Biden clenches the nomination.

[Worgen]

I think you may not get how it works. There's nothing stating there has to be X amount of people on it. There's history of increasing or reducing their members. Either way, you can't blackmail us with this threat. You are the ones who'd rather (literally, through global warming) burn the world down rather than not get exactly what you want.


Also, and this is almost equally important, a judge suggested by Biden is not all that different to a republican one in my eyes. The guy Obama was about to put on there that they prevented him from cause it was his last year (another new thing nobody did before but which was apparently doable) was definitely not my idea of a liberal judge.

I am well aware of the court packing meme. There actually is something stating it has to be x amount of people, the Judiciary Act of 1869 that stipulates the number of Supreme Court Justices as 9 and as the 1869 implies, that was the last time we had something that set that number. Technically you could alter the number like FDR attempted to do, but you need control of congress to have any hope of doing it and its still unlikely to work out. I mean if it was likely to pass and allow more supreme court justices, then why hadn't the republicans done it already?

The guy's name was Merrick Garland and he wasn't a nobody anymore then pretty much anyone nominated to the supreme court, he was actually well known enough to be considered for both of Obama's earlier appointments. He was a moderate centrist and there is a good reason for that. Because republicans controlled the senate. So of course he chose a moderate, he had to pick someone that they would approve of but he wasn't going to pick someone right wing. Then the turtle decided that they wouldn't even consider the nominee which was really unprecedented and so we were down 1 supreme court justice till after the election and we got Neil Gorsuch.

 

[Worgen]

See, that just doesn't make sense to me. If you're presented with two parties who represent everything you disagree with, why pick one of them?

Because I stand against one that I know is pretty much opposite to most of what I believe in and the other party agrees with me on enough things that I would much rather see them in charge. Sure I could try and go for a third party but unless it can prove it has the numbers needed to win, its just going to make it more likely that the party I really don't want to see win, win.

 

[Saelune]

Really? Why? He hasn't even departed that much from previously established policy.

Yeah, he's in the fascist direction. But we were already heading that way.

Just go back and read my arguments with crimson5pheonix, cause I am sure most of it will apply to you as well. You're an even bigger 'Bernie or bust' supporter than they are. So unless you have changed your opinion on that, I don't really feel like repeating these arguments.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

snip

You're right, Biden won't micromanage congress. Instead he's a regressive conservative who plans on doing whatever Pelosi and Schumer say, who are regressive conservatives.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I won't vote against my own interests, and the seats will flip faster without Republican (D)s in them.

*alleged rapist. Innocent until proven guilty still applies to those you disagree with politically. And that goes for Trump, too. After the Carl Beech affair in the UK (Google it if you are unfamiliar), it is wise to take any lone allegations against political figures with a grain of salt.

Seven iirc, though admittedly only one that involves rape. But one that's getting more and more traction.

Excuse me, but I'm trying to understand your point because... well, it's confusing to me.

Why should anyone reconsider their political beliefs if they don't see victory? How many people questioned if they should be Republicans during the reign of Obama? Clinton? Your beliefs will be your beliefs no matter losses or victories.

Because of the vote blue no matter who vision. If you were voting on a principal, of course you just vote on your principal come hell or high water.

But the philosophy of vote blue no matter who is to ignore any policies or crimes of whoever you're voting for and just vote on team color. The entire point of it is to shut your brain off and pack congress with your team. So if the principal you're voting behind is 'winning no matter what', and you don't win, you should evaluate your strategy.

It would be like if someone I voted for turned out to be a rat, I'd have to reevaluate my strategy.

Because I stand against one that I know is pretty much opposite to most of what I believe in and the other party agrees with me on enough things that I would much rather see them in charge. Sure I could try and go for a third party but unless it can prove it has the numbers needed to win, its just going to make it more likely that the party I really don't want to see win, win.

But they don't though. It's kinda buried now in arguments, but I had a post with dozens of links of just the Obama administration expanding Bush policies and killing innocents with wild abandon. Cutting Medicaid and other safety nets. Starting wars. Etc.

 

[Saelune]

You're right, Biden won't micromanage congress. Instead he's a regressive conservative who plans on doing whatever Pelosi and Schumer say, who are regressive conservatives.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I won't vote against my own interests, and the seats will flip faster without Republican (D)s in them.

So your interests are letting Republicans (R) have them instead?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

So your interests are letting Republicans (R) have them instead?

My interest is in electing progressives, so there's actually at the bare minimum, a resistance to Republicans.

 

[Saelune]

My interest is in electing progressives, so there's actually at the bare minimum, a resistance to Republicans.

But you oppose the only people actually doing anything to resist Republicans.

 

[Worgen]

But they don't though. It's kinda buried now in arguments, but I had a post with dozens of links of just the Obama administration expanding Bush policies and killing innocents with wild abandon. Cutting Medicaid and other safety nets. Starting wars. Etc.

