I almost feel sorry for Biden at this point. In the last week he has claimed that his deceased son Beau once served as the U. S. Attorney General, that he got arrested in South Africa while trying to free Mandela from prison (the admin on my other board lives in South Africa, and they love that little story because their press is stating that the claim is categorically false), and he told a crowd in South Carolina that (paraphrasing here) "he was there in North Carolina running for the United States Senate". Those are not "gaffes"; they are likely indicators of a more serious problem that needs to be addressed--go back and compare Reagan 1981 versus Reagan 1986 and you can see it. Ideally, his family and staff will advise him to drop out after Super Tuesday, but being a stubborn old man he will hang on until the national convention this summer.
Weinstein got convicted on two counts; even though the sentences are not overly-punitive given his age and health it is likely that he will die in prison. Of course, after being sent back to jail to await sentencing he has now been transferred to a hospital for chest pains and heart palpitations. Perhaps the reality of his situation is becoming clear to him. One other thing is clear: given how long Hollywood defended this man, we should never again listen to Hollywood or Hollywood celebrities try to lecture the rest of us on morality or how we should be living our lives.
Bernie's open praise of Casto and Castro's Revolution might cost him Florida. There are a *lot* of Cuban-Americans there who, if older, actually lost everything when they had to flee Castro or, if younger, had parents or grandparents who lost everything when they had to flee Castro.
Yeah, let's talk about Castro. Let's talk about why Castro ever came to power. Which was because Batista was a puppet military strongman of the US who turned his entire country over to American corporations and the mafia. How many of the first Cuban refugees were Batista loyalists. How the totality of Cuban policy for this entire country has been shaped around this community in Miami for the last 40 years (well, at least until Obama finally allowed Americans to travel there). Every single, solitary left-wing government we have been decrying in Central and South America for the last half-century came about in response to our support of military juntas in the same countries. You're also gonna hear alot of talk about the Sandinistas. As opposed to the Contras, who our right-wing government openly (and ILLEGALLY) supported while they were raping and killing nuns. Let's have a discussion about US involvement in Latin America, which is just as if not MORE egregious as our meddling in the Middle East.
This bullshit concern trolling about Cuba is proving once again just how utterly ignorant the US is of their own history. We didn't care that a oppressive government took over in Cuba. The only thing we cared about was that it was not OUR repressive government funneling money to American CEOs and organized crime figures through the casinos in Havana. The REAL crime of Castro (in American eyes) isn't that he was a communist dictator. His crime was that he took Cuba away from the people in America making money off it. The US has a problem when these leaders nationalize their resources ONLY because it takes them off the table for American corporations to exploit.
The Godfather Part II is a work of fiction. But Hyman Roth?? That's Meyer Lansky, who was very much real. When Michael has to flee the country after telling Fredo he knows he betrayed him?? That's because Castro's revolutionaries are taking the country back from Batista by force. No matter what happened afterward, the initial revolution itself was 110% justified.
Bernie Sanders is practically one of the only politicians of my lifetime who acknowledges these facts. You know why radical left-wing governments exist in Central and South America and Muslim terrorism exists in the Middle East?? They didn't form in a vaccum. They mostly exist as responses or consequences of US imperialism. Also, winning tweet for those who think only Cuba "indoctrinates" it's citizens:
Regardless of the literacy thing - it’s a really dumb argument for Bernie to be making. It does nothing but let right wing media mischaracterize him as supporting Cuban style socialism rather than Scandinavia style. They’re being disingenuous, but he’s giving them the ammunition.
The facts in this case are less important than the strategy. This isn’t a battle he should fight (and you can believe that it’ll be mentioned in the debate tonight - further demonstrating why it was bad to say anything at all)
Also, winning tweet for those who think only Cuba "indoctrinates" it's citizens:
Yeah, America and Europe are just as indoctrinated as any country they want to point to. Our academics, our advertisements, our popular culture, our journalist class, and our political class are completely united in ideology, there is no distinction. This is obviously not a coincidence or an organic process.
The ruling ideology hasn't changed in 30 years, just the way it justifies itself to the masses.
