In response to
"When the Democrats veer hard left against an unpopular incumbent it ends badly. -- (edited)"
by
spamlet
|
This line: "This election should be a bloodbath if it wasn’t for Trump. No need to help him by nominating from the fringes." is a joke, right?
Posted by
JackDawson (aka dawson)
Feb 11 '20, 09:52
|
Like 2016?
Like 2018?
Democrats won the popular vote both times and not by blood bath margins
In 2016 you can say they nominated not a hard left person but a problematic person
In 2018 they had centrist persons and won, but not by blood bath margins by any measure
a significant percentage of this country wants the dictatorship/strong-man/racist/xenophobic style of this person. To deny that and blame it on Democrats and who they nominate (the essence of what you're doing) is enabling him, it's direct aiding and abetting.
|
Responses:
-
(I've read this post three times and I don't understand what it is saying)
-
ty97
Feb 11, 09:55
-
I think you may have misinterpreted what I said.
-
spamlet
Feb 11, 09:54
15
-
I'm focused on "helping him by nominating from the fringes" here--the implication is that someone is helping him by nominating the candidate with a ce
-
JackDawson
Feb 11, 09:57
14
-
If you think that everyone that dislikes Trump is going to vote for Bernie that’s simply not true. -- nm
-
spamlet
Feb 11, 10:01
13
-
It’s def not but that’s not my point -- nm
-
JackDawson
Feb 11, 10:33
-
The point, I think, of nominating someone like Bernie would be to acknowledge the reality that the voter pool is not a zero sum game.
-
znufrii, human scum
Feb 11, 10:08
-
My feeling is, if in the face of Trump, someone needs to be motivated by the Dems nominee to vote against Trump, fuck em. They aren't
-
TWuG
Feb 11, 10:06
-
I have severe worries about Bernie's electability but I do think (in highly oversimplified terms) that
-
ty97
Feb 11, 10:05
9
|