every single post about how you're being silenced is pathetic and suggests you don't even know how to debate even if you wanted to.

For the record, nobody has said that you aren't allowed to complain about other candidates. You just happen to not be any good at it when you do it.

Harris refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchin when he was foreclosing on elderly people. She also has an extremely sketchy record on criminal justice. O'Rourke meanwhile has a Chamber of Commerce rating of 47%. A Democrat with that high a CoC rating should not be worshipped as the Democratic saviour. The fact that both of them are shows just how lost the Democratic Party is as an institution.

Look at that, you posted something and weren't immediately struck by a lightning bolt. Looks like your fear of being silenced by some invisible force the second you made an (admittedly skeletal) argument was completely unjustified.

Well that makes it a first, considering I'd usually be told to shut up and get back in line.

A counterargument does not equal "shut up and get back in line" which was the point of my post.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/12/21/18150359/beto-orourke-voting-record

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/20/beto-orourke-congressional-votes-analysis-capital-and-main

538 also expected him to side with Trump 18% of the time. He has sided with him 30% of the time.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/beto-orourke/

There's also the fact that he ended up getting less votes than the least popular statewide Republican.

https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/despite-tight-race-ted-cruz-beto-orourke-got-less-votes-least-popular-statewide-republican/

[Progressive Pessimist]

This primary is going to be a frigging clusterf***. I cannot wait for it to be over...

[Beet]

This primary is going to be a frigging clusterf***. I cannot wait for it to be over...

Look luck with that, it's another year at least, and when all is said and done it could end up being five times longer than the General Election.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

Beto O'Rourke is an interesting candidate insofar as he exposes an important division among the left. Some of the left believes that their guiding principle should be the welfare of the little guy. Others believe that their guiding principle should be the works of Karl Marx.

...and it's apparent Beto's got neither.

Fun fact, Hofoid. Immigrants and minorities are, shockingly enough, people.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Jesus Christ, have you ever participated in a debate in your life?

Your response to every single actual counterargument you face is "wah I'm not allowed to criticise other candidates". Maybe if you had something substantial to say instead of complaining that your initial salvos weren't accepted at face value, you would convince other people. Sitting on your hands and crying in every single post about how you're being silenced is pathetic and suggests you don't even know how to debate even if you wanted to.

For the record, nobody has said that you aren't allowed to complain about other candidates. You just happen to not be any good at it when you do it.

Harris refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchin when he was foreclosing on elderly people. She also has an extremely sketchy record on criminal justice. O'Rourke meanwhile has a Chamber of Commerce rating of 47%. A Democrat with that high a CoC rating should not be worshipped as the Democratic saviour. The fact that both of them are shows just how lost the Democratic Party is as an institution.

Look at that, you posted something and weren't immediately struck by a lightning bolt. Looks like your fear of being silenced by some invisible force the second you made an (admittedly skeletal) argument was completely unjustified.

Well that makes it a first, considering I'd usually be told to shut up and get back in line.

A counterargument does not equal "shut up and get back in line" which was the point of my post.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/12/21/18150359/beto-orourke-voting-record

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/20/beto-orourke-congressional-votes-analysis-capital-and-main

538 also expected him to side with Trump 18% of the time. He has sided with him 30% of the time.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/beto-orourke/

There's also the fact that he ended up getting less votes than the least popular statewide Republican.

https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/despite-tight-race-ted-cruz-beto-orourke-got-less-votes-least-popular-statewide-republican/

Lmao what is the point of this post? Do you have any critical thinking skills? I'm not arguing anything about Beto's voting record and those links don't say anything about how Beto dissenters should "shut up and get back in line".

[GoTfan]

Attacks on Democratic candidates are totally unfair and help Trump!!! ... Unless they're attacks on a Democrat (or someone I get to technically say isn't a "real Democrat") that I don't like, in which case, great! Why are they so special? I thought you all wanted scrutiny!

I don't expect people to understand something as elitist as "nuance", but it is possible to scrutinize candidates without believing that they're worse than the devil.

The only posters I can see incapable of grasping this are GoTfan, PittsburghSteel and Invisible Obama.

I could say the same for the Harris and O'Rourke fanatics,  but I'm not allowed to criticise them because that means I'm a closet Trumpist.

Jesus Christ, have you ever participated in a debate in your life?

Your response to every single actual counterargument you face is "wah I'm not allowed to criticise other candidates". Maybe if you had something substantial to say instead of complaining that your initial salvos weren't accepted at face value, you would convince other people. Sitting on your hands and crying in every single post about how you're being silenced is pathetic and suggests you don't even know how to debate even if you wanted to.

For the record, nobody has said that you aren't allowed to complain about other candidates. You just happen to not be any good at it when you do it.

Harris refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchin when he was foreclosing on elderly people. She also has an extremely sketchy record on criminal justice. O'Rourke meanwhile has a Chamber of Commerce rating of 47%. A Democrat with that high a CoC rating should not be worshipped as the Democratic saviour. The fact that both of them are shows just how lost the Democratic Party is as an institution.

Look at that, you posted something and weren't immediately struck by a lightning bolt. Looks like your fear of being silenced by some invisible force the second you made an (admittedly skeletal) argument was completely unjustified.

Well that makes it a first, considering I'd usually be told to shut up and get back in line.

A counterargument does not equal "shut up and get back in line" which was the point of my post.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/12/21/18150359/beto-orourke-voting-record

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/20/beto-orourke-congressional-votes-analysis-capital-and-main

538 also expected him to side with Trump 18% of the time. He has sided with him 30% of the time.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/beto-orourke/

There's also the fact that he ended up getting less votes than the least popular statewide Republican.

https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/despite-tight-race-ted-cruz-beto-orourke-got-less-votes-least-popular-statewide-republican/

Lmao what is the point of this post? Do you have any critical thinking skills? I'm not arguing anything about Beto's voting record and those links don't say anything about how Beto dissenters should "shut up and get back in line".

And you completely miss the point. Colour me shocked.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Yeah I'm pretty sure I've never seen anyone say that any candidate must not be criticized. The closest thing is a few of the dimmer Harris supporters basically saying "Non-issue, doesn't matter", which is incredibly annoying and bad debate form, but not "shut up and get back in line."

This. And how does one “get in line” when we don’t have a nominee? LOL.

[Grassroots]

This primary is going to be a frigging clusterf***. I cannot wait for it to be over...

I can't wait for it to begin. This is going to be fun asf.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

Yes, my guy, generally when somebody says "what is the point of this post" they are in fact "missing the point". In fact, I missed the point of your post so badly that I had to ask you directly what it was  (and you didn't answer).

I'm not going to argue over whether or not Beto has a more conservative voting record than the median House D because that's pretty demonstrably true. As BRTD said, we can argue about how relevant that is, or how much of that is attributable to a context that won't be present in 2020, but nobody is going to rebut the fact. Personally right now I'm more of a Sanders supporter than Beto supporter (and nobody has ever told me to get back in line, in fact).

What I was trying to argue was that you're an awful debator who apparently interprets anything that isn't a full-throated endorsement of your opening argument as someone telling you to "shut up". You haven't done anything to prove me wrong.

[Sbane]

Any Democrat who would choose Beto over Kamala is basically an unconsciously bigoted person. 

Kamala almost lost a statewide race in California while Beto almost won in Texas. Yeah, there's a difference.

[CatoMinor]

Any Democrat who would choose Beto over Kamala is basically an unconsciously bigoted person. 

Ooooor someone who actually cares about cannabis reform and criminal justice reform.

[RFK Jr.’s Brain Worm]

This primary is going to be a frigging clusterf***. I cannot wait for it to be over...