I don't disagree with any of @jjstraka34 comments re: Cuba. After fulling feathers in New York a lot of Mafia bosses and activity did move to Havana, which was as much of a jet-set destination in the early 1950s as Paris. Most of the messes in Central and South America are holdovers from us trying to act like an empire starting just before World War I, a process we continued through the early 1990s. Even on the earliest forms of discussion boards in the late 1980s--good old alt.net--I was arguing that we should be out of Central America and let them decide for themselves what they want. We own all the problems in Central America.
If you recall, I was giving Obama praise for opening up travel to Havana--I thought that we were on the brink of normalizing relations with them. Sadly, I was incorrect. That won't really start to happen until Raul is gone.
The Middle East...no, that wasn't us--that was the British arbitrarily drawing national boundaries.
Regardless of the literacy thing - it’s a really dumb argument for Bernie to be making. It does nothing but let right wing media mischaracterize him as supporting Cuban style socialism rather than Scandinavia style. They’re being disingenuous, but he’s giving them the ammunition.
The facts in this case are less important than the strategy. This isn’t a battle he should fight (and you can believe that it’ll be mentioned in the debate tonight - further demonstrating why it was bad to say anything at all)
I don't think it will turn out to be that big of a deal.
The initial- and valid-point was initially made in the 1980's. When those comments were brought to his attention on 60 Minutes, he stayed on brand and praised Cuba's efforts for improving literacy and health services while criticizing its authoritarian nature in the same breath. I can't see too many members of his existing base really being dissuaded from voting for someone whose position seems quite nuanced.
Right wing media and the other candidates may well criticize him, but they're gonna do so, anyway.
Besides, Bloomberg's relationship with the equally authoritarian China, for one...ensures that he's open to counter attack.
Regardless of the literacy thing - it’s a really dumb argument for Bernie to be making. It does nothing but let right wing media mischaracterize him as supporting Cuban style socialism rather than Scandinavia style. They’re being disingenuous, but he’s giving them the ammunition.
The facts in this case are less important than the strategy. This isn’t a battle he should fight (and you can believe that it’ll be mentioned in the debate tonight - further demonstrating why it was bad to say anything at all)
I don't think it will turn out to be that big of a deal.
The initial- and valid-point was initially made in the 1980's. When those comments were brought to his attention on 60 Minutes, he stayed on brand and praised Cuba's efforts for improving literacy and health services while criticizing its authoritarian nature in the same breath. I can't see too many members of his existing base really being dissuaded from voting for someone whose position seems quite nuanced.
Right wing media and the other candidates may well criticize him, but they're gonna do so, anyway.
Besides, Bloomberg's relationship with the equally authoritarian China, for one...ensures that he's open to counter attack.
I mean, if any Democrat's plan to win Florida is by getting the support of the Cuban community, they are barking up the most wrong tree of all-time. That's been gone since the Elian Gonzalez situation, even though the response to that was also entirely justified. You basically had a family refusing to give a child back to his father despite a court order, and their retort was to basically yell "Castro!!" as often as possible.
Regardless of the literacy thing - it’s a really dumb argument for Bernie to be making. It does nothing but let right wing media mischaracterize him as supporting Cuban style socialism rather than Scandinavia style. They’re being disingenuous, but he’s giving them the ammunition.
The facts in this case are less important than the strategy. This isn’t a battle he should fight (and you can believe that it’ll be mentioned in the debate tonight - further demonstrating why it was bad to say anything at all)
I don't think it will turn out to be that big of a deal.
The initial- and valid-point was initially made in the 1980's. When those comments were brought to his attention on 60 Minutes, he stayed on brand and praised Cuba's efforts for improving literacy and health services while criticizing its authoritarian nature in the same breath. I can't see too many members of his existing base really being dissuaded from voting for someone whose position seems quite nuanced.
Right wing media and the other candidates may well criticize him, but they're gonna do so, anyway.
Besides, Bloomberg's relationship with the equally authoritarian China, for one...ensures that he's open to counter attack.
Oh - yeah. To be clear, I wasn’t saying anyone who likes him is going to stop liking him. That said - those who are on fence don’t need more reasons to shy away from him. I’m just thinking about someone who likes Bloomberg. That sort of voter doesn’t need more ammunition to avoid voting for Bernie.
