A no name 75 year old socialist from a small state ran (uphill) well enough against her. She's an awful candidate and Biden wouldn't have had any problem running on being a continuation of the Obama presidency.
A no name 75 year old socialist from a small state ran (uphill) well enough against her. She's an awful candidate and Biden wouldn't have had any problem running on being a continuation of the Obama presidency.
Sanders lost by a significant margin, it wasn't close. Let's not rewrite history to make Clinton look worse than she already is.A no name 75 year old socialist from a small state ran (uphill) well enough against her. She's an awful candidate and Biden wouldn't have had any problem running on being a continuation of the Obama presidency.
Yeah. She never really had her own message. She ran on "hey, you guys liked Obama right?"
God damn so much bullshit in so few words. Democrats have been grooming her to run for a long time, but good try there breh"I don't think she ever really figured it out," Biden told the Los Angeles Times' Mike Memoli. "And by the way, I think it was really hard for her to decide to run."
Sanders lost by a significant margin, it wasn't close. Let's not rewrite history to make Clinton look worse than she already is.
Because Obama convinced him not to do it so Clinton would have a chance. http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...ign-primary-joe-biden-elizabeth-warren-214023
Did Biden ever say why he didn't take a shot at being the democrat candidate?
I get this in an emotional level; but I don't understand why a candidate needs a 'message' to run. Or rather; her message was that she was a pragmatic democrat who would continue building on the previous administration. Why the need for a kumbaya type of thing.
Obama convinced him not to run.
I'm starting to think Obama is a secret Republican.
Because you've got to get people enthusiastic about voting for you. So, you need a message. "That Trump guy is pretty fucking awful" may have worked in some states, but not the ones she needed.
Yeah. She never really had her own message. She ran on "hey, you guys liked Obama right?"
I watched a few of her rallies online and all she did was talk about Trump. From those it seemed like her message was "At least I'm not Trump, right?!". Her campaign was just poorly done for a lot of reasons.
A no name 75 year old socialist who told everyone they could have all the stuff they always dreamed of if it weren't for the fat cat bankers and wall street tycoons.
This is the exact kind of bullshit that alienates voters while adding nothing of substance to a discussion.
Wow. Just wow.
Biden would have body slammed Trump.
This here is just a microcosm of what when completely wrong with Democratic Leadership.
His son died.
Everything alienates voters.
Doubt that severely.
You can't feed them with hate either but that was what Trump campaigned on and he won.You can't feed families with equality.
Everything alienates voters.
Doubt that severely.
Biden is a white male rhat didn't have a private email server. Sorry to say this, but Biden would have won.
He wasn't competitive. He lost by very large margins, Clinton barely campaigned against him. What would the race look like if she had slammed him with ads like she did Obama in 08 lol?Let's not rewrite it to make Clinton look better, either. He was an insurgent candidate with no support from the party; it should never have even been competitive.
"You can't eat equality" is unprincipled nonsense. We can't abandon our basic values because they're inconvenient in a campaign.
Likewise, the notion that civil rights and economic security are somehow inapposite is similarly absurd.
The takeaway from this election cannot be that Democrats need to laser-focus on the WWC and that minorities will vote for them anyway. That is just as myopic an attitude as the Clinton campaign is being accused of.
It really is horrible.
You may not be able to eat equality, but a decent wage isn't going to stop a bullet.
A good job isn't going to stop minority employees from catching extra flack at that job, get paid less, and ultimately suffer mentally and physically.
You can't eat equality. You can't eat civil rights either. But you know what's going to stop a dude like me from eating? Getting discriminated out of jobs, losing the right to vote, prison in general.
Let me propose to you that if you take a look at many of the countries in the world who lead in equality, achieved that as a byproduct of equality-type proposals where a self centered majority voted in their own interests and minorities benefitted. Stronger taxes funds a better welfare state. It allows for better trained police, better education and health which gives opportunity to those who didn't have before. This opportunity increases the amount of minorities who are visible in the mainstream across all levels. And this reduces friction, fear and polarization between the mainsteam majority and the minorities.
I propose to you that people in Sweden or Switzerland or Australia or Luxembourg are not any bit less racist than Americans.
You are right. Equality would not help today or tomorrow. It would take decades, perhaps a generation to undo a lot of the damage that exist in America (and always have). There is a track record for other countries that carrying up the entire lower and middle class would have many benefits that would help minorities.
Everything alienates voters.
Doubt that severely.
Maybe...but I refuse to accept that there was not a Democrat that could have soundly beat Trump.
I'm doing what I can. But this, one thousand times.Instead asking minorities to wait their turn "allies" should ask the majority was equality looks like oppression to them?
Let me propose to you that if you take a look at many of the countries in the world who lead in equality, achieved that as a byproduct of equality-type proposals where a self centered majority voted in their own interests and minorities benefitted. Stronger taxes funds a better welfare state. It allows for better trained police, better education and health which gives opportunity to those who didn't have before. This opportunity increases the amount of minorities who are visible in the mainstream across all levels. And this reduces friction, fear and polarization between the mainsteam majority and the minorities.
