Poll: Sanders support among young voters drops 'sharply'
88 replies, posted
I really hope that if Biden wins the Democratic primaries, that there isn’t a repeat of 2016 where Americans decide to just not vote, or even vote for Trump instead (as many threatened to do when Clinton won the primaries). For people who support progressive politics, Biden would be the better candidate over Trump in practically every policy area.
It’s so absurd to see just how emotional (not passionate, just emotional) Americans are with elections.
It's pretty obvious to see why politics here can be an emotional matter. If the last 4 years haven't shown you that, then I'm not sure what else would.
If Bernie does not win I fully believe it will be the death of any progressive movement in America. The DNC fucking hates AOC and Ilhan and barely tolerates Bernie, they would make less progress than he ever did, and Republicans absolutely despite them and have been villifying them with disgusting hit pieces and comics.
Grow a fucking spine and vote an actual progressive leftist and not another corporate shill out of nevertrump spite. As much as a retard Trump is, hes also the perfect scapegoat for Dems to return America to corporatist owned normalcy and not actually pass any progressive legislature.
How liberals can think voting for an actual segregationist corporate owned creep and "climate change centrist" is morally superior boggles my mind.
Lotta establishment repubs didn't like Trump before he made office, but once he got in they changed their tune around. Assuming he's not snubbed, I think a similar thing would happen with Bernie
The difference is Trump is pro-establishment despite whatever he campaigned on. In reality none of his politics conflict with the republican party in any way, they were just afraid of having an outsider not in government running.
Bernie is a radical in America politics. Tax the rich, free healthcare, stop fucking around in wars, let felons vote. No one else is running on that except Warren.
More Obama. Those two words make all the older Dem demographics and non-white demographics love him
Andrew Yang
this is patently false though, high confidence is associated with turnout. Confidence is associated with increased turnout
If you're asking people to make a protest vote if Bernie doesn't win the Democrat nomination, you're asking people to re-elect Trump. Which is the lesser evil? What is your responsibility as a voter? To vote for someone you like who has no chance in hell of winning and by your actions directly contribute to the victory of the greater evil? Or make the choice you don't like to keep the greater evil from keeping power, like any responsible adult?
It's nice to have principles and values, but one also needs to understand the way elections work in your country. If you do not vote for the lesser evil when there's no other choice, you're shirking your responsibility as a citizen and you're part of the problem.
Push for electoral reform if you ever want to be able to see a day where you can actually vote for the candidate you want, and Dems and Republicans don't run a duopoly on power.
People vastly underestimate the damage Trump has done, and could continue to do if reelected.
If Ginsberg is replaced by another conservative supreme court justice, it'd be the death of progressive policy in this country for the next several decades. It wouldn't matter who gets elected after that. I'm not entirely sure it matters now, honestly. We might already be irreversibly fucked.
Vote for whoever you want. Just remember that you'll suffer the consequences of what happens, no matter what your beliefs are. We all will.
Okay, but I was questioning someone else's disillusioned with Bernie.
While, I maybe could respect your narrative for once. But this come out as soundly hypocritical, when you making a nearly sounded irrational rant and scapegoating the mortally meh to bad party's loss to the oblivious worst party. That itself still can't helped no one who that still cynical (including me in my worst times) on this very obliviously broken electoral process in the US.
If you think I'm trying to champion the US electoral system, you've not understood what I'm trying to say. I don't care to make you less cynical - I'm as cynical as they come. I'm simply laying out the hard facts - under the current, broken electoral system in the US, if you choose not to vote or make a protest vote rather than choosing the lesser of two evils, you are directly helping the greater evil win. It's about weighing pros and cons and making an emotionless, calculating decision because it is necessary. Nobody's naive enough to think they can push through electoral reform overnight, after all. The important thing in the meantime is to deal with the looming crisis by limiting the damage as much as possible.
Oh its that's so, when it sounded really more so, like of a politically defeatist and so-called "pragmatic"-style pessimistic than truly cynical to just hypocritically and insanely accepting the problems that most toxic regressive reactionary Western nations like Canada, US, and UK unhealthly are sickly bonded too.
That not helping your point. Dude
A course its not happen overnight if more people are demanding/making voting reform as the major issue. It take a good random time to (semi-)successfully adopt a new voting system, like the Mainers did in 2016.
