The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

The Increasingly Wearily-Moderated [Primaries] Thread

1235733

Posts

  • Viktor WaltersViktor Walters Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I don't feel that Bernie appreciates the extent to which racism and racial dynamics affect minorities. I don't think he's entirely of the belief that everything is all about class, as some of his detractors claim, but I think there's an element of truth to that, which is apparent when you kind of read between the lines.

    I don't have a half dozen citations available or anything, it's just a sense I get from looking at how he's responded to criticism of his handling of racial issues over the years. Maybe I'm wrong.

    It doesn't really affect my vote anyway - I'm voting for Warren come Super Tuesday, unless she's clearly toast, at which point I'll have to make a decision between Biden and Bernie. (I would prefer Bernie, but I also think Bernie is going to be uniquely susceptible to Trump's brand of bullshit such that he's the only front runner I don't think can win the general.)

    I'm not a huge Bernie supporter (I voted for him in 2016's primary but have soured a bit on him since) but I do not see Bernie being susceptible at all to Trump. Biden, on the other hand, really seems easily manipulated, considering his tendency to get flustered and Trump's ability to prey on people who "play fair." I don't think Bernie would be as worried about Respectability.

  • KamarKamar Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    I genuinely worry about Biden getting blown up somehow in the general.

    Saying something so stupid he finally loses voters. Getting hit with Republican bullshit that sticks somehow and peels off people who are already looking for an excuse to stay home, Hillary style. Something genuinely fucked up coming out or happening. Health scare. Etc.

    Kamar on
  • ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    i don't know how you can see biden like, speak and think he's electable

    genuinely one of the worst campaigners i've seen in my lifetime

  • KamarKamar Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    Winky wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    I think viewing capitalism--or any single thing, really--as the root of evil rather than just an avenue for it is a great way to get government that fails its people when humans human it up.

    Slavery is far, far older than capitalism.

    I think this assumption about people; that they just tend toward evil and that what becomes expressed in our systems is just a necessary byproduct of this, is one of the most destructive forces at work today. We fail to address systemic problems at a systemic level because we make the assumption that people will corrupt any system, that the system itself cannot be the corrupting force here. I deeply disagree with this. Humans do evil because we create a system for them where they are encouraged to do so.

    Everyone doesn't have to be a villain to turn a system built too optimistically into something monstrous. Apathy and normal selfishness and shortsightedness, stuff which is absolutely definitely normal for most humans, is more than enough to empower the real shitheads.

    Enough people are racist, for no reason but shithead tribalism, that a system which doesn't acknowledge that racism is its own thing will allow it to flourish. A socialist one as much as a capitalist one. You get 'socialism, but only for white people' if you're not careful.

    Kamar on
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Elendil wrote: »
    i don't know how you can see biden like, speak and think he's electable

    genuinely one of the worst campaigners i've seen in my lifetime

    He extremely comes off as the party elder who thinks its his turn.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • wanderingwandering Russia state-affiliated media Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    I've been listening to the audiobook version of Our Revolution, and it's a bit surprising how personal it is, since Bernie usually shies away from personal stuff. He talks about his childhood in Brooklyn, crying over the Holocaust as a kid, etc. He says his first realization that something was wrong with capitalism was when the greedy owner of the Brooklyn Dodgers moved the team to L.A. when he was a teenager, which is pretty adorable

    Also been doing some volunteer texting for the Bernie campaign: pretty fun!

    wandering on
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    wandering wrote: »
    I've been listening to the audiobook version of Our Revolution, and it's a bit surprising how personal it is, since Bernie usually shies away from personal stuff. He talks about his childhood in Brooklyn, crying over the Holocaust as a kid, etc. He says his first realization that something was wrong with capitalism was when the greedy owner of the Brooklyn Dodgers moved the team to L.A., which is pretty adorable

    Also been doing some volunteer texting for the Bernie campaign: pretty fun!

