15% of Bernie supporters say they'll vote for Trump

[Economy 52,853]

3 hours ago, GagaTheExplorer said:

Not you telling me how socialism works when it is all I've ever seen my entire life 

Socialism or left wing politics is far too complex to generalize. There's many versions of it

 

More importantly, the more of the nation's financial resources are given to Government (transfered away from people and businesses) making well uses of those resources becomes crutial

 

Spending poorly and inneficiently and misallocating resources makes socialism deadly to an economy because ur draining the private sector of capital resources it could use to spend and invest with less to show for it than the private sector could do with the same amount of money

 

In order for the benefits of socialism to outway the negatives competence on the part of governemnts to use tax dollars well is very important other wise socialism will just impoverish a nation

 

Some Countries with bigger socialist benefits like Scandinavian Countries have done well, others that tried some version of bigger governemnt like Venezuela or Greece failed miserably

 

It really depends

[Emvee 8,829]

Not all of Bernie’s supporters are “liberal” or vote by party lines. Many are simply anti-establishment and anti-free trade!

This is not shocking AT ALL. Bernie took votes away from Trump! 

That crossover appeal was the goddamn point of Bernie’s electability argument. 
 

Y’all are acting as if it’s gay black millennials who will suddenly vote for Trump to spite Biden. The electorate is so much more complex than left vs. right. 
 

[Marilyn MonHoe 11,011]

17 minutes ago, StarstruckIllusion said:

Good! Let the Pete stans do what they want. Ideas should be the most important thing. Political parties shift ideas all the time, so people should chase that, instead of the party itself. 

I agree! It just makes me laugh when I see neoliberals chastise Bernie supporters over numbers like these when Buttigieg stans were the ones most likely to support Trump months ago. 

I laugh even harder when a former Buttigieg stan in this thread is trying to voter shame people when their group used to have the same kind of numbers supporting Trump 

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

People are so stupid. 

Good luck with SCOTUS getting nothing done and reversing any chance for progressive policies. Same with the federal courts. I swear American voters are ignorant children half the time...

[StarstruckIllusion 53,564]

1 hour ago, HybridAT said:

 

Oh, so it's okay to call people corporate shills and use "neoliberals" as insults but not okay to call out people who are trying to burn the entire house down just because they didn't got their way as throwing childish, temper tantrums? Hear yourself for a minute there

And the votes are to be earned during the primaries. Once that's done and the nominee is decided, especially in an unusual election where literal fascism is on the ballot, people are expected to vote AGAINST the fascist, not FOR it. This shouldn't be that hard a concept to understand.

Keep making the perfect the enemy of the good and keep enabling fascism for everyone to suffer. You're doing amazing, sweetie.

Also, why the hell are you trying to encourage a Trump presidency when you don't even live here and don't have to reel under the weight of one? 

Neoliberal is not an insult, it is an identifier based on someone’s political beliefs. I’m unstanning the term “moderate” bc Bernie is the moderate based on the POV that should actually matter: Mainstream American opinion.

Also Idk why you’re using the extra ass phrase “burn the house down” when it’s just a shift in political direction. It happens every 4-8 years, like it was designed to. 

I say voters votes are NOT being earned bc there’s a misalignment in opinion and voter support. People are being told left and right the lie that Bernie Sanders is not electable, when really the only electable factor should be who has the most beloved platform in America. Pete would have made more sense as neolib to coalesce around, bc you know, he had more support and success than Biden before Super Tuesday Eve.

I also acknowledge that Trump might be facistic, but clearly that message didn’t work last time. I was just as confused as you until I learned that economics matter, and how neoliberals and neocons have hurt the American public thru stupid decisions like how the 2008 recession was handled.

There are black people in working states who just don’t care that Hillary lost; to give you a crumb.

Idk a greater enemy of the good than billionaires purchasing policy that harms people of every race, gender identity and sexual identity. That’s why I’m constantly in political threads about it. 

Tea, I’m not American, but my country is similar to how it operates and often follows in its footsteps as it’s impact is great on our lives. America is a world leader, and if y’all lead the world into neolib/fascistic hellscapes, suddenly other people will care.  

My only encouragement is to educate why CNN and MSNBC left Dems so bamboozled in 2016.

Bernie 2016/2020 = Obama 2008

Joe 2020 = Hillary 2008/2016.

-

Stan progressive news sources, bc they said Trump had a chance in 2016, unlike everywhere else. 

[Eighteen 5,430]

lmfao

[JusKeepBreathin 19,311]

1 hour ago, Chromatican said:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/105691/mccain-vs-obama-28-clinton-backers-mccain.aspx
 

This means more Bernie supporters are supporting the Democratic nominee than Hillary supporters supported Obama in 2008. 

The false equivalency in this comment.

Trump = McCain 

[StarstruckIllusion 53,564]

6 minutes ago, Marilyn MonHoe said:

I agree! It just makes me laugh when I see neoliberals chastise Bernie supporters over numbers like these when Buttigieg stans were the ones most likely to support Trump months ago. 

I laugh even harder when a former Buttigieg stan in this thread is trying to voter shame people when their group used to have the same kind of numbers supporting Trump 

The bias serves too hard chile...