A strawman is a logical fallacy wherein one person responds to an imaginary argument rather than the one the person they're debating is actually making. In pretending that I am making any argument respecting electoral reform at all, you are guilty of it. I am certainly not in any way saying that the status quo is a good thing, which you seem to be implying. If my pointing out that realistically a pragmatic, calculating vote is necessary rather than being an ideological hardliner with his head up his own ass is 'defeatist', then so be it. I'd rather be 'defeatist' than hand Trump another election like we did in 2016.
Do you see any logical way to make electoral reform a major issue in 2020 and still prevent a Trump victory? If so, then please enlighten us.
No offense, furrybutt, but you remind me of Conscript. Using loaded, ideologically extreme terms to describe things with no substantial support whatsoever to connect them to reality. Calling Canada 'regressive', 'toxic' and even 'ultra-reactionary' in the same breath as the United States makes it very clear how ignorant you are about it. The cultures of the two countries are very far apart and the political landscape is very different. You need to take a step away from the filter of ideology you seem to apply to everyone and everything and look at things more objectively. Which is rich coming from me, I'm sure.
Okay, that I accidentally forgot about they are more (semi-)electable political parties in Canada, both nationally and provincially due of your country's governments design flaw to get a third party to won 1 to 3 seats once of while for each post/pre-election period.
Because of your personality can be translated to writing, will comes off like that?
Well, not entirely to defining these words like defeatism or adult in general, is vague word to used for one's strawmaning and whataboutism, either good or bad via accusing each others, like both us are doing right now.
But, sure you're almost right... but its depends if people had to pushed hard enough and taken very seriously before its too late.
You live in a country that is proof it does.
Care to offer reasoning?
Oh christ. Learn what socialism is before trying to talk about it
Do you keep that list of YouTube citations on hand, or did you take the time to dig them all out?
Is France a third-world country or something now? Last time I checked they were going pretty OK despite the yellow vest movement.
You provided exactly one useful source to back yourself here, and it's from AEI.
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/133737/a378493c-d466-4786-9005-f89a7354ef7b/image.png
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/133737/e387f186-5768-4aea-a8d7-67acf66f28ff/image.png
I just thought you might want to know that they're liars who are entirely owned and protective of their corporate fossil fuel sponsors. And, literally, PragerU is your follow up act?
This is what you're going to use as the source for your arguments about 'this is how socialism doesn't work and I refuse to debate any points, just watch these videos'
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/133737/e77cad56-f1ba-407f-85d0-d645b0ccf320/image.png
This source is meant to 'tell us the truth about socialism'?
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/133737/c69cd4bf-331f-47b8-ae96-6d6786962fd6/image.png
That source who's a columinst and blogger for THIS source?
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/133737/cedb5df7-787f-408e-adb9-3e2e8f53ed06/image.png
PragerU is what you're going to hold up here as 'this is how socialism is wrong and I refuse to hear any arguments otherwise because everything was argued in the videos I linked'? Truly?
I can't help but feel like we're having two different conversations entirely. You keep addressing my tone without addressing the actual content of what I'm trying to say. I'm aware you suffer dyslexia, or something very like it, and as a result it's difficult at times to understand exactly what it is you're saying, but given the way this conversation has been going, it feels like you're having just as much difficulty understanding me. You're missing my entire point by miles. If one makes a protest vote under FPTP in both the US and Canada, one is helping the greater evil win.
The Conservative party will likely win the next Federal election in Canada because Trudeau's made a complete ass of himself and the left wing vote will be split between the Liberals, the NDP and the Greens. But you know what? The Conservatives are much, much worse.
The electoral system in both our countries is fucked. But I wouldn't use words like 'ultra-reactionary' unless you actually know what they mean. Describing an entire country as illiberal when most of the citizenry actually wants electoral reform is stupid. The important thing to remember is that there are actual lives hanging in the balance during major elections, such as the US 2020 federal election. And if you vote like a child because you consider accepting responsibility for your right to vote 'defeatist', people could die. Even you acknowledge Trump is obviously worse.
I may be an asshole, but I'm no hypocrite.
I love your method of getting "Sources".
You google the thing you're being challenged on, and you throw a bunch of links at that person in hopes to dissuade them from looking farther.
Sorry. I looked.
You don't have the faintest fucking clue what you're talking about about anything. I wish I could help you, I really do, but you seem to be pretty set on being a bad actor
What?
The fuck is up with North Americans believing France is some Venezuela-tier shithole lately? I much prefer to live in a place where my relatives can get free treatment and surgery for their myriad of genetic defects, where I could pursue quality higher education for free which I wouldn't have been able to if I lived in a typical neoliberal country, and where I get to enjoy strong worker protection and a comfortable work environment.