Regardless of the literacy thing - it’s a really dumb argument for Bernie to be making. It does nothing but let right wing media mischaracterize him as supporting Cuban style socialism rather than Scandinavia style. They’re being disingenuous, but he’s giving them the ammunition.
The facts in this case are less important than the strategy. This isn’t a battle he should fight (and you can believe that it’ll be mentioned in the debate tonight - further demonstrating why it was bad to say anything at all)
I don't think it will turn out to be that big of a deal.
The initial- and valid-point was initially made in the 1980's. When those comments were brought to his attention on 60 Minutes, he stayed on brand and praised Cuba's efforts for improving literacy and health services while criticizing its authoritarian nature in the same breath. I can't see too many members of his existing base really being dissuaded from voting for someone whose position seems quite nuanced.
Right wing media and the other candidates may well criticize him, but they're gonna do so, anyway.
Besides, Bloomberg's relationship with the equally authoritarian China, for one...ensures that he's open to counter attack.
I mean, if any Democrat's plan to win Florida is by getting the support of the Cuban community, they are barking up the most wrong tree of all-time. That's been gone since the Elian Gonzalez situation, even though the response to that was also entirely justified. You basically had a family refusing to give a child back to his father despite a court order, and their retort was to basically yell "Castro!!" as often as possible.
Disagree. There are several democrat representatives who won in South Florida by not writing off the Cuban American community in 2018. That community isn’t unreachable.
"On the fence"? There is no such thing as an "on the fence" or "undecided" voter any more. Anyone who claims that they are undecided actually just does not want to have to justify the choice they have already made. That being said, I suppose it is possible to be somewhat undecided--do I vote for Buttigieg or Klobuchar because I don't like the front-runners?--but there is no such beast as "do I vote for Democrats or Republicans?".
Interesting--potential changes being proposed to the Communication Decency Act, specifically Section 230--"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."--which gives online portals--like the Beamdog Forums--legal protection against anything any of us might say here. Although originally designed to help guard against things like child pornography or human trafficking, through the "Good Samaritan" nature of the law portals like Facebook and YouTube have baanned fringe lunatics like Alex Jones....which some have claimed is a violation of the First Amendment (even though corporate portals are not bound by it because they are not the government). This law has not kept up with the times, of course, because dedicated people are able to find *anything* on the dark web.
This is a bad idea. I want the tech giants regulated as much as anyone, but just removing those protections and opening the floodgates of liability will not make them decide to be content neutral platforms again. Rather, what will happen is that they will freak out and impose heavy, arbitrary restrictions and the net effect will be that the internet will become even less a place for free and unique expression than it has already been becoming.
I can come on here and claim anything--LBJ had JFK assassinated so he could ramp up Vietnam...Joe Biden and John Kerry were funneling money into Ukraine behind Obama's back so the oligarchs there could buy mercenaries and weapons to fight the Russians on the ground....the Coca-Cola company never changed the formula back away from New Coke--and Beamdog is not liable. If they become liable, the jobs of moderators will be to sit at a desk and read *every* *single* *comment* then fact-check it before they allow it to be published. No one is going to do that---*I* wouldn't do that. Most social media platforms would shut down almost overnight and half of YouTube would simply disappear, leaving only legitimate music videos and cats. (clearly an overstatement but you get the meaning)
Misinformation is the responsiblity of the one posting it, not the forum where it is posted. The gray area is still "aggressive" or "hateful" speech--calling someone a racial slur is a clear-cut case of "you can't do that", but is calling someone a "Millennial" or "Boomer" hateful because it is ageist?
We have an Administration that cut the CDC off at the knees less than a year ago in this regard, a President who only cares about how it is affecting the markets because he views it as his personal score card, and is now proposing the money they already took away now be replaced by money allocated for low income energy assistance. In other words, alot of senior citizens, incidentally the people who would be MOST susceptible to an outbreak. If you didn't know any better, you'd think they were making the worst decisions imaginable on purpose. We're roughly 72 hours away from the right-wing media saying George Soros created coronavirus in a lab and unleashed it to hurt Trump, and 30% of the population believing it.