    Texting while in the bathroom on company time is praxis

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    I do wish the Sanders campaign would stop texting my phone as if its my wifes phone, but I don't want any further texts and confirming the number is live would just get me more of those.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • CoinageCoinage Heaviside LayerRegistered User regular
    wandering wrote: »
    Also been doing some volunteer texting for the Bernie campaign: pretty fun!
    The stuff people send back to you is wild. If only I were allowed to tell people that Bernie is not a communist but I am...

    Happiness is within reach!
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    I do wish the Sanders campaign would stop texting my phone as if its my wifes phone, but I don't want any further texts and confirming the number is live would just get me more of those.

    If youd just put her on the phone I could stop

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • CoinageCoinage Heaviside LayerRegistered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    I do wish the Sanders campaign would stop texting my phone as if its my wifes phone, but I don't want any further texts and confirming the number is live would just get me more of those.
    They will stop if you text back stop, trying to honor opt out requests is important for not violating the FCC or whatever

    Happiness is within reach!
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    I thought political stuff was not subject to FCC stuff.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • wanderingwandering Russia state-affiliated media Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    I thought political stuff was not subject to FCC stuff.
    I just know that we have a big opt out button that we’re supposed to push if someone says “stop” or “opt-out” or whatever

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    wandering wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    I thought political stuff was not subject to FCC stuff.
    I just know that we have a big opt out button that we’re supposed to push if someone says “stop” or “opt-out” or whatever

    Not that I don't believe you wandering, but literally every time I've done that I only get spammed more.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • NobeardNobeard North Carolina: Failed StateRegistered User regular
    edited January 2020
    Elendil wrote: »
    i don't know how you can see biden like, speak and think he's electable

    genuinely one of the worst campaigners i've seen in my lifetime

    He's an old, white man, he's Obama's VP, and he's been around in politics a long time as a Democrat. Everyone, even his supporters, knows he is a terrible campaigner and they don't care. He could stroke out and the establishment could get him the primary win, Weekend at Bernie's style.

    Nobeard on
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    Preacher wrote: »
    wandering wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    I thought political stuff was not subject to FCC stuff.
    I just know that we have a big opt out button that we’re supposed to push if someone says “stop” or “opt-out” or whatever

    Not that I don't believe you wandering, but literally every time I've done that I only get spammed more.

    I can believe that political campaigns might honor the unsubscribe button because they don't want to annoy you enough that you don't vote for the candidate.

    CelestialBadger on
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Ilpala wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    I mean like, Bernie Sanders is a "rising tide lifts all boats" sort of person, who doesn't seem to fully grasp that racism and other systemic oppression is like drilling holes in those boats. That's a part of the reason why I favor Warren over Sanders. However, Sanders is still preferable to Joe "fuck all people under age 40 and I'll totes be able to work with Mitch McConnell" Biden. The polls in this state are very close between Sanders and Biden but not not favoring Warren much, so that's where my dilemma lies.

    Do you think this is evidenced in his supporter demographics?

    The majority of my Sanders dislike comes from his cultish fan base. I was just talking about considering voting for him but because I'm not a 100% pure believer I'm getting interrogated. This part might be unfair since people can't control their fans, but still.

    I asked a question in a discourse thread. No one is interrogating you.

    I asked because "Sanders doesnt get race", or variations on it, is a pretty common argument but then we're left with the fact that the only guy polling better than him among black voters used to argue for segregation and all the liberal candidates who are "good" on race struggle to break single digits.

    There's just a disconnect I can't rectify between the premise and the polling.

    Doesn't this suggest that there isn't a simple cause/effect relationship among who people choose to support and the support he does enjoy isn't necessarily a reflection on his policy or rhetoric?

    Probably! But it makes the claims that Sanders doesnt get race kind of aggravating, especially as they rarely seem to come from the minority groups in question.

    He polls well with minorities, he talks constantly about issues of race and racial equality. He has a decades long history of this! He just doesnt divorce class and race like liberalism has for several decades.

    Which is the whole problem, because race and class are in many ways orthogonal. Treating racism as just another form of class warfare doesn't work, because racism doesn't cleave like that - class markers like money and education rarely protect people from the impact of racism.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Ilpala wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    I mean like, Bernie Sanders is a "rising tide lifts all boats" sort of person, who doesn't seem to fully grasp that racism and other systemic oppression is like drilling holes in those boats. That's a part of the reason why I favor Warren over Sanders. However, Sanders is still preferable to Joe "fuck all people under age 40 and I'll totes be able to work with Mitch McConnell" Biden. The polls in this state are very close between Sanders and Biden but not not favoring Warren much, so that's where my dilemma lies.

