"White working class voters are good people, they're not racist, not sexist" -Joe Biden

[ttystikk]

Giving up on reason? You choose to believe something that is not provable and requires an the presence of an undetectable bias with a large effect. You are free to believe it.

I said nothing about giving up on reason, but you want to go no further than you can prove. Unfortunately, the political world doesn't always work like that.

 

[Fogdog]

I said nothing about giving up on reason, but you want to go no further than you can prove. Unfortunately, the political world doesn't always work like that.

I'm just following your train of posts. You say the country is moving away from rational thought and you are saying you will continue to believe something that is unprovable and requires a large change in voter preferences due to an externally invisible media bias. That's a whopper of a story.

I agree that the country has become a fact free-for all. I don't understand why so many people jump to very difficult to achieve conclusions but there it is. I guess feelings are greater than facts.

 

[UncleBuck]

It's important to know what people's real desires are. It's then easier to work backwards to what they're willing to live with, which ends up looking a lot like democracy.

want to speak directly to the speaker designate of the colorado house democrats?

it's a totally elitist event. so elite that literally anyone can get in.

lemme know.

 

[st0wandgrow]

I'm just following your train of posts. You say the country is moving away from rational thought and you are saying you will continue to believe something that is unprovable and requires a large change in voter preferences due to an externally invisible media bias. That's a whopper of a story.

I agree that the country has become a fact free-for all. I don't understand why so many people jump to very difficult to achieve conclusions but there it is. I guess feelings are greater than facts.

It's actually 2 million, not 4 million.

As far as "feelings" go, there seems to be a "feeling" from a lot of Hillary supporters that racism is to blame for her loss to Trump. I don't see the same burden of proof being required to prove this for some reason. I'd say that there is more tangible evidence supporting the claim that the primary was tampered with.

 

[Fogdog]

It's actually 2 million, not 4 million.

As far as "feelings" go, there seems to be a "feeling" from a lot of Hillary supporters that racism is to blame for her loss to Trump. I don't see the same burden of proof being required to prove this for some reason. I'd say that there is more tangible evidence supporting the claim that the primary was tampered with.

It was 2 million for Clinton over Trump in popular vote in the general election. Bernie collected 3.7 million fewer votes than Clinton did in the primary. Not that either matters. It's all about delegates and EC votes. Especially the primary, I'd like to see it switch to a popular vote. While I'm not totally against the EC, a switch to popular vote for president would be OK with me too.

As far as racism is concerned, there is pretty good evidence that about 25% of the nation is very racist. I don't know why you'd think this is something that is not true. The rest of Trump's support coming from racists? Well, you are right in that it is a sweeping statement that is probably false. I'm of the opinion that the majority of Trump's voters didn't care about racist policies and voted for Trump as a "change" candidate.

Still, without making a claim of proof, I ask, how can a person support a candidate with racist policies and who makes racist or bigoted statements and not be racist or bigoted themselves?

@Padawanbater2 brought up a valid point that Bernie did better in blue and purple states than Clinton did. These are the states that Democrats HAD to win in order secure the presidency. Yet, states like Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas all had an outsized effect on the primary given the fact that those states were NEVER going to vote for a Democratic party candidate. The DNC awarding delegates according to a pretty arcane system that does account for previous election results but why Texas had 252 delegates while Michigan had 152 is beyond me. To me, this skewed the primary to accrue meaningless delegates for Clinton and made the overall primary more difficult for Bernie to win, given that he was almost unknown in the south, and a Yankee to boot.

Also fuck the super-delegates. They can stay home and watch on TV. Bernie's team tried to get them eliminated but ended up with compromise that reduced the number of SD to a smaller number. Now that Clinton no longer holds a position in the party, maybe they can revisit the agreement to write them out entirely.

 

[Padawanbater2]

There's also the fact that hundreds of thousands of voters who wanted to vote for Sanders couldn't because of ridiculous restrictions put on them by the DNC. So no need to keep trotting out the assumption that the DNC and media collusion wasn't really an issue because Clinton received more votes

Also, if it wasn't an issue, why is the DNC leadership complaining they lost the general election because of the emails Wikileaks released?

 

[ttystikk]

Okay, so I think we've come about as far as we can to a consensus about how things turned out the way they have.

I have a new and relevant question;

NOW WHAT?

 

[Fogdog]

There's also the fact that hundreds of thousands of voters who wanted to vote for Sanders couldn't because of ridiculous restrictions put on them by the DNC. So no need to keep trotting out the assumption that the DNC and media collusion wasn't really an issue because Clinton received more votes

Also, if it wasn't an issue, why is the DNC leadership complaining they lost the general election because of the emails Wikileaks released?

You are mixing issues. Hundreds of thousands were excluded because why? Surely not because DNC-media "collusion".

 

[ttystikk]

want to speak directly to the speaker designate of the colorado house democrats?

it's a totally elitist event. so elite that literally anyone can get in.

lemme know.