We have an Administration that cut the CDC off at the knees less than a year ago in this regard, a President who only cares about how it is affecting the markets because he views it as his personal score card, and is now proposing the money they already took away now be replaced by money allocated for low income energy assistance. In other words, alot of senior citizens, incidentally the people who would be MOST susceptible to an outbreak. If you didn't know any better, you'd think they were making the worst decisions imaginable on purpose. We're roughly 72 hours away from the right-wing media saying George Soros created coronavirus in a lab and unleashed it to hurt Trump, and 30% of the population believing it.
30% of the population would believe we were being invaded by leprauchans if Trump said it. It's the other 70% I'm worried about...
As a side note - In the debate, Bernie got slammed for his comments about Cuba. It was used to try to wedge him against the rest of the party. It's not a good look. The other candidates are being intellectually disingenuous, but it doesnt change the fact that he(sanders) made a poor tactical choice to make this a talking point.
Will it make a huge change in the grand scheme of things? Probably not - but Sanders doesnt seem to be doing very well in the room tonight, and Biden is up in most polls in SC. If he wins SC and exceeds his polling there, it'll feed a narrative that gives him more hope going into Super Tuesday.
As a side note - In the debate, Bernie got slammed for his comments about Cuba. It was used to try to wedge him against the rest of the party. It's not a good look. The other candidates are being intellectually disingenuous, but it doesnt change the fact that he(sanders) made a poor tactical choice to make this a talking point.
Will it make a huge change in the grand scheme of things? Probably not - but Sanders doesnt seem to be doing very well in the room tonight, and Biden is up in most polls in SC. If he wins SC and exceeds his polling there, it'll feed a narrative that gives him more hope going into Super Tuesday.
I'll give Bernie props for owning what he said though. He knew he'd take shots for it but said it anyway. Is that hubris, or a bad tactical move? Maybe, but the interesting thing is that he's putting all his cards on the table and he's not wavering. He's going all in on his hand and damn the torpedos. I kind of respect that.
As a side note, my impressions from this debate:
It really looks like Warren is firmly in Bernie's corner now. Biden had a strong showing and should likely win SC. Klobuchar was fairly impressive too. Buttigieg and Steyer seem to be fading but Bloomberg had a solid debate this time (albeit it was in front of a favorable, $3k/seat crowd that is likely rooting for him). Bernie took some hits but I don't think they sunk him by any means...
That's the going theory from Bernie supporters (or at least the one Bernie backer intern at my work).
At a bare minimum, no average SC voter is shelling out a minimum of $1700 to watch that shit. Bernie doesn't need to win there, he simply needs 2nd place and 15% to qualify for delegates. Biden can't ride any momentum wave in 3 days going into next Tuesday, particularly if two if those days are on a weekend. Ask Newt Gingrich how well winning only SC turned out for him.
That's the going theory from Bernie supporters (or at least the one Bernie backer intern at my work).
At a bare minimum, no average SC voter is shelling out a minimum of $1700 to watch that shit. Bernie doesn't need to win there, he simply needs 2nd place and 15% to qualify for delegates. Biden can't ride any momentum wave in 3 days going into next Tuesday, particularly if two if those days are on a weekend. Ask Newt Gingrich how well winning only SC turned out for him.
Hard disagree (about Biden). The media is salivating over Biden making a comeback, and it'll dominate the pundit based media over the weekend. While California is voting on Super Tuesday, so are some states that are faaaar more favorable to Bloomberg and Biden than anyone else.
If Biden wins big in SC, you can imagine him splitting or nearly splitting the delegates on Super Tuesday. If THAT happens, he's even money to win the nomination.
Bernie needs a breakthrough to win over moderate Democrats. He loses if any of them stay home, or if Bloomberg decides to dump money on himself and runs as an independent a'la Ross Perot 1992.
Edit: I'm thinking that if Bernie gets a plurality it would behoove the Democrats to get behind healthcare for all and go with Bernie. If they screw him with super-delegates this time I think they go down in flames. The rest of Bernie's policies can wait, but taking on the health insurance industry is a winning strategy in my opinion.