    Do you think this is evidenced in his supporter demographics?

    The majority of my Sanders dislike comes from his cultish fan base. I was just talking about considering voting for him but because I'm not a 100% pure believer I'm getting interrogated. This part might be unfair since people can't control their fans, but still.

    I asked a question in a discourse thread. No one is interrogating you.

    I asked because "Sanders doesnt get race", or variations on it, is a pretty common argument but then we're left with the fact that the only guy polling better than him among black voters used to argue for segregation and all the liberal candidates who are "good" on race struggle to break single digits.

    There's just a disconnect I can't rectify between the premise and the polling.

    Doesn't this suggest that there isn't a simple cause/effect relationship among who people choose to support and the support he does enjoy isn't necessarily a reflection on his policy or rhetoric?

    Probably! But it makes the claims that Sanders doesnt get race kind of aggravating, especially as they rarely seem to come from the minority groups in question.

    He polls well with minorities, he talks constantly about issues of race and racial equality. He has a decades long history of this! He just doesnt divorce class and race like liberalism has for several decades.

    Which is the whole problem, because race and class are in many ways orthogonal. Treating racism as just another form of class warfare doesn't work, because racism doesn't cleave like that - class markers like money and education rarely protect people from the impact of racism.

    In what waybdo you think Sanders does this?

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    Ilpala wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    I mean like, Bernie Sanders is a "rising tide lifts all boats" sort of person, who doesn't seem to fully grasp that racism and other systemic oppression is like drilling holes in those boats. That's a part of the reason why I favor Warren over Sanders. However, Sanders is still preferable to Joe "fuck all people under age 40 and I'll totes be able to work with Mitch McConnell" Biden. The polls in this state are very close between Sanders and Biden but not not favoring Warren much, so that's where my dilemma lies.

    Do you think this is evidenced in his supporter demographics?

    The majority of my Sanders dislike comes from his cultish fan base. I was just talking about considering voting for him but because I'm not a 100% pure believer I'm getting interrogated. This part might be unfair since people can't control their fans, but still.

    I asked a question in a discourse thread. No one is interrogating you.

    I asked because "Sanders doesnt get race", or variations on it, is a pretty common argument but then we're left with the fact that the only guy polling better than him among black voters used to argue for segregation and all the liberal candidates who are "good" on race struggle to break single digits.

    There's just a disconnect I can't rectify between the premise and the polling.

    Doesn't this suggest that there isn't a simple cause/effect relationship among who people choose to support and the support he does enjoy isn't necessarily a reflection on his policy or rhetoric?

    Probably! But it makes the claims that Sanders doesnt get race kind of aggravating, especially as they rarely seem to come from the minority groups in question.

    He polls well with minorities, he talks constantly about issues of race and racial equality. He has a decades long history of this! He just doesnt divorce class and race like liberalism has for several decades.

    Which is the whole problem, because race and class are in many ways orthogonal. Treating racism as just another form of class warfare doesn't work, because racism doesn't cleave like that - class markers like money and education rarely protect people from the impact of racism.

    Hence all those stories of well-heeled older black men driving their nice cars home to their nice neighborhood and getting harassed by police who think they don't belong. Class is not a perfect protection.

  • eMoandereMoander Registered User regular
    eMoander wrote: »
    As a California resident, I'm still struggling to come to terms that my primary vote may actually make a difference this year. I'm so used to Super Tuesday being something that happens to other people, it still hasn't quite settled in yet.

