The White House has called on Congress to approve aid to Israel and Ukraine, but Republicans oppose any measure that excludes provisions to address security on the U.S.-Mexico border.
Bloomberg wasn’t a moderate, he was a straight-up right-wing twat. But in any case, that doesn’t really take away from the core problem I’m pointing out?
Warren should have know it was Sanders turn, amirite?
Man, if you’re at a point in your support and with the polls opening soon and realize you’re gonna be a spoiler candidate, then you have to either accept responsibility for cratering someone, or nut up and drop out to avoid cratering the candidate you’re closer to. She didn’t do the latter, so she has to accept the former.
Anyone old enough to remember Bill Clinton’s campaign knows this is complete hogwash. Clinton had no chance of winning the nomination until suddenly he was the front runner riding a wave of popularity seemingly overnight. No one owes a single candidate their allegiance just because you see them as closely aligned, and they have every right and reason to believe they can win. Additionally candidates also choose to stay in to force their policy positions onto the party platform, something Sanders also did well past a likely winning outcome. I really think you’re only seeing this from a self centered perspective without considering the situation from any other candidates perspective. Its honestly very Bernie bro culty.
Anyone old enough to remember Bill Clinton’s campaign knows this is complete hogwash.
Afraid I’m not that old. Wasn’t even born when Clinton ran in '92.
No one owes a single candidate their allegiance just because you see them as closely aligned, and they have every right and reason to believe they can win.
They have every right, but not every reason. A failure to examine the current circumstances and likelihood of success accurately is… well, a mistake. A failure. It doesn’t make anyone a bad person, but it is a bad decision.
Additionally candidates also choose to stay in to force their policy positions onto the party platform, something Sanders also did well past a likely winning outcome.
Yes, but she dropped out two days after Super Tuesday, so that’s not really applicable here.
I really think you’re only seeing this from a self centered perspective without considering the situation from any other candidates perspective. Its honestly very Bernie bro culty.
It’s… culty to think that Bernie would have had better chances had the other progressive candidate in the race, who was polling much more poorly, had dropped out when all the moderate candidates dropped out and endorsed the moderate candidate remaining?
Man, I’m at peace with what happened. It’s politics, it is what it is. But that doesn’t mean Warren made a good or sensible choice.
Bernie could have gotten every single Warren vote and he’d still have lost. Do you question why he stayed in after having his heart attack? Warren was briefly beating Biden right around that point in the primary, so surely he should have dropped out to not be a spoiler?
“When all the moderates drop out and unite behind one candidate with mere days before the polls open, the progressives would need to do the same to have a chance of victory.”
“lmao listen to this guy and his motivated reasoning”
The moderates just had more votes man, before and after consolidation. Like I said to kick off this whole thread, even if Bernie got every single vote cast for Warren (not a real thing, at that time her voters’ second choices were close to evenly split), he’d still have lost. You presumably believe some bird magic would have happened if Bernie lost Super Tuesday by less, I don’t. He got his head-to-heads against Biden and pretty consistently lost.
Maybe, just maybe, Bernie should have done more to attract Warren voters and/or more to encourage Warren he’d be a good candidate. What’s that phrase again? “You need to earn votes”?
The moderates just had more votes man, before and after consolidation.
If you think that name recognition isn’t a huge factor when multiple candidates drop out simultaneously with very little time before polls opening, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
Like I said to kick off this whole thread, even if Bernie got every single vote cast for Warren (not a real thing, at that time her voters’ second choices were close to evenly split), he’d still have lost.
He’d have come out of Super Tuesday with fewer votes than Biden. That’s different from ‘lost’. In a vote that doesn’t happen all at once, as with, you know, the primaries, perceptions of being ‘in-range’ of victory make a big difference in turnout and voter motivation. Warren voters had Bernie as their second choice at a rate of almost 2-1, but I don’t expect facts to matter much to you, clearly.
You presumably believe some bird magic would have happened if Bernie lost Super Tuesday by less, I don’t.
Tell me more about how early success doesn’t translate into increased later support, I’m sure all of the primary jousting over Iowa will be thrilled to be dispelled as a money sink for candidates.