The pundit-based national media is as clueless about what's happening with Bernie as they were with Trump in the Republican primaries. First Jeb was going to stop him, then Ted Cruz, then Marco Rubio. Every one of those predictions was just prisoner of the moment knee-jerk reactions trying to manufacture an actual contest into existence. It never happened.
That's the going theory from Bernie supporters (or at least the one Bernie backer intern at my work).
At a bare minimum, no average SC voter is shelling out a minimum of $1700 to watch that shit. Bernie doesn't need to win there, he simply needs 2nd place and 15% to qualify for delegates. Biden can't ride any momentum wave in 3 days going into next Tuesday, particularly if two if those days are on a weekend. Ask Newt Gingrich how well winning only SC turned out for him.
Hard disagree (about Biden). The media is salivating over Biden making a comeback, and it'll dominate the pundit based media over the weekend. While California is voting on Super Tuesday, so are some states that are faaaar more favorable to Bloomberg and Biden than anyone else.
If Biden wins big in SC, you can imagine him splitting or nearly splitting the delegates on Super Tuesday. If THAT happens, he's even money to win the nomination.
Well Biden finally didn't seem like he was asleep, but I'm not sure that showing wipes out all his other debate performances. He still seems like a long-shot to me. He has '0' money to spend on Super Tuesday so he needs the momentum from this debate and his SC performance to propel him. If (and that's a big if) that happens, he's back in the race...
The pundit-based national media is as clueless about what's happening with Bernie as they were with Trump in the Republican primaries. First Jeb was going to stop him, then Ted Cruz, then Marco Rubio. Every one of those predictions was just prisoner of the moment knee-jerk reactions trying to manufacture an actual contest into existence. It never happened.
Bernie's enthusiasm is his best ally. He even won over the hostile crowd a few times tonight. Trump has shown how the bully pulpit can be used as a bludgeon. Bernie can use that to his advantage. I dont think he'd get everything he wants, but he should be able to muscle a few things through. The gun issue is a big weakness for him with Democrats though. It's interesting that his views on that issue are more moderate. That actually might help him in rural areas and states like mine (Michigan).
Ha, I was wondering if I was the only one who heard Bloomberg say he 'bought' a Democratic House majority! God, how can this guy claim to be a Democrat???
Ha, I was wondering if I was the only one who heard Bloomberg say he 'bought' a Democratic House majority! God, how can this guy claim to be a Democrat???
Well, hello my fellow politics enthusiasts. Is anybody interested to hear about what's happening out of the US? Well, I have news... or more like... bad news, but only if you would like to listen. I wouldn't want to depress you folks unnecessarily.
Well, hello my fellow politics enthusiasts. Is anybody interested to hear about what's happening out of the US? Well, I have news... or more like... bad news, but only if you would like to listen. I wouldn't want to depress you folks unnecessarily.
Well, hello my fellow politics enthusiasts. Is anybody interested to hear about what's happening out of the US? Well, I have news... or more like... bad news, but only if you would like to listen. I wouldn't want to depress you folks unnecessarily.
2043 billionaires in the US with average income $200m/year x 0.02 (2% tax)= wait for it...
$8.2 billion - not enough to provide shit
This is not difficult math. Warren is full of crap and so is Bernie when he says these things. I have no problem with Democrats wanting to provide extra services, but I call bullshit that a 2% tax on billionaires is going to pay for it. There simply are not enough of them for their income to pay for any of these progressive policies. Tell me the fucking truth and let me decide, Elizabeth. At least Bernie admits that everybody is going to have to pony up...
Comments
Weinstein got convicted on two counts; even though the sentences are not overly-punitive given his age and health it is likely that he will die in prison. Of course, after being sent back to jail to await sentencing he has now been transferred to a hospital for chest pains and heart palpitations. Perhaps the reality of his situation is becoming clear to him. One other thing is clear: given how long Hollywood defended this man, we should never again listen to Hollywood or Hollywood celebrities try to lecture the rest of us on morality or how we should be living our lives.
