2020 Presidential Election

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by Martina

I don't think it's gonna go that way. I am glad for the voices on the left. They remind us of reality in this surreal political landscape. I am not totally neverhillary because I voted for her, but I hated her as a candidate -- with a white hot heat.

I don't know if you can go by me, but I will vote for any not totally sold out Dem. I guess I am a little ideosyncratic in how I determine that. I dislike and would not vote for Corey Booker, but would vote for Biden.

I think there are a lot of lefties like me who don't feel the anti-mainstream Dem heat as strongly after two years of Trump.

I am concerned about Russia. Whether or not people are currently feeling the anti-mainstream heat, Russia will make sure sentiments like these grow legs.

Chapo Traphouse stated multiple times that interest in the Russia investigation was a litmus test for who NOT to support among the Dem candidates.

It's like they are Russian Meddling deniers, despite extensive proof that the Russians used them last time.

This will make just make the left a better weapon.

[Martina]

Kamala now, which I guess we knew. I like her.

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by dark_crystal

I am concerned about Russia. Whether or not people are currently feeling the anti-mainstream heat, Russia will make sure sentiments like these grow legs.

Chapo Traphouse stated multiple times that interest in the Russia investigation was a litmus test for who NOT to support among the Dem candidates.

It's like they are Russian Meddling deniers, despite extensive proof that the Russians used them last time.

This will make just make the left a better weapon.

Part of the reason the #NeverHillary situation last year was so terrifying to me was because it was as much IRL than online, in that i had 2 Sanders supporters close to me (both guys, one white/cishet) who hated Hillary Clinton so much that i thought they were about to stroke out over it. Ruining ever happy hour and dinner party and ranting 24/7 on facebook. And i couldn't mute them because i was going to see them.

Anyway, i feel like this lingering hatred is driving the tendency of outlets like Chapo Traphouse to mock and dismiss the Russia situation.

If Russia delivered the election to Trump, Clinton's loss was not because of how badly she sucked. It was not because the Democrats failed to nominate Bernie.

If Trump cheated, then Clinton didn't lose.

Clinton's loss validates the idea that the Democrats need to move further left. If she didn't lose, some of that validation shift back to the center.

We're not supposed to talk abut politics at work, but we have talked about the Russian meddling because it is relevant to our work.

I have colleagues who feel like what Russia did was no big deal.

If Russia changed votes by amplifying and promoting misinformation, they believe that's fair. Critical thinking is available to everyone, they say, and if people had used it, Russia's tricks wouldn't have worked.

I guess that's what Chapo Traphouse thinks, too.

But is critical thinking available to everyone? I don't feel that it is, and part of a librarian's job is to address that.

[Martina]

A lot of us on the left have a broader critique of mainstream Democrats than just our hatred of Clintons. Working people have been betrayed by corporatist Democrats, who contributed to our headlong rush into a society of extreme economic inequality. Without the challenge from the left, Democrats would still be singing their same old song.

There has not been any over correction. I was hearing that BS on NPR today. Today's left are espousing FDR brand policies. The world canted way to the right starting with Reagan. Sensible folk are pointing that out in order to create a more humane system.

I do care about defeating Trump, but I also care about the truth. The idea that the Democratic Party is too far to the left is a joke.

After Trump, these divisions will still be with us, and I am not going to pretend that the Dems have not massively betrayed this country for any single election, even 2020.

[C0LLETTE]

I love the debates in here and I read them avidly. I often read them over and over and over till I understand the point.

Would it be possible to have a rule that a writer not use any "double negatives", surely not use more than one, and just stick to simple declarative sentences.

I figure you'd save time and space and even a simpleton like me would understand what you are saying in half the time.

Just a thought.

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by Martina

A lot of us on the left have a broader critique of mainstream Democrats than just our hatred of Clintons. Working people have been betrayed by corporatist Democrats, who contributed to our headlong rush into a society of extreme economic inequality. Without the challenge from the left, Democrats would still be singing their same old song.

There has not been any over correction. I was hearing that BS on NPR today. Today's left are espousing FDR brand policies. The world canted way to the right starting with Reagan. Sensible folk are pointing that out in order to create a more humane system.

I do care about defeating Trump, but I also care about the truth. The idea that the Democratic Party is too far to the left is a joke.

After Trump, these divisions will still be with us, and I am not going to pretend that the Dems have not massively betrayed this country for any single election, even 2020.

I don't think the Democratic party is too far to the left, my post was narrowly focused on why certain media and librarian progressives dismiss the Russian meddling.

There are a lot of things on the table for 2020 that would not even be in the air if Clinton had won.

We would be looking at Obamacare-with-lipstick-on for health care, rather than having a primary field where you have to support some form of single-payer. We would not even be talking about 70% tax rates on the wealthy. We would not be talking about redistribution at all.

I think all critiques of the yuppie wing of the Democratic party are valid.

I think those critiques are weakened when people are so invested in them that they ignore crimes just because the existence of those crimes challenges the critique narrative. That is what i see happening on Chapo Traphouse.

It's like the "tankie" (Tankie = member of a communist group or a "fellow traveller" (sympathiser) who believes fully in the political system of the Soviet Union and defends/defended the actions of the Soviet Union) phenomenon: tankies are so committed to communism that they ignore or defend atrocities because the existence of Soviet history puts a question mark on communism's virtues.

Anyway i was listening to Chapo Traphouse again this morning and they were having a lot of fun with the arrest of Roger Stone, so maybe their position is more nuanced that it seemed when i first heard them discuss it.

Also i do not know if i can promise to write in short declarative sentences. Brevity has never been a strength of mine.

[C0LLETTE]

The word "short" was never mine. I asked for "simple" declarative and fewer double negatives which bog me down. lol.

There's the line that Einstein probably never really uttered: " If you can't explain it simply, you probably don't understand it ".

On the other hand, one Nobel winner probably did say" "If it was simple to explain, I wouldn't have won a Nobel prize for it ".

[homoe]

Howard Schultz, Please Don’t Run for President...........




Really, what qualifications do you have besides being a decent businessman???????

[Martina]

Seriously, wasn't that out of left field? I wish he'd run in the Republican primary.

[homoe]

Originally Posted by homoe

Howard Schultz, Please Don’t Run for President...........




Really, what qualifications do you have besides being a decent businessman???????

Schultz was faced by protesters here in his home town of Seattle, with signs that said "Grande Ego" & "Venti Mistake" in regards to his possible run for president,while promoting his new book.