    Personally, I like Warren a lot (the plan for everything really resonates with me), but I definitely see the appeal of Biden as 'someone who can win vs Trump'. Call it PTSD relative to 2016, but if I'm honest with myself my major concern is a repeat of poor performance in several midwest/rust belt states that me in my liberal elite stronghold just has zero insight into. I'm not intending this as provocative in any way, just trying to honestly articulate my feelings. So while I would definitely prefer a Warren presidency in a vacuum, I am certainly giving real consideration to a Biden vote because I do think he is more 'electable' in the general. I just wanted to throw in my 2 cents as the discussion around sticky Biden voters is interesting, but for me the fear of another loss is definitely a top consideration given the real damage that Trump is doing right now and it wouldn't surprise me at all if this is a pretty widespread consideration. Policies are great and all, but elections have consequences and all that.

    For an even more unpopular opinion here, if I had a third choice I would actually go Steyer. As much as I hate allowing another billionaire to buy into the presidency, I do think he has his priorities on the environment right and has a history of doing good things with his power and position.

    Trying very hard to observe the thread rules here so sorry for not being more elaborate:

    What makes you think Biden is more electable in the general? It seems like enough of the base is extremely fatigued with neo-liberal politics that have consistently failed them that turnout will be an issue with Biden.

    I'm going to echo NoBeard above (probably for different reasons), but he's an old white man who is preaching a 'can't we all just get along' mantra that seems like it would appeal to my mental image of the average voter. Now I'll caveat that up and down that my image of the average voter is incredibly negative and cynical, so take that purely as my personal opinion.

    When you reference the base being fatigued and that driving turnout, while I think that is not an unreasonable interpretation, I also don't necessarily buy it being true even if we want it to be. I don't want to dig into specifics for fear of violating the rules as you said, but I'm just trying to articulate my personal feelings and why I would consider Biden, recognizing that I agree with pretty much all the negative feedback that has been posted on here. I agree he's old, a poor campaigner, etc etc, but the question comes down to who do I think will play better with voters in a handful of swing states rather than who do I actually want to be president. It sucks, but that's just where I am.

    All that being said, I am still likely voting Warren but I do want to see how she performs and whether it looks like she has a real shot before fully committing.

    Xbox: Travesty 0214 Switch: 3304-2356-9421 Honkai Star Rail: 600322115 Battlenet: Travesty #1822
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Ilpala wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    Mayabird wrote: »
    I mean like, Bernie Sanders is a "rising tide lifts all boats" sort of person, who doesn't seem to fully grasp that racism and other systemic oppression is like drilling holes in those boats. That's a part of the reason why I favor Warren over Sanders. However, Sanders is still preferable to Joe "fuck all people under age 40 and I'll totes be able to work with Mitch McConnell" Biden. The polls in this state are very close between Sanders and Biden but not not favoring Warren much, so that's where my dilemma lies.

    Do you think this is evidenced in his supporter demographics?

    The majority of my Sanders dislike comes from his cultish fan base. I was just talking about considering voting for him but because I'm not a 100% pure believer I'm getting interrogated. This part might be unfair since people can't control their fans, but still.

    I asked a question in a discourse thread. No one is interrogating you.

    I asked because "Sanders doesnt get race", or variations on it, is a pretty common argument but then we're left with the fact that the only guy polling better than him among black voters used to argue for segregation and all the liberal candidates who are "good" on race struggle to break single digits.

    There's just a disconnect I can't rectify between the premise and the polling.

    Doesn't this suggest that there isn't a simple cause/effect relationship among who people choose to support and the support he does enjoy isn't necessarily a reflection on his policy or rhetoric?

    Probably! But it makes the claims that Sanders doesnt get race kind of aggravating, especially as they rarely seem to come from the minority groups in question.

    He polls well with minorities, he talks constantly about issues of race and racial equality. He has a decades long history of this! He just doesnt divorce class and race like liberalism has for several decades.

    Which is the whole problem, because race and class are in many ways orthogonal. Treating racism as just another form of class warfare doesn't work, because racism doesn't cleave like that - class markers like money and education rarely protect people from the impact of racism.

    Hence all those stories of well-heeled older black men driving their nice cars home to their nice neighborhood and getting harassed by police who think they don't belong. Class is not a perfect protection.

    Sanders has never said fixing class solves racism!

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    The media looooooves Biden, which is the best argument for him.