I appreciate this invitation. Kindly stop stuffing words in my mouth.

Let me consider what I might have to say to him and I'll get back to you. I'm not the type to waste a busy official's limited time just to say, "hey dude!"

 

[Padawanbater2]

Okay, so I think we've come about as far as we can to a consensus about how things turned out the way they have.

I have a new and relevant question;

NOW WHAT?

Now either progressives take control over the party or Democrats keep losing

 

[ttystikk]

You are mixing issues. Hundreds of thousands were excluded because why? Surely not because DNC-media "collusion".

Are they so separate if they contribute to the same outcome?

 

[ttystikk]

Now either progressives take control over the party or Democrats keep losing

A good start. Let's flesh this out; what specific proposals do you have?

 

[st0wandgrow]

It was 2 million for Clinton over Trump in popular vote in the general election. Bernie collected 3.7 million fewer votes than Clinton did in the primary. Not that either matters. It's all about delegates and EC votes. Especially the primary, I'd like to see it switch to a popular vote. While I'm not totally against the EC, a switch to popular vote for president would be OK with me too.

As far as racism is concerned, there is pretty good evidence that about 25% of the nation is very racist. I don't know why you'd think this is something that is not true. The rest of Trump's support coming from racists? Well, you are right in that it is a sweeping statement that is probably false. I'm of the opinion that the majority of Trump's voters didn't care about racist policies and voted for Trump as a "change" candidate.

Still, without making a claim of proof, I ask, how can a person support a candidate with racist policies and who makes racist or bigoted statements and not be racist or bigoted themselves?

@Padawanbater2 brought up a valid point that Bernie did better in blue and purple states than Clinton did. These are the states that Democrats HAD to win in order secure the presidency. Yet, states like Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas all had an outsized effect on the primary given the fact that those states were NEVER going to vote for a Democratic party candidate. The DNC awarding delegates according to a pretty arcane system that does account for previous election results but why Texas had 252 delegates while Michigan had 152 is beyond me. To me, this skewed the primary to accrue meaningless delegates for Clinton and made the overall primary more difficult for Bernie to win, given that he was almost unknown in the south, and a Yankee to boot.

Also fuck the super-delegates. They can stay home and watch on TV. Bernie's team tried to get them eliminated but ended up with compromise that reduced the number of SD to a smaller number. Now that Clinton no longer holds a position in the party, maybe they can revisit the agreement to write them out entirely.

I'm saying 2 million for the primary, because that's what it is. If you took 2 million votes off of Hillary's ledger and added them to Sanders, who wins? So really, we're looking at 2% of the electorate that was influenced. Unrealistic?

As for the racism thing, it's being surmised here that counties within Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin that Obama won handily, flipped to Trump... because of racism. I'd say that's a completely unsubstantiated claim. Much more so than Bernie being bent over by the DNC/Clinton in the primary.

 

[Padawanbater2]

You are mixing issues. Hundreds of thousands were excluded because why? Surely not because DNC-media "collusion".

Because the DNC set registration time limits in key states/counties, closed voting locations in key states/counties, closed key primaries to exclude independents in places that were likely to go to Sanders, etc. Many small things like that that added up to the result of the election, all orchestrated by biased members of the DNC who wanted Clinton to win

 

[Padawanbater2]

A good start. Let's flesh this out; what specific proposals do you have?

Putting Ellison at the head of the DNC would be a good start. Then working with the DNC to aggressively push progressives that support actual liberal policies

All establishment politicians must be purged from the party, non negotiable

 

[UncleBuck]

As far as "feelings" go, there seems to be a "feeling" from a lot of Hillary supporters that racism is to blame for her loss to Trump.

not a feeling when it can be backed by verifiable facts.

20% of republicans want to literally ban homosexuals from living in the country.

25% want to ban muslims from living in the country.

29% want to shut down all mosques.

11% outright believe that whites are the "superior race".

 

[UncleBuck]

I appreciate this invitation. Kindly stop stuffing words in my mouth.

Let me consider what I might have to say to him and I'll get back to you. I'm not the type to waste a busy official's limited time just to say, "hey dude!"

*her

 

[UncleBuck]

All establishment politicians must be purged from the party, non negotiable

getting really tough to discern berniebot rhetoric from hitler-esque rhetoric.

 

[ttystikk]

Putting Ellison at the head of the DNC would be a good start. Then working with the DNC to aggressively push progressives that support actual liberal policies

All establishment politicians must be purged from the party, non negotiable

How do we determine what an establishment politician is and isn't?

getting really tough to discern berniebot rhetoric from hitler-esque rhetoric.

This concerns me greatly; it doesn't work to combat fascism with more of it.

 

[ttystikk]

*her

My mistake! I confess I'm clueless about my state level representatives, but I'll bet my last dime that I'm not alone.