Maybe, just maybe, Bernie should have done more to attract Warren voters and/or more to encourage Warren he’d be a good candidate. What’s that phrase again? “You need to earn votes”?
“All the moderates drop out and unite behind one candidate, and the progressives stay divided, clearly this is a good strategic choice.”
Look, if you want to simp for people who think nothing should fundamentally change, that’s your choice. Just wish you wouldn’t use bad strategic mistakes as a smokescreen to do it.
Bloomberg wasn’t a moderate, he was a straight-up right-wing twat. But in any case, that doesn’t really take away from the core problem I’m pointing out?
Man, if you’re at a point in your support and with the polls opening soon and realize you’re gonna be a spoiler candidate, then you have to either accept responsibility for cratering someone, or nut up and drop out to avoid cratering the candidate you’re closer to. She didn’t do the latter, so she has to accept the former.
The only charitable way to interpret Heresy_generator’s comment would be as a confession that Biden was also a straight-up right-wing twat, LOL.
deleted by creator
Anyone old enough to remember Bill Clinton’s campaign knows this is complete hogwash. Clinton had no chance of winning the nomination until suddenly he was the front runner riding a wave of popularity seemingly overnight. No one owes a single candidate their allegiance just because you see them as closely aligned, and they have every right and reason to believe they can win. Additionally candidates also choose to stay in to force their policy positions onto the party platform, something Sanders also did well past a likely winning outcome. I really think you’re only seeing this from a self centered perspective without considering the situation from any other candidates perspective. Its honestly very Bernie bro culty.
Afraid I’m not that old. Wasn’t even born when Clinton ran in '92.
They have every right, but not every reason. A failure to examine the current circumstances and likelihood of success accurately is… well, a mistake. A failure. It doesn’t make anyone a bad person, but it is a bad decision.
Yes, but she dropped out two days after Super Tuesday, so that’s not really applicable here.
It’s… culty to think that Bernie would have had better chances had the other progressive candidate in the race, who was polling much more poorly, had dropped out when all the moderate candidates dropped out and endorsed the moderate candidate remaining?
Man, I’m at peace with what happened. It’s politics, it is what it is. But that doesn’t mean Warren made a good or sensible choice.
Bernie could have gotten every single Warren vote and he’d still have lost. Do you question why he stayed in after having his heart attack? Warren was briefly beating Biden right around that point in the primary, so surely he should have dropped out to not be a spoiler?
Man, I don’t know how many times I have to emphasize the circumstances of Super Tuesday in 2020 before people get it through their fucking heads.
Maybe the reason you have to emphasize it so often is that other people don’t share your motivated reasoning.
“When all the moderates drop out and unite behind one candidate with mere days before the polls open, the progressives would need to do the same to have a chance of victory.”
“lmao listen to this guy and his motivated reasoning”
The moderates just had more votes man, before and after consolidation. Like I said to kick off this whole thread, even if Bernie got every single vote cast for Warren (not a real thing, at that time her voters’ second choices were close to evenly split), he’d still have lost. You presumably believe some bird magic would have happened if Bernie lost Super Tuesday by less, I don’t. He got his head-to-heads against Biden and pretty consistently lost.
Maybe, just maybe, Bernie should have done more to attract Warren voters and/or more to encourage Warren he’d be a good candidate. What’s that phrase again? “You need to earn votes”?
But let me tell you how Bernie can still win.
If you think that name recognition isn’t a huge factor when multiple candidates drop out simultaneously with very little time before polls opening, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
He’d have come out of Super Tuesday with fewer votes than Biden. That’s different from ‘lost’. In a vote that doesn’t happen all at once, as with, you know, the primaries, perceptions of being ‘in-range’ of victory make a big difference in turnout and voter motivation. Warren voters had Bernie as their second choice at a rate of almost 2-1, but I don’t expect facts to matter much to you, clearly.
Tell me more about how early success doesn’t translate into increased later support, I’m sure all of the primary jousting over Iowa will be thrilled to be dispelled as a money sink for candidates.
“All the moderates drop out and unite behind one candidate, and the progressives stay divided, clearly this is a good strategic choice.”
Look, if you want to simp for people who think nothing should fundamentally change, that’s your choice. Just wish you wouldn’t use bad strategic mistakes as a smokescreen to do it.