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    a note on the Sanders and Warren coverage from during the hiatus: apparently the Sanders Team has been looking into, hypothetically at least, if Warren could serve as both Vice President and Treasury Secretary at the same time. Seems like there's nothing constitutionally that prevents it, at least

    https://www.businessinsider.com/sanders-researched-whether-warren-could-vp-and-treasury-secretary-report-2020-1

    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    Lanz wrote: »
    a note on the Sanders and Warren coverage from during the hiatus: apparently the Sanders Team has been looking into, hypothetically at least, if Warren could serve as both Vice President and Treasury Secretary at the same time. Seems like there's nothing constitutionally that prevents it, at least

    https://www.businessinsider.com/sanders-researched-whether-warren-could-vp-and-treasury-secretary-report-2020-1

    Lucky she's energetic!

  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Cybertronian Paranormal Eliminator Registered User regular
    Interesting; I thought the common wisdom that you'd want either Bernie or Warren to stay in the Senate if the other one won.

  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    Interesting; I thought the common wisdom that you'd want either Bernie or Warren to stay in the Senate if the other one won.

    Generally is, but there may be morale value in having your trust-busting favoring colleague leading both Treasury and the second highest executive office in the land, assuming you're able to fill the vacancy they leave with another democrat

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    also what the hell New York Times
    Reports of how Senator Klobuchar treats her staff give us pause. They raise serious questions about her ability to attract and hire talented people. Surrounding the president with a team of seasoned, reasoned leaders is critical to the success of an administration, not doing so is often the downfall of presidencies. Ms. Klobuchar has acknowledged she’s a tough boss and pledged to do better. (To be fair, Bill Clinton and Mr. Trump — not to mention former Vice President Biden — also have reputations for sometimes berating their staffs, and it is rarely mentioned as a political liability.)

    You reported she throws objects at her staffers.


    EDIT:

    From earlier up in the endorsements:
    Ms. Klobuchar promises a foreign policy based on leading by example, instead of by threat-via-tweet. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, she serves on the subcommittees responsible for oversight of the Department of Homeland Security, as well as the nation’s borders and its immigration, citizenship and refugee laws. In 13 years as a senator, she has sponsored and voted on dozens of national defense measures, including military action in Libya and Syria. Her record shows that she is confident and thoughtful, and she reacts to data — what you’d want in a crisis.

    [looks at Libya]

    [looks at the New York Times Editorial Board with a look of deep concern]

    EDIT: They try to parse it as a "There's a battle for the soul of the party! The old guard and the progressive left!" but it all just feels like half-assed bullshit to avoid giving Warren a clean endorsement because they feel like they have to acknowledge her popularity and clout, but actually loathe what her policies stand for, and the whole thing feels just completely insulting.

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • -Tal-Tal Registered User regular
    treasury secretary is a great place for warren, financial regulation is an area she's extremely knowledgeable about and has good policy ideas for

    PNk1Ml4.png
  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    -Tal wrote: »
    treasury secretary is a great place for warren, financial regulation is an area she's extremely knowledgeable about and has good policy ideas for

    plus there's a significant level of cultural clout that goes with the Vice Presidency, at least from the standpoint of the lay person.

    Sanders' plans revolve around the idea of boosting civic involvement to get the legislators we need and in the numbers we need to craft and pass policy, and turning out larger shares of the vote than traditionally have been the case, so on the morale aspect that may be useful to use the power of the Treasury to execute policy where it can and generate changes that the public will appreciate and feel have improved their lives, and then use that to build more democratic party support overall.

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Cybertronian Paranormal Eliminator Registered User regular
    Honestly, in regards to Biden or Bernie getting socked with something during the campaign causing them to lose to Trump.. I don't think that's going to matter. I know we all have Clinton e-mail PTSD, but that was before 4 years of Trump governance.

    As we've seen, Biden has been pretty stable despite all of his weirdness and stupid things he's said. And Trump has maintained an incredibly stable (though low) poll numbers despite his endless stream of bullshit. It took taking credit for a government shutdown to really sock his numbers and the recovered pretty quick after that.

    I think people's minds are made up for the general, and it's going to come down to just getting the bases out to vote, and just how much voter suppression the Pubs can do.

