What democratic candidate would you vote for? Warren or Bernie?

Discussion in 'Opinion POLLS' started by redeemer216, Oct 27, 2019.

?

Bernie or Warren?

  1. Bernie

    11 vote(s)
    55.0%
  2. Warren

    9 vote(s)
    45.0%
  1. redeemer216

    redeemer216 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    For the independents or left leaning voters here which candidate between the two would be your first choice and why? I also think as of now it's most likely going to be between these two at the end (could be wrong).
    I lean towards a similar answer to Michael Moore. Don't always agree with the guy but he was right here.
     
  2. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    13,132
    Likes Received:
    4,533
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Its very early days. I may well pick someone else entirely. I already voted for Bernie four years ago but he has some big flaws that always made him suspect from an electability angle. I don't like to serve a previous contest's leftovers to the voters and hope they will love the taste more this time. Right now I am going with Warren but I refuse to let myself be boxed in by the progressive/moderate false choice, so many in my party fall into. I think we get ourselves all tied in knots over ideological purity or lack thereof or the specifics of these proposals when there will be no purity in anything coming out of Congress anyway and all these policies are going to be thrown into a shredding machine. This is about who we think can win and who we think has better political skills to accomplish what Dems all basically stand for anyway.
     
    Adfundum and Derideo_Te like this.
  3. redeemer216

    redeemer216 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I get the elect-ability angle, but that shouldn't be the highest priority. Also, what exactly do the Dems stand for these days? Even better that Sanders is not a Dem. He is just running as one.

    And if electability is what we are talking about, I really don't see how Warren is going to win vs a Trump.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2019
  4. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    13,132
    Likes Received:
    4,533
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh it better be the highest priority this time. The planet as we know it, probably cannot handle four more years in republican hands. That is four more years without a climate change treaty even being negotiated.

    Dems really don't change all that much except that the focus of our platform alters here and there. If you read the 1972 platform, and then you read the 2016 platform, you will see a lot of the same broad aspirations. Yes gay rights and climate change, and terrorism are new to the mix, and Vietnam, busing, and ERA is out, but big picture, not much. Well, I am glad Sanders is running. The country needs to be exposed to his ideas. But Dems will not nominate someone as their standard-bearer who is not loyal to the Democratic party. Can't blame them for that. Sanders is not at heart a Democrat. This relationship is mutually beneficial to both, and as long as that is true, we should all be happy he is hanging around our debates our caucus room and our primaries.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2019
  5. redeemer216

    redeemer216 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    That Sanders and the rest of the Justice Dems are not Dems at heart is not a bad thing. The Dem party as it currently is needs to to die and change. The root cause of all our problems is money in politics and corruption and unfairness in elections. This is the reason Trump was elected and the Dems for some reason STILL do not understand this.
     
  6. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    13,132
    Likes Received:
    4,533
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well now I understand your goals, and your aspirations. You want Sanders to be your trojan horse/poison pill to help kill the democratic party. We do not share the same objective. Do you think Sanders aspires to be a poison pill in our party, and destroy it from within?
     
    Adfundum likes this.
  7. redeemer216

    redeemer216 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    No, I think the justice dems are the only ones who are going to keep it from destroying itself.
     
  8. DavidMK

    DavidMK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    2,573
    Likes Received:
    619
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He's less a poison pill and more a reformer. He'd be to the Dems what Reagan was to the Repubs. I get if you disagree with that direction but to imply he's trying to destroy the Party is just wrong.
     
    redeemer216 likes this.
  9. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    13,132
    Likes Received:
    4,533
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sanders has never said a word to make me worry about his intentions as nefarious, and I was suitably impressed in 2016 by the fact he kept his promise to the party by endorsing Hillary per prior commitment, and campaign for the ticket . Means he's a man of his word but I was responding to a post that could make me wonder. . Its hard to reform a party that you are not invested in and have never showed any interest in. He really just wants to exploit the preexisting systems within the party, to promote either himself or his message or both. He ditched the party like a disposable sanitary napkin the minute he had no use for it and he will again once this election is over. I sense total indifference. He wants to reform America but not as a party man.