Ill never forget how neoliberals tried to cancel Bernie over the Joe Rogen endorsement bc he said homophobic and transphobic things.

and then were crickets when Mike Bloomberg, an actual extremely harmful racist, sexist, and transphobe, endorsed Biden. 

Consistency... we’d love to see it..

[Flippy 14,273]

I.... 

[JusKeepBreathin 19,311]

6 minutes ago, StarstruckIllusion said:

The bias serves too hard chile...

Ill never forget how neoliberals tried to cancel Bernie over the Joe Rogen endorsement bc he said homophobic and transphobic things.

and then were crickets when Mike Bloomberg, an actual extremely harmful racist, sexist, and transphobe, endorsed Biden. 

Consistency... we’d love to see it..

What? That last line in your comment on a thread about the most "progressive" people in America voting for Trump.

 

[StarstruckIllusion 53,564]

12 minutes ago, JusKeepBreathin said:

The false equivalency in this comment.

Trump = McCain 

If we weren’t talking about party loyalty then why oh why did you make the exact same point in both threads  

[StarstruckIllusion 53,564]

4 minutes ago, JusKeepBreathin said:

What? That last line in your comment on a thread about the most "progressive" people in America voting for Trump.

 

Sorry that example doesn’t work bc in this context, progressive = populous. Bernie is a left wing populist, Trump ran as a right wing populist. Hillary and Joe, are not. The consistency exists. 

Culture isn’t the only thing that matters

[JusKeepBreathin 19,311]

3 minutes ago, StarstruckIllusion said:

Sorry that example doesn’t work bc in this context, progressive = populous. Bernie is a left wing populist, Trump ran as a right wing populist. Hillary and Joe, are not. The consistency exists. 

Culture isn’t the only thing that matters

So Trump is running as a populist in 2020?

Where are the coal mining jobs?

[HorusRa2 5,005]

Same arguments that we’ve had for the past year in this thread. 

Bernie is not a socialist and for many leftists is a compromise choice in the first place. In other words, he is not left enough (almost exclusively on foreign policy). It’s the most energized and activist part of the Democratic Party. 

Trump and Biden are 2 sides of the same coin. Trumps administration, however, is worse in some ways than a Biden administration would be especially on social issues but by and large the economics of both would fundamentally do the same things (I.E. enrich the donor class and crumbs for working people). 

People don’t vote on ideology alone. Majority of democratic voters prefer Bernie’s policies but voted for Biden anyway because he has been perceived as the so-called electable candidate. 

The point of a democracy is having exclusive choice on who you want to vote for—calling people ignorant and childish because you don’t like how someone exercised their god given right to vote shows that you are the childish one in the first place. 

Maybe y’all should figure out that insults and vote shaming isn’t exactly a exemplary form of persuasion to appeal to disillusioned voters who support Bernie. Also, it must be acknowledged that both Bernie and Biden have very long opposing records and votes that show that from an ideological standpoint the two are on two different sides even though they are technically within the same political party, which I should remind you is a private corporation that can do whatever it wants. 

And again, there is no way in hell im going to vote for Joe Biden. 

[Hybrid AT 78]

1 hour ago, Marilyn MonHoe said:

I agree! It just makes me laugh when I see neoliberals chastise Bernie supporters over numbers like these when Buttigieg stans were the ones most likely to support Trump months ago. 

I laugh even harder when a former Buttigieg stan in this thread is trying to voter shame people when their group used to have the same kind of numbers supporting Trump 

Because Buttigieg had actual right-wing Republicans who supported him? Because he knew how to sell progressive policy ideas in a moderate tone and not make them feel insulted and not welcome in his movement? His whole candidacy was built upon inclusion and belonging and making people across the aisle feel welcomed. That's why he used to always say "future former Republicans" because he wanted to expand his coalition beyond just Democrats. Unlike Bernie who wanted to win with approx 30% support of his own base and failing to expand his ideological coalition  

Like, he literally recruited Republicans to serve as precinct captains for him. He wanted to sell these progressive ideas to conservatives and wanted to expand the electorate on the right by having them embrace those ideas. Because his politics was inclusionary, not exclusionary.

OTOH,

"Perhaps the most significant factor, as with every presidential campaign, was the candidate himself, and the stubborn ideological and stylistic consistency that both endeared Mr. Sanders to his supporters and limited his ability to build a majority coalition larger than his own progressive movement.

It was Mr. Sanders’s persistent lashing of the “political establishment” that concerned Representative Peter Welch, a liberal Democrat and fellow Vermonter who was one of just a few members of Congress to endorse Mr. Sanders’s campaign.

Mr. Welch said he had reached out to the campaign last month to implore Mr. Sanders to ease up on that rhetoric, which Mr. Welch believed sounded exclusionary to ordinary people backing other candidates. After all, Mr. Welch said, there were “a lot of voters who are just everyday voters, who decided to vote for other Democrats.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/21/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democrats-2020.html

There's a difference between voting for Trump out of spite or voting for Trump because they're more closer to his politics. But hey, at least you tried. Cute.