Obama at least tried to mitigate deaths, trump jacked everything up. Also, what new wars did Obama start? He did the nuclear deal with Iran and we were well on the way to having good relations with them before trump wiped his ass with it. The cutting medicare link you send only said that a few democratic senators joined with republicans, it also looked like an independent voted for it also, so does that mean that Bernie Sanders supported it?

Not to mention you ignoring him helping make gay marriage legal, establishing Daca and ending don't ask don't tell.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

But you oppose the only people actually doing anything to resist Republicans.

No I'm not.

Obama at least tried to mitigate deaths, trump jacked everything up. Also, what new wars did Obama start? He did the nuclear deal with Iran and we were well on the way to having good relations with them before trump wiped his ass with it. The cutting medicare link you send only said that a few democratic senators joined with republicans, it also looked like an independent voted for it also, so does that mean that Bernie Sanders supported it?

Not to mention you ignoring him helping make gay marriage legal, establishing Daca and ending don't ask don't tell.

No he didn't, that's the problem. Obama escalated from the Bush years, his drone strikes for example killed innocents 90% of the time by some measures. As for the wars:

The Obama Administration: From Ending Two Wars to Engagement in Five – with the Risk of a Sixth

www.csis.org

Gay marriage I've said before is the one unqualified good thing under his rule. I suppose Don't Ask Don't Tell is good (especially since Clinton put it in in the first place), but praising daca has to come with the context of just how shitty he treated immigrants.

The Obama administration is using racist court rulings to deny citizenship to 55,000 people

Five American Samoans want the Supreme Court to grant them birthright citizenship.

www.motherjones.com

Why Is the Obama Administration Keeping Toddlers Behind Bars?

Twenty-two women stuck in a legal limbo with their children are on a hunger strike in Pennsylvania.

www.thenation.com

And while we're on the subject of vote blue no matter who and immigration:

 

[Saelune]

No I'm not.



No he didn't, that's the problem. Obama escalated from the Bush years, his drone strikes for example killed innocents 90% of the time by some measures. As for the wars:

The Obama Administration: From Ending Two Wars to Engagement in Five – with the Risk of a Sixth

www.csis.org

Gay marriage I've said before is the one unqualified good thing under his rule. I suppose Don't Ask Don't Tell is good (especially since Clinton put it in in the first place), but praising daca has to come with the context of just how shitty he treated immigrants.

The Obama administration is using racist court rulings to deny citizenship to 55,000 people

Five American Samoans want the Supreme Court to grant them birthright citizenship.

www.motherjones.com

Why Is the Obama Administration Keeping Toddlers Behind Bars?

Twenty-two women stuck in a legal limbo with their children are on a hunger strike in Pennsylvania.

www.thenation.com

And while we're on the subject of vote blue no matter who and immigration:

This entire topic has been you opposing Democrats.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

This entire topic has been you opposing Democrats.

Opposing DNC Democrats, who are people like Joe Manchin up there who are actually Republicans. If you notice, vote blue no matter who doesn't actually work. We tried that before.

 

[Saelune]

Opposing DNC Democrats, who are people like Joe Manchin up there who are actually Republicans. If you notice, vote blue no matter who doesn't actually work. We tried that before.

Joe Manchin is not running for President. Nor would he, because he is a Trump supporter. Yes, Joe Manchin claims to oppose Trump, but seems to do everything he can to support him by letting him do what he wants. I do not like people who want Trump to stay in power.

Bernie is also a Democrat, and you oppose him too. He says we should vote for Biden.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Joe Manchin is not running for President. Nor would he, because he is a Trump supporter. Yes, Joe Manchin claims to oppose Trump, but seems to do everything he can to support him by letting him do what he wants. I do not like people who want Trump to stay in power.

Bernie is also a Democrat, and you oppose him too. He says we should vote for Biden.

And yet you don't think about who you're supporting, even if it's someone who would continue Trump's policies by and large. If they have a D next to their name, it all becomes ok, just part of the political business or whatever.

Blind obedience to your 'betters' isn't support. I support Sanders' ideas, I don't support him having to support a rapist because of politics. I'm not bound to those politics. I can see how toxic Biden is and at the bare minimum, don't want to see him on the ticket the next election cycle.

 

[Saelune]

And yet you don't think about who you're supporting, even if it's someone who would continue Trump's policies by and large. If they have a D next to their name, it all becomes ok, just part of the political business or whatever.

Blind obedience to your 'betters' isn't support. I support Sanders' ideas, I don't support him having to support a rapist because of politics. I'm not bound to those politics. I can see how toxic Biden is and at the bare minimum, don't want to see him on the ticket the next election cycle.

I am not blindly supporting, you are blindly opposing. You operate on faulty logic. It is not someone who will continue Trump's policies. But you don't care.

You are not a Bernie supporter. You have learned nothing from his legacy, his history, his dedication to working with Democrats to push them left, even if it takes literally his whole life. Bernie's only true failure is his ability to control his cult. I don't excuse Trump on that, and I won't excuse Bernie on it either.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

I am not blindly supporting, you are blindly opposing. You operate on faulty logic. It is not someone who will continue Trump's policies. But you don't care.