I propose to you that people in Sweden or Switzerland or Australia or Luxembourg are not any bit less racist than Americans.
You are right. Equality would not help today or tomorrow. It would take decades, perhaps a generation to undo a lot of the damage that exist in America (and always have). There is a track record for other countries that carrying up the entire lower and middle class would have many benefits that would help minorities.
This works usually in a Parliamentary System where a leader in waiting waits their turn
But not so much for President
He wasn't competitive. He lost by very large margins, Clinton barely campaigned against him. What would the race look like if she had slammed him with ads like she did Obama in 08 lol?
Do I think Biden could have beaten Trump? Yes. But it's irrelevant because Biden couldn't beat Hillary.
Let me propose to you that if you take a look at many of the countries in the world who lead in equality, achieved that as a byproduct of equality-type proposals where a self centered majority voted in their own interests and minorities benefitted. Stronger taxes funds a better welfare state. It allows for better trained police, better education and health which gives opportunity to those who didn't have before. This opportunity increases the amount of minorities who are visible in the mainstream across all levels. And this reduces friction, fear and polarization between the mainsteam majority and the minorities.
I propose to you that people in Sweden or Switzerland or Australia or Luxembourg are not any bit less racist than Americans.
You are right. Equality would not help today or tomorrow. It would take decades, perhaps a generation to undo a lot of the damage that exist in America (and always have). There is a track record for other countries that carrying up the entire lower and middle class would have many benefits that would help minorities.
It's insane to me when people say Clinton *couldn't* beat Trump.
She certainly *didn't*, but she absolutely had the ability to. It's not like everything went her way and she still lost.
I'm doing what I can. But this, one thousand times.
Maybe...but I refuse to accept that there was not a Democrat that could have soundly beat Trump.
Because there isn't a democrat who could have "soundly" beaten Trump. Beaten him? OH easily. "Soundly" is just kinda crazy when Trump is basically the cumulation of white resentment of minorities personified; we're talking decades upon decades of baseless fear of PoC backed by media that have framed and reinforced people's views of PoC expressed by Trump. This was magnified by our first black President daring to actually speak out on that very white fear and how damaging it is to PoC.
Keep in mind that DNC has never won the white vote, keep in mind that despite the fact Trump basically told white women he could do what he wants with him and that him and his goons said women aren't entitled to their own body they still overwhelmingly voted for dude.
A democratic candidate could definitely beat Trump, but it wouldn't be some blow out. Once American liberals get over this delusion that love beats racism or that racism is on it's way out, or that people vote logically or any of this nonsense the better DNC will be able to counter such nonsense in the future.
DNC was (and white liberals in general) were shocked that this many Americans bought into racist politics; it was easy for them to ignore it (and minorities pointing it out) when RNC used dog whistles to say their message, Trump got rid of that abstraction and just went old school and liberals were like "ooooh my gawd I can't believe this in 2016!" It's always been there, and it's still and will always be a huge platform for RNC.
Factually wrong or not, I can't stand behind a 'what's good for white people is good for minorities' statement. What's good for minorities is good for everyone.
Statements like 'you can't eat equality' sound dismissive as shit, and they sure as hell aren't going to bring out minority voters.
We need more white voters, yes... but we've got to hold onto the voters we already have. And we don't do it with statements like that.
Yeah; I guess I mean in an ideal world; why is being qualified and having good policy not a reason enough.
"You can't eat equality" is unprincipled nonsense. We can't abandon our basic values because they're inconvenient in a campaign.
Likewise, the notion that civil rights and economic security are somehow mutually exclusive is similarly absurd.
The takeaway from this election cannot be that Democrats need to laser-focus on the WWC and that minorities will vote for them anyway. That is just as myopic an attitude as the Clinton campaign is being accused of.
Yeah, but 2 million voters, Republican Voters, voted for Mitt Romney than Trump.Because there isn't a democrat who could have "soundly" beaten Trump. Beaten him? OH easily. "Soundly" is just kinda crazy when Trump is basically the cumulation of white resentment of minorities personified; we're talking decades upon decades of baseless fear of PoC expressed by Trump.
Keep in mind that DNC has never won the white vote, keep in mind that despite the fact Trump basically told white women he could do what he wants with him and that him and his goons said women aren't entitled to their own body they still overwhelmingly voted for dude.
A democratic candidate could definitely beat Trump, but it wouldn't be some blow out. Once American liberals get over this delusion that love beats racism or that racism is on it's way out, or that people vote logically or any of this nonsense the better DNC will be able to counter such nonsense in the future.
DNC was (and white liberals in general) were shocked that this many Americans bought into racist politics; it was easy for them to ignore it (and minorities pointing it out) when RNC used dog whistles to say their message, Trump got rid of that abstraction and just went old school and liberals were like "ooooh my gawd I can't believe this in 2016!" It's always been there, and it's still and will always be a huge platform for RNC.