Zardnaar
Deity
This is why I pay for WaPo it covers a lot if areas in the states that won't really get covered here.
2020 US Election (Part One)
- Thread starter Lexicus
- Start date
- Status
This is why I pay for WaPo it covers a lot if areas in the states that won't really get covered here.
Ironsided
Flower of happiness
- Joined
- May 25, 2012
- Messages
- 1,267
Its hack job like most main stream media interactions and interviews these days. The problem is that the MSM is pressured by moneyed interests. It’s more prominent in the case of Bernie because he is taking on a lot of moneyed interests. In this interview, the personal health issues, the age, they even attempt to frame Bernie as a Trump or Trump as a Bernie. Nothing to do with the issues Americans face or policy program, all personal. Remember when Bernie pointed out abc ran ads for big pharma on their primary debate, just seconds before they had to do it. There is an undertone of we don’t like you and we ask the questions. That said I would never use this clip as an example because it is weak but the issue and the critique Kyr puts forward is just. This is a better collage of media bias against Bernie:
Also @Cami remember this from early May …
“Is there a point at which Sanders should start to worry about his mediocre poll numbers, and where is that point? Polls are relatively meaningless early on, but they do seem to indicate that a large proportion of the people who actually voted for Sanders last time are looking at other candidates now.”
Page 154, btw.
November: Most individual donations, individual donators, draws a 26k crowd in NYC when endorsed by AOC, polling favourable in all the states Hillary lost and in many polls ahead of all other candidates. I know you are just a status quo-shill like Tim and Sommer but who’s your favourite status quo candidate now that Biden looks like a senile idiot? Butty? Kamala? Klobuchar?
You should pay us instead
Zardnaar
Deity
Qualities not there.
@Ironsided - how would you distinguish between an interviewer engaging in a poor framing exercise, and an interviewer putting the opposition's framing forward to give the candidate an opportunity to respond? In particular in relation to the age, it's abundantly clear that Bernie sat for that interview for the express purpose of addressing questions about his age. The whole reason Bernie did the interview was so he could, in a relatively comfortable and mild environment, build the quite compelling narrative of "this shows me how everyone needs Medicare". I'm coming at this from the perspective of a profession where it's actually an obligation to give someone an opportunity to respond to a critique if they are to be met with an accusation; it's called Browne v Dunn-ing the witness. It would be unfair to Bernie to have conducted this interview without talking about his health and age, when that is the precise challenge that at the time he was required to confront, and which he clearly wanted to confront.
As for my own preferences, throughout this entire primary I've been pretty much 1) Warren, 2) Bernie, 3) somewhat disinterested so I find the 'establishment' candidates perfectly acceptable but not preferable. So from the perspective of being someone who wants to see Bernie do well, it remains concerning that despite the positive signs you mention, his poll numbers still have not increased much above the 15-18% level, which barely gets him any delegates, but might take them away from Warren and make things easier for Biden or Buttigieg. At the time I made the comment in question, his polling average was 16.4%. Now it is 17.1%. If voters have not yet found him compelling enough to be their top choice, what can he do to make that change over the next few months? Wait for others (like Warren) to fail? If the answer is that the media has been biased against him, is there a practical solution to that problem, or is it a matter of conceding that his vote share will not increase but arguing that's no fault of his? (Likewise, it's concerning that Warren's rise against Biden has not been as inexorable as the media initially seemed to suggest.)
As for my own preferences, throughout this entire primary I've been pretty much 1) Warren, 2) Bernie, 3) somewhat disinterested so I find the 'establishment' candidates perfectly acceptable but not preferable. So from the perspective of being someone who wants to see Bernie do well, it remains concerning that despite the positive signs you mention, his poll numbers still have not increased much above the 15-18% level, which barely gets him any delegates, but might take them away from Warren and make things easier for Biden or Buttigieg. At the time I made the comment in question, his polling average was 16.4%. Now it is 17.1%. If voters have not yet found him compelling enough to be their top choice, what can he do to make that change over the next few months? Wait for others (like Warren) to fail? If the answer is that the media has been biased against him, is there a practical solution to that problem, or is it a matter of conceding that his vote share will not increase but arguing that's no fault of his? (Likewise, it's concerning that Warren's rise against Biden has not been as inexorable as the media initially seemed to suggest.)