    Reagan was late as a republican but he was completely devoted once he changed registration.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019
    Adfundum likes this.
  10. DavidMK

    DavidMK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    2,573
    Likes Received:
    619
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He absolutely would push to make the Party SocDem if not outright socialist if he took over. But he'd still have the same base, he'd still push the established platform (just without the corporate love). If you're a hardline capitalist I 100% agree with your opposition but the Dems would still be the Dems, just more explicitly left. Reagan turned the Repubs into what they are today but they were already a right wing, pro-business, pro-religion party since Reconstruction, all he did was stop the hedging and force Repub politicians to commit to unapologetic conservatism.

    If you're a 'moderate' Clinton Dem, worry. If not, Sanders is no threat to the party.
     
    redeemer216 likes this.
  11. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    15,697
    Likes Received:
    11,108
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Im not a leftist, and rue the political atmosphere that would leave me with the above choice. I don't agree with Sanders on much, but he seems like a sincere believer in his rhetoric. Warren seems like she'll say whatever to get elected. So I'll take the sincere fool over the coniving shill. I think Sanders will end up another Carter. Warren might as well be a Bush or Clinton imo.
     
    Ddyad and redeemer216 like this.
  12. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    13,132
    Likes Received:
    4,533
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well there are parties such as the Green party who's ideological prism is more similar to that vision than this big wooly mammoth, but working to convert this party instead is a viable option for him, I suppose, except it would leave no place to go for the slightly left of center guys and gals, our moderates to call home. Personally, I'd prefer we make our system far more amenable to a wider range parties. I want to see a stronger Green or workers party, a stronger constitutional and libertarian party and a fewer Ds and Rs after everyone's name and media forced to pay attention to them all. I think that is in America's interest because we would get a far broader spectrum of ideas, and candidates. Its not Dems or Pubs that are the enemy, it the duopoly of Dems or Pubs. If Sanders answer to being misplaced and outcast, is to usurp the party so that another group is misplaced and outcast, I don't see the value.

    In other words, I'd prefer we hear Sanders SocDem ideas, as a SocDem. I want him in the presidential debates. I want a system whereby you get a tax break for any party you give to and they are all treated alike on the IRS form. I want real voters pamplets that treat that green party or libertarian exactly the same way they treat the other two. That's my vision.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019
  13. redeemer216

    redeemer216 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Currently, a third party is not even viable in this climate so talking about having more parties (which already exist by the way) is completely irrelevant. The dem party needs to shift more left for a reason. It's been pretty far right economically for too long. Work within the two major parties too reform the entire electoral system. I'm talking about public funding for elections. And mandating ranked choice voting across the board. Then and only then can you have viable third parties and it would be much more difficult to ever get back into the state we are currently in. Most polls show strong support for things like medicare for all and electoral reform which is Bernies main platform. I don't know who these moderates you are talking about that would supposedly be kicked out of the party. Most actual moderates are independents, not Dems. The only people who are in danger are the corporatists and centrists, which are a minority at least within the general population. Most people on the left are far too focused on cancel culture to care unfortunately.

    Warren although she is certainly much better than Hilary as far as her history goes, still falls too far into that establishment centrist circle. And I don't see her having any chance of beating Trump because of this.

    You are against reforms that would keep the dem party alive but at the same time keep bringing up the two party duopoly problem which seems completely paradoxical to me.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019
  14. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    13,132
    Likes Received:
    4,533
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't accept the premise that moving that far to the left 'keeps the party alive' if the nature of the party becomes a carbon copy of the Green party or a social democrat party. Nothing wrong with either one but lets not kid ourselves here that a democrat party with no moderate wing is still the same party just by keeping the name. As for public finance of campaigns I am good with it. As for ranked choice voting, I want to experiment with it at the state level here and there and see how well it works. I rather like that laboratory of democracy notion and we do not exploit the fact we have 50 labs nearly enough. I do know the difference between a moderate and an independent. No I am not interested in a Democratic party that moves significantly to the left when there are already options there. If they are not appealing enough currently, then make them appealing enough and empower them to compete by altering the political dynamic so that they can better flourish.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019
    Ddyad likes this.
  15. redeemer216

    redeemer216 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Why not make the dem party fully soc dem? Isn't that the ideal anyway? It needs to go left because currently both parties are already shifted fairly closely to the right, the differences economically are relatively small. The only major differences are identity politics and certain social issues.