  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User, Transition Team regular
    Lanz wrote: »
    a note on the Sanders and Warren coverage from during the hiatus: apparently the Sanders Team has been looking into, hypothetically at least, if Warren could serve as both Vice President and Treasury Secretary at the same time. Seems like there's nothing constitutionally that prevents it, at least

    https://www.businessinsider.com/sanders-researched-whether-warren-could-vp-and-treasury-secretary-report-2020-1

    This is exactly the kind of moronic nonsense that makes me hope Bernie loses dramatically. What a staggeringly stupid way to waste your political capital and weaken your administration.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    a note on the Sanders and Warren coverage from during the hiatus: apparently the Sanders Team has been looking into, hypothetically at least, if Warren could serve as both Vice President and Treasury Secretary at the same time. Seems like there's nothing constitutionally that prevents it, at least

    https://www.businessinsider.com/sanders-researched-whether-warren-could-vp-and-treasury-secretary-report-2020-1

    This is exactly the kind of moronic nonsense that makes me hope Bernie loses dramatically. What a staggeringly stupid way to waste your political capital and weaken your administration.

    Its just some research the campaign was doing.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    a note on the Sanders and Warren coverage from during the hiatus: apparently the Sanders Team has been looking into, hypothetically at least, if Warren could serve as both Vice President and Treasury Secretary at the same time. Seems like there's nothing constitutionally that prevents it, at least

    https://www.businessinsider.com/sanders-researched-whether-warren-could-vp-and-treasury-secretary-report-2020-1

    This is exactly the kind of moronic nonsense that makes me hope Bernie loses dramatically. What a staggeringly stupid way to waste your political capital and weaken your administration.

    Uh....what? Care to explain why that's bad?

  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User, Transition Team regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    a note on the Sanders and Warren coverage from during the hiatus: apparently the Sanders Team has been looking into, hypothetically at least, if Warren could serve as both Vice President and Treasury Secretary at the same time. Seems like there's nothing constitutionally that prevents it, at least

    https://www.businessinsider.com/sanders-researched-whether-warren-could-vp-and-treasury-secretary-report-2020-1

    This is exactly the kind of moronic nonsense that makes me hope Bernie loses dramatically. What a staggeringly stupid way to waste your political capital and weaken your administration.

    Its just some research the campaign was doing.

    Everything is optics. You either do it so it gets known / don't mind if it does, or you don't do it because it might get known.

    It's just so fucking stupid.

  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    Geth, kick @“Spool32” from the thread

    FIRST BLOOD

  • GethGeth Legion Perseus VeilRegistered User, Moderator, Penny Arcade Staff, Vanilla Staff vanilla
    Affirmative Tube. @spool32 banned from this thread.

  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    James Madison, albeit for a short time, served as both Secretary of War and Secretary of State during the War of 1812.

    It doesn't seem that far-fetched, concerning the lack of concrete executive responsibilities of the VP in the modern day, outside of "be ready to assume the presidency"*




    *as averse to the legislative responsibility of the tie breaking vote

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • -Tal-Tal Registered User regular
    I do think it would be better to have someone else as VP instead of Warren filling both slots, but I don't know who. Anyone currently in office is probably better off left there. So you want someone good, popular, but who isn't currently doing anything too important. Michelle Obama?

    PNk1Ml4.png
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    -Tal wrote: »
    I do think it would be better to have someone else as VP instead of Warren filling both slots, but I don't know who. Anyone currently in office is probably better off left there. So you want someone good, popular, but who isn't currently doing anything too important. Michelle Obama?

    Barbara Lee

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    edited January 2020
    -Tal wrote: »
    I do think it would be better to have someone else as VP instead of Warren filling both slots, but I don't know who. Anyone currently in office is probably better off left there. So you want someone good, popular, but who isn't currently doing anything too important. Michelle Obama?

    You still want someone who, if something should happen to you, follows at least a similar ideology to continue the work of the elected platform. In that case, in our current climate and with the available candidates, Warren would be the go to for a Sanders presidency to continue that

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
This discussion has been closed.