Ironsided
Flower of happiness
- Joined
- May 25, 2012
- Messages
- 1,267
How do you expect anyone to believe you have Bernie second favourite when you post how he should give up before the race even begins or object to him being unfairly treated in media or establishment circles? And Bernie is not hovering on 17%. He is fluctuating between 15 and 30% in polls, even on 538 – which is run by Nate Silver a competent data-presenter but a complete and utter shill for the establishment when it comes to political punditry. His 358 is part of abc news. He puts a grading on the pollsters method (A for abc and also Fox by the way) and a sample size number but not a peep on the sample composition. CNNs poll that had no millennials and hardly a GenX and an average age of 65 also scored an A according to Nate. These polls are handpicked and as rubbish as those left out.
I'm just using the RCP polling average. I think we may have gone over this before, but is your response to the general idea about Bernie struggling that actually Bernie isn't hovering in the 15-18% range, and that the reason why he shouldn't worry about that polling average is because it's made up of skewed polls and the actual results are going to be better for him?
I'm curious to see where I've said that Bernie should give up, because I don't recall posting that. If you're assuming the question of whether he should worry is a suggestion that he should give up, that's an odd interpretation. I'm not interested in, like, Michael Bennett's strategy. Usually when someone expresses concern about the effectiveness of a political strategy, it's because they want the object of that strategy to be achieved, but don't see it working.
Now, if we get to February next year and there's evidence to suggest that a) Warren is going to beat Sanders, b) Sanders is dragging down Warren's share of delegates, and c) because of vote share thresholds, Sanders and Warren simultaneously being in the race reduces the delegate share of non-'establishment' candidates, thereby increasing the chances of e.g. Biden winning, then I may be more in favour of Sanders dropping out, on the basis that his strategy has unfortunately not worked to expand his popularity, and his continued place in the race actually has a tangibly counter-productive effect.
That point has not arrived (and indeed, it could work the other way around too).
Likewise, I'm not sure where I've objected to the idea that Bernie has been unfairly treated by the media. You may be reading into my response to the video posted by Kyriakos something which is not there. "This is a poor example of a valid argument" and "this example renders your argument invalid" are two different positions, each of which can be provoked by the same post. You may notice that the example posted by Kyriakos has not convinced anyone. In fact, it might feed into the idea that Bernie supporters are clutching at straws by claiming media bias. Bernie supporters have a strong interest in countering such a narrative and sharpening their argument.
More generally, I'm reading into your posts something which isn't explicitly there: that you're making the mistake of assuming everyone who likes Bernie (or perhaps Warren) shares a whole set of other beliefs or opinions which they do not necessarily hold. In particular, I'm doubting you would accept the possibility of someone genuinely both liking Bernie and Harris, yet that is probably a position held by the majority of Democratic voters. The symptoms of such a position may be to defend Harris from what are seen as undue attacks, but as a matter of logic it would not thereby follow that Harris is preferred.
I'm curious to see where I've said that Bernie should give up, because I don't recall posting that. If you're assuming the question of whether he should worry is a suggestion that he should give up, that's an odd interpretation. I'm not interested in, like, Michael Bennett's strategy. Usually when someone expresses concern about the effectiveness of a political strategy, it's because they want the object of that strategy to be achieved, but don't see it working.
Now, if we get to February next year and there's evidence to suggest that a) Warren is going to beat Sanders, b) Sanders is dragging down Warren's share of delegates, and c) because of vote share thresholds, Sanders and Warren simultaneously being in the race reduces the delegate share of non-'establishment' candidates, thereby increasing the chances of e.g. Biden winning, then I may be more in favour of Sanders dropping out, on the basis that his strategy has unfortunately not worked to expand his popularity, and his continued place in the race actually has a tangibly counter-productive effect.
That point has not arrived (and indeed, it could work the other way around too).
Likewise, I'm not sure where I've objected to the idea that Bernie has been unfairly treated by the media. You may be reading into my response to the video posted by Kyriakos something which is not there. "This is a poor example of a valid argument" and "this example renders your argument invalid" are two different positions, each of which can be provoked by the same post. You may notice that the example posted by Kyriakos has not convinced anyone. In fact, it might feed into the idea that Bernie supporters are clutching at straws by claiming media bias. Bernie supporters have a strong interest in countering such a narrative and sharpening their argument.
More generally, I'm reading into your posts something which isn't explicitly there: that you're making the mistake of assuming everyone who likes Bernie (or perhaps Warren) shares a whole set of other beliefs or opinions which they do not necessarily hold. In particular, I'm doubting you would accept the possibility of someone genuinely both liking Bernie and Harris, yet that is probably a position held by the majority of Democratic voters. The symptoms of such a position may be to defend Harris from what are seen as undue attacks, but as a matter of logic it would not thereby follow that Harris is preferred.
