Socialism. What you’re describing is socialism. And when that begins to fail, it will rapidly turn into communism, once entrenched in power...and armed. From AOC’s website on the Green New Deal: “A line on Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's website supporting "economic security to all those who are unable or unwilling to work" triggered backlashthis week and prompted mixed messages from her team about where the line came from, and whether it was ever intended to be part of the landmark Green New Deal policy package. The controversy has given fodder to critics of the Green New Deal legislation, which was unveiled Thursday. Though the actual Green New Deal legislation introduced to the House of Representatives contains no mention of guaranteeing economic security to those "unwilling to work," the phrase was included on Ocasio-Cortez's website in a Frequently Asked Questions page that has since been removed from the site. The page was also sent to reporters, including NPR, which published the document, and the Washington Post. Intense criticism ensued, and some of Ocasio-Cortez's staffers and advisers attempted to walk back the "unwilling to work" line.” Link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.bu...controversy-unwilling-to-work-line-faq-2019-2
You can always be counted on to provide silly and ignorant characterization of those who don't think like you.
This true and I'm all for robust policy debates and highlighting differences between candidates. It's the distortions, conspiracy theories and outright lies that are the problem. Especially when they're disproportionately directed at one candidate. Most of them get this stuff, to be clear, but the volume and vitriol Pete gets is ridiculous.
that's how you know you like a candidate- when you think they are getting the most. not to say he is getting the most or isn't, but when the shit river is too deep to stand in, they're all swimming regardless of who is dealing with the deepest spot. it also dulls the impact of actual policy and values, and favors the incumbent. "they're all the same! The devil you know..."
I've worked in management consulting for more than 20 years and I'll be damned if I'm "cancelled" by these idiot [uck fay]ers because my career doesn't meet their purity tests. It's definitely not a perfect business and there are negatives, but I'm also very proud of most of the work I've done. Like most any career there is good and bad; you're going to find issues with most anything if you dig enough. Nothing will every be good enough.
To be completely transparent I have never felt this way about a political candidate. His is the first campaign to which I've contributed. So, yeah, I see pretty much all of the shit thrown his way because I follow him more closely. I don't ignore the others, though, and still believe he gets the most. At least in terms of out right lies and disgusting comments. The further left a candidate is the less of the latter they receive.
the less they receive from the left. but the more they receive from the right. and make no mistake, for every bernie bro spouting off purity tests, there are probably 5 bernie bros that are mich more focused on their own candidate than tearing down others. Anyone can be so loud these days, it distorts reality.
This is the dark side of the internet and social media. Every nutjob can scream something out, and then it can be passed around as The Voice of whatever group you are trying to fight against. One guy saying "Trump is a lizard person!" and suddenly every person not supporting Trump thinks he is a lizard person because one guy said it and it gets repeated as a quasi-strawman.
I was recently talking about this to a friend. Fair or not, the behavior of a candidate's vocal followers reflects on the candidate. It's certainly true of Trump and it's true of Bernie. He does nothing to tamp it down and everyone knows it's an issue. You see mostly positive from Warren, Buttigieg and Yang followers. Bernie followers are almost all negativity, lies and venom. There is zero difference in the far right and far left in terms of behavior.
Exactly, perfectly and precisely this. GCB thinks he’s got a second gunman on the grassy gay knoll, and the longer he stares, the more he’s convinced. I know that his being gay isn’t the only reason GCB likes him (80%?, 85ish%?)...but seeing the rough and tumble nature of a primary as being somehow unique to him is to allow some slanted favorability to show. A gay / lesbo candidate will have a chance to win the WH when it doesn’t matter to anyone that they are gay / lesbian....most particularly, to gays / lesbians, themselves. IMO, JMHO.
No, only Trump is singularly responsible for whatever worst things that any of his supporters do. If you had to wager a blind-assed guess, which candidate do you think would overwhelmingly be the most favored amongst ANTIFA terrorists? Warren? Yang? Biden? Gabbard? Who?
I don't think sexuality will be an issue in the primary. certainly not vocally, but only probably not consciously. And for my two cents, I wouldn't shy away from it in the general even if it is a deal breaker for some. It's just real life. Americans are not only straight, they're also gay. And all the other letters. Because Americans are free to be what they are.
LOL. So cheeky. His being gay is a definite perk for me, but not nearly as high as you prescribe. It's the totality of Pete that earns my support and he's the candidate best aligned to my pragmatic progressivism. I think he's the smartest and most honest (for a politician) of the bunch.
Bernie. Zero doubt. They already teamed up to disrupt a pro-Buttigieg meeting in South Bend just last week.
It’ll affect the primary - but it will go both ways. 53 certainly spoke some truth the other day about social signaling. I’d wager that the straight mayor of South Bend wouldn’t be doing as well as this point as the gay mayor is. However, after that bump from folks who don’t have an issue with it and whose attention you get in part because of it, you then start dealing with the folks who do have issues with it.
I think sexuality will be an issue, but it'll be largely behind the scenes. Most folks are smart enough not to be overtly anti-gay. How big of an issue is the question. I'll also add that Pete's sexual orientation is rarely talked about anymore. Other than him talking about Chasten it rarely comes up in his stump speeches.