Bernie's open praise of Casto and Castro's Revolution might cost him Florida. There are a *lot* of Cuban-Americans there who, if older, actually lost everything when they had to flee Castro or, if younger, had parents or grandparents who lost everything when they had to flee Castro.
This bullshit concern trolling about Cuba is proving once again just how utterly ignorant the US is of their own history. We didn't care that a oppressive government took over in Cuba. The only thing we cared about was that it was not OUR repressive government funneling money to American CEOs and organized crime figures through the casinos in Havana. The REAL crime of Castro (in American eyes) isn't that he was a communist dictator. His crime was that he took Cuba away from the people in America making money off it. The US has a problem when these leaders nationalize their resources ONLY because it takes them off the table for American corporations to exploit.
The Godfather Part II is a work of fiction. But Hyman Roth?? That's Meyer Lansky, who was very much real. When Michael has to flee the country after telling Fredo he knows he betrayed him?? That's because Castro's revolutionaries are taking the country back from Batista by force. No matter what happened afterward, the initial revolution itself was 110% justified.
Bernie Sanders is practically one of the only politicians of my lifetime who acknowledges these facts. You know why radical left-wing governments exist in Central and South America and Muslim terrorism exists in the Middle East?? They didn't form in a vaccum. They mostly exist as responses or consequences of US imperialism. Also, winning tweet for those who think only Cuba "indoctrinates" it's citizens:
The facts in this case are less important than the strategy. This isn’t a battle he should fight (and you can believe that it’ll be mentioned in the debate tonight - further demonstrating why it was bad to say anything at all)
Yeah, America and Europe are just as indoctrinated as any country they want to point to. Our academics, our advertisements, our popular culture, our journalist class, and our political class are completely united in ideology, there is no distinction. This is obviously not a coincidence or an organic process.
The ruling ideology hasn't changed in 30 years, just the way it justifies itself to the masses.
If you recall, I was giving Obama praise for opening up travel to Havana--I thought that we were on the brink of normalizing relations with them. Sadly, I was incorrect. That won't really start to happen until Raul is gone.
The Middle East...no, that wasn't us--that was the British arbitrarily drawing national boundaries.
I don't think it will turn out to be that big of a deal.
The initial- and valid-point was initially made in the 1980's. When those comments were brought to his attention on 60 Minutes, he stayed on brand and praised Cuba's efforts for improving literacy and health services while criticizing its authoritarian nature in the same breath. I can't see too many members of his existing base really being dissuaded from voting for someone whose position seems quite nuanced.
Right wing media and the other candidates may well criticize him, but they're gonna do so, anyway.
Besides, Bloomberg's relationship with the equally authoritarian China, for one...ensures that he's open to counter attack.
I mean, if any Democrat's plan to win Florida is by getting the support of the Cuban community, they are barking up the most wrong tree of all-time. That's been gone since the Elian Gonzalez situation, even though the response to that was also entirely justified. You basically had a family refusing to give a child back to his father despite a court order, and their retort was to basically yell "Castro!!" as often as possible.
Oh - yeah. To be clear, I wasn’t saying anyone who likes him is going to stop liking him. That said - those who are on fence don’t need more reasons to shy away from him. I’m just thinking about someone who likes Bloomberg. That sort of voter doesn’t need more ammunition to avoid voting for Bernie.
Disagree. There are several democrat representatives who won in South Florida by not writing off the Cuban American community in 2018. That community isn’t unreachable.
Interesting--potential changes being proposed to the Communication Decency Act, specifically Section 230--"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."--which gives online portals--like the Beamdog Forums--legal protection against anything any of us might say here. Although originally designed to help guard against things like child pornography or human trafficking, through the "Good Samaritan" nature of the law portals like Facebook and YouTube have baanned fringe lunatics like Alex Jones....which some have claimed is a violation of the First Amendment (even though corporate portals are not bound by it because they are not the government). This law has not kept up with the times, of course, because dedicated people are able to find *anything* on the dark web.
Misinformation is the responsiblity of the one posting it, not the forum where it is posted. The gray area is still "aggressive" or "hateful" speech--calling someone a racial slur is a clear-cut case of "you can't do that", but is calling someone a "Millennial" or "Boomer" hateful because it is ageist?