Ironsided
Flower of happiness
- Joined
- May 25, 2012
- Messages
- 1,267
No matter how you dress it up or for whatever reasons you tip toe around the issue. Fact remains you think somehow Bernie is wrongfully infringing on your favourite candidate. Clear as day. Just like last election where Clinton supporters had the same argument for Bernie. I mean why didn’t you say Warren or Kamala should worry about their numbers in May – they were even worse at the time. Huh? You just don’t like social democracy, many people don’t, just own it.
Agreed we need to get a lot further into this primary to even begin discussions about who is blocking whom. Or who should make way. Let’s just wait for the momentous swings that Iowa and NH can make. If Bernie is way behind Warren (like half her support) in those two primary states even I want him to step down and endorse her. But it’s with some level of certainty I believe that is not going to be the case. Bernie won NH last time around after all.
Also, there is hardly any overlap of Bernie supporters and Kamala supporters in this Primary. And this is still a primary race. Kamala supporters famously made fools of themselves chanting and marching out of the press room when Bernie entered after the first primary debate only to continue chanting loudly in the halls like little children. How’s that for your wishful party unity?
Agreed we need to get a lot further into this primary to even begin discussions about who is blocking whom. Or who should make way. Let’s just wait for the momentous swings that Iowa and NH can make. If Bernie is way behind Warren (like half her support) in those two primary states even I want him to step down and endorse her. But it’s with some level of certainty I believe that is not going to be the case. Bernie won NH last time around after all.
Also, there is hardly any overlap of Bernie supporters and Kamala supporters in this Primary. And this is still a primary race. Kamala supporters famously made fools of themselves chanting and marching out of the press room when Bernie entered after the first primary debate only to continue chanting loudly in the halls like little children. How’s that for your wishful party unity?
Kamala is polling at 3%, which is below even Tulsi. So much for Kamala being "a top tier candidate" 
I am also not seeing what kind of voter would like both Bern and Kamala. I guess if they care about nothing at all other than "not Trump", they would, but that isn't much of a position if you aren't Stephen Colbert or similar media millionaires.
I am also not seeing what kind of voter would like both Bern and Kamala. I guess if they care about nothing at all other than "not Trump", they would, but that isn't much of a position if you aren't Stephen Colbert or similar media millionaires.
Zkribbler
Deity
Has anyone noticed that news stations spending a lot of rime talking about polls and very little interviewing candidates?
Lexicus
Deity
Not really. New Hampshire is a "don't tread on me" weird kinda place, I know from campaigning there in 2016. I expect Bernie to win Hew Hampshire.
Agreed. Bernie should win comfortably in New Hampshire. In fact, if Bernie didn't win in NH, it would be a major upset, and I can't even say what that would bode for his campaign if he couldn't snatch low-hanging fruit like NH.
That said, I believe he will cruise to victory in NH. I'd be more interested to see if he could pull off a win in SC. If he could do that it would indicate the possibility that he has made great inroads with black voters.
Lexicus
Deity
Agree completely. Unfortunately (from my point of view anyway) I do not expect him to do very well with the black vote and I will be very surprised if he wins SC or any other southern state.
Six posts and one of them is a fascist conspiracy theory, and another is global warming denial. Not a great record so far.
It's beginning to seem like everything and everyone is "anti-Bernie" to some of you guys... If everyone is "anti-Bernie" I don't know how the hell he is supposed to get elected.I'd say they are anti-Bernie if anything
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
It's a moral/ethical issue but what Tim said is what I was trying (and failing to say) - Sleeping with campaign staff (which she admitted to) is a not a violation of Congressional rules. Sleeping with a congressional aide (which she denies) is a violation of Congressional rules. So I don't think she should have resigned but can understand her wanting to get the hell out of the spotlight as soon as possible and pursue legal avenues with respect to revenge porn as aggressively as possible. It is an icky, moral bad situation either way but I don't think he should have given up her job over it and should have been given and investigation to prove or disprove the allegations of the second affair with a congressional aide.
But who knows, maybe that allegation was true and she's trying to extricate herself from any punishment/embarrassment.
Berzerker
Deity
2020 isn't looking so good for the Dems, the polls are showing the battleground states are within the margin of error with Biden having a slight lead over Trump in 5 of 6. Biden needs bigger leads because elections usually move in favor of the incumbent. If the economy keeps chugging along Trump may be the favorite and impeachment might even backfire as more voters learn what a hypocritical partisan sham the Dems have wasted 4 years fabricating.
At least he hasn't advocated murdering a few billion people yet
At least he hasn't advocated murdering a few billion people yet
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
Berzerker
Deity
I have to admit the world would be better off without us 
- Status
