LawTalkers

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying. (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=880)

ThurgreedMarshall 07-05-2017 04:40 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508537)
To be clear, I voted for her, not him.

Not sure why this is relevant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508537)
But I thought he went easy on her. For example, he never touched the email. She was the consummate insider -- that's who she was. He didn't need to define her that way.

Yes. She was an insider. But what hurt her most was the implication that she was corrupt because she took speaking fees from Wall Street and because she met with bankers (whether it mattered that they were her constituents at one point and a huge driver of the economy made no difference, of course). He absolutely hammered her on this.

I remember vividly because I had many fights with Bernie idiots who kept saying that it would make her stronger in the general and not to worry, etc.

He didn't need to go after her on the emails. She was taking shit on that front from all sides already.

TM

Hank Chinaski 07-05-2017 04:42 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508539)


How do you think that Sanders crippled Clinton, but that Clinton did not cripple Obama in 2008?

How many Clinton voters do think defected away from voting for Obama? I'd say not nearly as many as the Bernie supporters that defected away from Hil.

ThurgreedMarshall 07-05-2017 04:44 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508539)
Nonsense. He didn't turn anyone against Hillary.

This is flat out wrong. Once she was defined as a corrupt banker-lover, that was enough for a lot of dumbasses to throw their votes away because they "just couldn't vote for her." Once he was out they threw their votes away on fucking Stein and Johnson (of all people). Sure, many thought she would win anyway, but he absolutely turned many on the far left against her.

TM

Tyrone Slothrop 07-05-2017 04:53 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 508541)
Not sure why this is relevant.

Yes. She was an insider. But what hurt her most was the implication that she was corrupt because she took speaking fees from Wall Street and because she met with bankers (whether it mattered that they were her constituents at one point and a huge driver of the economy made no difference, of course). He absolutely hammered her on this.

I remember vividly because I had many fights with Bernie idiots who kept saying that it would make her stronger in the general and not to worry, etc.

He didn't need to go after her on the emails. She was taking shit on that front from all sides already.

TM

When you are an insider, you will be attacked as corrupt, and she had the Clinton name to boot. Bernie didn't make her take money from Wall Street or carry its water as the Senator from NY. That's who she was. Any Republican would have used this stuff against her in the general, and having to deal with it from him should have helped her figure out how to deal with it then.

Tyrone Slothrop 07-05-2017 04:55 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 508542)
How many Clinton voters do think defected away from voting for Obama? I'd say not nearly as many as the Bernie supporters that defected away from Hil.

I imagine the numbers were comparable, but Obama was a winner so no one cared. If the Bernie number was bigger, I would attribute it more to sexism than anything Bernie said or did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 508543)
This is flat out wrong. Once she was defined as a corrupt banker-lover, that was enough for a lot of dumbasses to throw their votes away because they "just couldn't vote for her." Once he was out they threw their votes away on fucking Stein and Johnson (of all people). Sure, many thought she would win anyway, but he absolutely turned many on the far left against her.

We can agree to disagree. He absolutely ran against her, but I don't think he did much to change anyone's mind. He took the existing pool of leftie Democrats who would have been inclined against Clinton, and they voted for him. I don't think there were that many who defected in the general relative to any other year, but those people are usually ignored until they matter (2000, 2016).

ThurgreedMarshall 07-05-2017 05:04 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508544)
When you are an insider, you will be attacked as corrupt, and she had the Clinton name to boot. Bernie didn't make her take money from Wall Street or carry its water as the Senator from NY. That's who she was. Any Republican would have used this stuff against her in the general, and having to deal with it from him should have helped her figure out how to deal with it then.

I forgot your stance on Wall Street. I'm not banging my head against that wall again.

But on the "any Republican would run with it," again, I think you're wrong. Cruz and Rubio surely would. But Trump was handed a gift when Bernie defined her as a corrupt Wall Street shill (and I notice that you keep using "Washington insider" and "corrupt bank shill" as interchangeable and I'm not sure you should). Trump (and other Republicans) up until that point kept pointing at Hillary as a Benghazi witch and a Washington insider. That may be because they were trying to win a primary for the right wing dumbass vote. But there is no way Trump, the ultimate rich guy jackass, gets to point at Hillary and call her a corrupt banker shill without Bernie pinning that label on her first.

Whatever. If you believe Bernie didn't hurt Hillary with the far left, I'm not going to convince you and I no longer want to try.