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/25/investing/dow-jones-stock-market/index.html
We have an Administration that cut the CDC off at the knees less than a year ago in this regard, a President who only cares about how it is affecting the markets because he views it as his personal score card, and is now proposing the money they already took away now be replaced by money allocated for low income energy assistance. In other words, alot of senior citizens, incidentally the people who would be MOST susceptible to an outbreak. If you didn't know any better, you'd think they were making the worst decisions imaginable on purpose. We're roughly 72 hours away from the right-wing media saying George Soros created coronavirus in a lab and unleashed it to hurt Trump, and 30% of the population believing it.
30% of the population would believe we were being invaded by leprauchans if Trump said it. It's the other 70% I'm worried about...
Will it make a huge change in the grand scheme of things? Probably not - but Sanders doesnt seem to be doing very well in the room tonight, and Biden is up in most polls in SC. If he wins SC and exceeds his polling there, it'll feed a narrative that gives him more hope going into Super Tuesday.
I'll give Bernie props for owning what he said though. He knew he'd take shots for it but said it anyway. Is that hubris, or a bad tactical move? Maybe, but the interesting thing is that he's putting all his cards on the table and he's not wavering. He's going all in on his hand and damn the torpedos. I kind of respect that.
As a side note, my impressions from this debate:
It really looks like Warren is firmly in Bernie's corner now. Biden had a strong showing and should likely win SC. Klobuchar was fairly impressive too. Buttigieg and Steyer seem to be fading but Bloomberg had a solid debate this time (albeit it was in front of a favorable, $3k/seat crowd that is likely rooting for him). Bernie took some hits but I don't think they sunk him by any means...
That's the going theory from Bernie supporters (or at least the one Bernie backer intern at my work).
At a bare minimum, no average SC voter is shelling out a minimum of $1700 to watch that shit. Bernie doesn't need to win there, he simply needs 2nd place and 15% to qualify for delegates. Biden can't ride any momentum wave in 3 days going into next Tuesday, particularly if two if those days are on a weekend. Ask Newt Gingrich how well winning only SC turned out for him.
Hard disagree (about Biden). The media is salivating over Biden making a comeback, and it'll dominate the pundit based media over the weekend. While California is voting on Super Tuesday, so are some states that are faaaar more favorable to Bloomberg and Biden than anyone else.
If Biden wins big in SC, you can imagine him splitting or nearly splitting the delegates on Super Tuesday. If THAT happens, he's even money to win the nomination.
Edit: I'm thinking that if Bernie gets a plurality it would behoove the Democrats to get behind healthcare for all and go with Bernie. If they screw him with super-delegates this time I think they go down in flames. The rest of Bernie's policies can wait, but taking on the health insurance industry is a winning strategy in my opinion.
Well Biden finally didn't seem like he was asleep, but I'm not sure that showing wipes out all his other debate performances. He still seems like a long-shot to me. He has '0' money to spend on Super Tuesday so he needs the momentum from this debate and his SC performance to propel him. If (and that's a big if) that happens, he's back in the race...
Bernie's enthusiasm is his best ally. He even won over the hostile crowd a few times tonight. Trump has shown how the bully pulpit can be used as a bludgeon. Bernie can use that to his advantage. I dont think he'd get everything he wants, but he should be able to muscle a few things through. The gun issue is a big weakness for him with Democrats though. It's interesting that his views on that issue are more moderate. That actually might help him in rural areas and states like mine (Michigan).
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/25/politics/who-won-south-carolina-debate/index.html
He was a Republican and Independent for more years than he's been a Democrat iirc he only registered as Dem in 2018.
Please
Enlighten us, please!
2043 billionaires in the US with average income $200m/year x 0.02 (2% tax)= wait for it...
$8.2 billion - not enough to provide shit
This is not difficult math. Warren is full of crap and so is Bernie when he says these things. I have no problem with Democrats wanting to provide extra services, but I call bullshit that a 2% tax on billionaires is going to pay for it. There simply are not enough of them for their income to pay for any of these progressive policies. Tell me the fucking truth and let me decide, Elizabeth. At least Bernie admits that everybody is going to have to pony up...