    Who are these moderates you keep appealing too and what are their policies? Sorry but most on the left including me only vote dem because they realize not doing so would be wasting their votes. These line pulling dems you keep speaking of simply do not exist except if by moderates you mean the Hilary and Biden supporters.

    You keep saying there are other current options. There are not. The other parties are currently completely non viable, hence why the dem party is the only option for the majority of leftists, dem or not. And the majority on the left seems to agree on some major issues which is where the main party on the left needs to go.

    As for ranked choice voting I really don't see it making things worse, so not sure why the need to waste time at the state level, when our corrupted system needs to be fixed now. Just have a clause in there for it to go back up for a revote after a certain amount of test years. Certain states have already been doing it for years.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019
  16. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    13,132
    Likes Received:
    4,533
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Because I know a hell of a lot of Democrats in my 57 years, and I have worked for the party and most are not fully comfortable as social Dems despite a flirtation. If you only vote dem because not doing so, wastes your vote, then you are probably not a Democrat anymore than Sanders is. So get out of the closet, as a social democrat and own your owe values and beliefs, with all those others you know and pick up that mantle and tear up your registration card. You won't have to rub elbows with the likes of Biden or Clinton or Carter ever again.

    There are some current experiments with ranked choice voting here in the states like California, I want to see them go forward, but there are often unforeseen unintended and long range implications to many major reform systems that benefit from statewide application before national application. Its just smarter for us to learn for California as it perfects this.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019
    Ddyad likes this.
  17. hudson1955

    hudson1955 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 11, 2012
    Messages:
    2,578
    Likes Received:
    460
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Female
    Can't vote because their is not one Democrat Socialist I would vote for. Their platforms do not have anything for me at this time. Way to Socialist And way to expensive.
    .
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019
    ToddWB likes this.
  18. redeemer216

    redeemer216 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Who do you support if anyone on the left?
     
  19. redeemer216

    redeemer216 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I am owning it, from the dem party (only viable option to move forward). And the state of WA doesn't require you to register a party to be able to vote in the primary. Thanks but no thanks. You kinds sound like a completely partisan voter who cares about party above solutions and policy.
     
  20. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    13,132
    Likes Received:
    4,533
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You have plenty of solutions and options, many of which I support. You don't want them because they require you to build a viable party from the bottom up, and you are too lazy and cowardly. So you want to be a parasite, sucking off the blood of your host instead and laying your eggs under its skin. The problem there is that your solution will just weaken the host on which you depend and then host and parasite die. The irony is considering your view that the democratic party is a parasite living off a corporate host, the last thing you should ever want to be attached to in a secondary parasitic relationship, is another parasite destined to dye.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019
    Ddyad likes this.
  21. redeemer216

    redeemer216 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The host will kill itself regardless of your made up parasite. Bad analogy. The evidence for which is already there and clear as day. Also no, no third party is viable, regardless of said made up viable party. The existing parties already hold a monopoly.
     
  22. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    13,132
    Likes Received:
    4,533
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL I already anticipated your view. It is predictable. Reread the amended post. We have had duopolies before at the top of politics, and guess what, the Whigs, the federalists no longer exist. You just give up too fast.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019
    Ddyad likes this.
  23. redeemer216

    redeemer216 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,586
    Likes Received:
    417
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Yep. Things evolve. Deal with it. Nature of life.

    Given I just restated what I previously said, of course it was predictable.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019
  24. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,944
    Likes Received:
    3,636
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'd go for Warren. Bernie, while a nice sincere guy, hinges on marxism and is too much of a purist. Warren is socialist but at least she is an economist and does have some free market views.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019
    redeemer216 likes this.
  25. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    13,132
    Likes Received:
    4,533
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then evolve past parasitism. You have your own convention, with your own platform, and your own primary system with your own pristine ranked voting picked nominee. Be a social democrat. But if you suck off our blood you will be infected by the same influences we are. You will be corrupted by big money and you will find its influence toxic, because this party will continue to accept plenty of donations from the very people you guys decry, and (psst to win against us, your candidates will succumb and sneak those dollars through the back door) Greed and ego will not spare 'justice Dems' from behaving like any other, if that what it takes to win.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2019

Share This Page