TM

ThurgreedMarshall 07-05-2017 05:06 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508545)
We can agree to disagree. He absolutely ran against her, but I don't think he did much to change anyone's mind. He took the existing pool of leftie Democrats who would have been inclined against Clinton, and they voted for him. I don't think there were that many who defected in the general relative to any other year, but those people are usually ignored until they matter (2000, 2016).

Sure. The far left would have voted exactly the same as they did had Bernie not run at all and if there were no Sarandons out there saying the dumbest shit she could think of. That's not ridiculous at all. You win.

TM

Tyrone Slothrop 07-05-2017 05:10 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 508546)
I forgot your stance on Wall Street. I'm not banging my head against that wall again.

But on the "any Republican would run with it," again, I think you're wrong. Cruz and Rubio surely would. But Trump was handed a gift when Bernie defined her as a corrupt Wall Street shill (and I notice that you keep using "Washington insider" and "corrupt bank shill" as interchangeable and I'm not sure you should). Trump (and other Republicans) up until that point kept pointing at Hillary as a Benghazi witch and a Washington insider. That may be because they were trying to win a primary for the right wing dumbass vote. But there is no way Trump, the ultimate rich guy jackass, gets to point at Hillary and call her a corrupt banker shill without Bernie pinning that label on her first.

Whatever. If you believe Bernie didn't hurt Hillary with the far left, I'm not going to convince you and I no longer want to try.

TM

I guess the question is, hurt her relative to what? Trump was far worse on her, and he didn't need Sanders to do oppo research. He has an uncanny sense of his opponents' weaknesses. I don't think Sanders was any rougher on her than any other generic Democratic primary opponent would have been. He may have been rougher than Martin O'Malley was, but that's because it wasn't a two-person race yet.

And the advantage of getting attacked in the primaries should have been that it helps you deal with it better in the general. She, uh, didn't.

Tyrone Slothrop 07-05-2017 05:12 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 508547)
Sure. The far left would have voted exactly the same as they did had Bernie not run at all and if there were no Sarandons out there saying the dumbest shit she could think of. That's not ridiculous at all. You win.

TM

That's a silly counterfactual. Of course she would have looked wonderful if no one run against her.

ThurgreedMarshall 07-05-2017 05:22 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508548)
I guess the question is, hurt her relative to what? Trump was far worse on her, and he didn't need Sanders to do oppo research. He has an uncanny sense of his opponents' weaknesses. I don't think Sanders was any rougher on her than any other generic Democratic primary opponent would have been. He may have been rougher than Martin O'Malley was, but that's because it wasn't a two-person race yet.

And the advantage of getting attacked in the primaries should have been that it helps you deal with it better in the general. She, uh, didn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508549)
That's a silly counterfactual. Of course she would have looked wonderful if no one run against her.

Jesus Christ.

TM

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 07-05-2017 05:29 PM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 508536)
You're reading FB. You expected Vidal v. Buckley?

It's an extreme position, but one could persuasively argue political commentary on FB is exclusively authored by totally useless twats.

You were not missed in that particular conversation.

Hank Chinaski 07-05-2017 05:39 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508545)
I imagine the numbers were comparable, but Obama was a winner so no one cared. If the Bernie number was bigger, I would attribute it more to sexism than anything Bernie said or did.


Again, math. A 500% increase in third party voters in at least Mi and Pa. I think the Jill Stein votes alone would have given her Mi.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 07-05-2017 05:44 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508549)
That's a silly counterfactual. Of course she would have looked wonderful if no one run against her.

If Bernie had not run the anti-Hillary vote in the primaries would have gotten behind someone else, probably O'Malley, who would have, like Bernie, been totally dead and hopeless post-Super Tuesday. That person probably would have admitted the futility of the effort sooner than Bernie and the party would have unified sooner. But, who knows? Maybe Webb would have survived instead.

Bernie's move, once he broke out of the pack, to go rabidly anti-Clinton said it all. He didn't have the base on the left to beat her, there just wasn't enough room there, so he had to go negative and hard (because he hadn't gone negative in the beginning - remember when he was sick of talking about her emails?).

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 07-05-2017 05:45 PM

Re: Bernie 2020
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 508552)
Again, math. A 500% increase in third party voters in at least Mi and Pa. I think the Jill Stein votes alone would have given her Mi.

I'm debating whether you or TM get my proxy from here on out.

sebastian_dangerfield 07-05-2017 05:53 PM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 508551)
You were not missed in that particular conversation.

Thank you.

(Could you tee that one a little higher for me, John Edwards?)


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:44 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com