Kind of sad to see people who would most likely benefit from similar policies argue against their own interest like this.
France has its problems, definitely. But compared to the United States and how fucked up things are there, it's like a complete utopia. That argument has always been absurd.
Worker ownership of the means of production isn't the public sector, though. If you look at coops nowadays, that's basically what every company would be in a market socialism system. Coops aren't owned by the state, they're privately owned, it's simply a matter of the rules regarding who gets to own and reap the benefits being a lot more strict and involved.
We've never seen that market socialism work for long at any scale above small town levels, though. Eventually the unions just become the Party, and we all know how that story goes in the end. Part of the reason we can't have nice things is because when you've got one sector with an inordinate amount of power, they fail to self-regulate and corruption takes hold. Human beings can't have nice things in large groups because of the Dunbar number. Our brains are physically incapable of seeing a nation's worth of people as real people, and that allows us to justify protecting those closest to us at everyone else's expense. That's why close-knit groups of elites - and even in a market socialism system there would be elites - are so dangerous.
There is no way to maintain checks and balances when the regulatory body is supposed to keep an eye on itself.
I... Don't think that's how it works. I don't know of any communist dictatorship that gained power peacefully through gradual increase in union power through market socialism.
Literally the only difference between market socialism and market capitalism is that in the former all of the employee of a company are its shareholders. I have no idea how you think that'd be more prone to shaping up elite groups which hold concentrated power than market capitalism where most of the wealth ends up in the hands of a select few.
It seems to me you're opposing both sides equally out of principle, rather than based on their actual flaws.
All right, just to make sure we're on the same page, could you clarify a few things for me? You mentioned rules regarding ownership of companies being more strict and involved. What kinds of rules do you think would be necessary?
Well, more to Dysgraphic-like symptom within a bigger neurological disorder I still suffered from since I mostly self-taught to read, for the last three times I keep asking in this forum site.
The Liberals AREN'T still a left-wing party as few Canadians I meet outside of this site says, but its obliviously more closer to Centrism, so can said the Greens (since they believe their ecological focus version of Liberalism) are "taking" their votes, because they screw themselves due a scandal that your country can't forget for the next few years.
Well, keep shaming people like this way. Then fucken still won't help no one who that both truly cynical and rebellious but acting like you can't learn nothing to get your side, with this retarded attitude.
Well you agree sorta, but it still can't people personality like a bad political-attempt missionary by doing the same increasingly [out]dated message to 'reason' people like me.
I will very agree like this one if they make this a important minor issue for this moment, unlike the previous sentences you write.
Is it not the least bit ironic to you that you're implying that my being mean to people who want to make a protest vote and calling them children is going to make it impossible to get my point across to them? If anything, they'd be proving my point. If hurt feelings are enough to cause people to ignore their responsibility as voting citizens and make choices that may doom their country, then they really are children.
There's too much at stake to be coddling them and America at large has a lot of growing up to do if it's to save itself from disaster.
You're still making straw man arguments, pretending I'm concern trolling while secretly trying to preserve the broken status quo, and criticizing my tone without offering any actual counterpoints of substance to my central argument.
I'm terribly sorry to have hurt your feelings, but the facts are the facts. The way the electoral system works doesn't change just because I'm not framing my message in a way that doesn't offend your delicate sensibilities.
As for Canada, even in my example you're missing the central point of my argument. Granted, voting in Canada is more complicated than in the States. Even if it's been decades since we last had an NDP Prime Minister, the party usually does well enough that Canada could be considered a three-party system.
Support for the greens has always been so low as to be virtually irrelevant under FPTP.
Jack Layton was one of the best leaders the NDP ever had, and under his leadership they actually came close to putting an early end to Stephen Harper's government in 2008, but fell short due to the vote being split between them and the Liberals.
Unless the NDP can produce leadership as good as Jack Layton in the next election, they're not getting very far. The liberals might be the only responsible choice based on poll numbers, because it's far more important to prevent a conservative victory, and splitting the vote is often the only reason Conservatives ever get elected in Canada. It's important that the citizenry of both the US and Canada continue to push for electoral reform to keep it on the radar of politicians, but when a federal election is at stake, especially with stakes as high as this one, anyone who makes a protest vote knowing the consequences is childish and irresponsible. I'm sticking to my guns on that one.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.