Historically, this has happened before, I've provided evidence of exactly this happening.

You are not a Bernie supporter. You have learned nothing from his legacy, his history, his dedication to working with Democrats to push them left, even if it takes literally his whole life. Bernie's only true failure is his ability to control his cult. I don't excuse Trump on that, and I won't excuse Bernie on it either.

See, when you say cult it takes away a lot of credibility. If Bernie supporters were a cult, they'd just listen to him whatever he says. Bernie's lesson has always been to think for yourself and vote in your own interest. It's not Bernie supporters who are a cult here.

 

[Saelune]

Historically, this has happened before, I've provided evidence of exactly this happening.



See, when you say cult it takes away a lot of credibility. If Bernie supporters were a cult, they'd just listen to him whatever he says. Bernie's lesson has always been to think for yourself and vote in your own interest. It's not Bernie supporters who are a cult here.

In the alternate reality where Bernie is President, the US is till drone striking foreigners.

You do not include yourself among his supporters I see.

Bernie's lesson was to move left, primarily by working from within the Democrats rather than against. Leaving Trump in power does the opposite. As I said before, the move from Hillary to Biden is proof that letting Trump be in power only moves us further right, not left. The power you claim to have is actually among the half the country too moderate to vote, not too progressive to vote.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

In the alternate reality where Bernie is President, the US is till drone striking foreigners.

That's your opinion. I just know that Biden is to the right of Obama, who was the absolutely worse about drone striking than Bush.

Bernie's lesson was to move left, primarily by working from within the Democrats rather than against. Leaving Trump in power does the opposite. As I said before, the move from Hillary to Biden is proof that letting Trump be in power only moves us further right, not left. The power you claim to have is actually among the half the country too moderate to vote, not too progressive to vote.

The only ones to blame for going with Biden after Hillary is the DNC. The people of the country haven't moved right, the DNC has because they are too stupid to breathe. And they're trying to trick you into not thinking about their candidate.

 

[Sneed's SeednFeed]

Education can be bad if you're teaching lies.
Activism can be bad if you're advocating for deadly policies.
Labor can be bad if your work tears things down.

You're doing the first two in this thread.

Please tell me what lies I'm teaching and what deadly policies I have advocated. Cause so far you're the only one accusing me of lying and advocating for murder in this thread.

And last I checked, literally every religious figure, every revolutionary, pretty much every heroic figure in history and movement 'tore things down' in your words. It goes as far back as the tale of Moses, and right up to Hong Kong nativists tearing down Chinese rule (to use a normative example).

 

[Saelune]

That's your opinion. I just know that Biden is to the right of Obama, who was the absolutely worse about drone striking than Bush.



The only ones to blame for going with Biden after Hillary is the DNC. The people of the country haven't moved right, the DNC has because they are too stupid to breathe. And they're trying to trick you into not thinking about their candidate.

Obama was 'worse about drone strikes' because he wanted to reduce casualties to US soldiers while dealing with the conflicts Bush and Republican dragged us into. Every 'Republican' thing Obama did was about mitigating the damage Republicans were doing. Same for all the immigrants he deported. That was Obama reducing the bad effects in the hopes of moving left at all. Because when we try to move left in big strides, Republicans do everything they can to sink that ship.

Until Republicans are removed from power, we are restrained. The goal of supporting Democrats is to phase out Republicans, and then when we do that, we can work on phasing out right-wing Democrats with left-wing ones.

Fixing problems is a process. But if you do not help that process, then you are just being a hinderance to it and thus slowing down or even stopping the goals you claim to want to achieve. Reality is not perfect, it sucks, but if we want things to be better at all, we need to be realistic.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Obama was 'worse about drone strikes' because he wanted to reduce casualties to US soldiers while dealing with the conflicts Bush and Republican dragged us into. Every 'Republican' thing Obama did was about mitigating the damage Republicans were doing. Same for all the immigrants he deported. That was Obama reducing the bad effects in the hopes of moving left at all. Because when we try to move left in big strides, Republicans do everything they can to sink that ship.

Utter nonsense. Obama got us into 5 wars on his own, his drone strikes killed innocents 90% of the time and that's on him, Bush never bombed an MSF hospital to my knowledge, and Obama cranked up the anti-immigration policies over Bush, including the expansion of putting children in cages. Obama didn't move left, he moved right.

Until Republicans are removed from power, we are restrained. The goal of supporting Democrats is to phase out Republicans, and then when we do that, we can work on phasing out right-wing Democrats with left-wing ones.

Already tried, already failed.

Fixing problems is a process. But if you do not help that process, then you are just being a hinderance to it and thus slowing down or even stopping the goals you claim to want to achieve. Reality is not perfect, it sucks, but if we want things to be better at all, we need to be realistic.

"We need to be realistic" is the rallying cry of the moderate. I think there's a great quote about this somewhere.