Current Events > What if Hilary ran again but with Bernie as her VP. Can they beat Trump in 2020?

(+) Yeah! (+)

i preferred Sanders over Clinton and a rebel vote is an acceptable protest for a convention that disenfranchises its voters and actively works unbiased such as scheduling debates during game of thrones and sunday night football

People who voted for Bernie and then for Trump didnt really care about eithers policy

I support Bernies socialist policies
What he lost?
Okay Ill vote for Trump who is the total opposite, burn it all down!

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

actively works unbiased such as scheduling debates during game of thrones and sunday night football

Youre just being ridiculous
---

If Democrats actually run Hillary again, that would be astounding.
---

What about superdelegates saying they were gonna put their points towards hillary regardless of how the vote turns out before primaries? That suggests they were bought or tainted. That shows the colors of the DNC. There is a reason Debbie got fired and ended up on the Hillary campaign after the primaries.

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

i preferred Sanders over Clinton and a rebel vote is an acceptable protest for a convention that disenfranchises its voters and actively works unbiased such as scheduling debates during game of thrones and sunday night football

Sure, if you prioritize your protest over the likely, and deeply harmful, policy decisions of your opponents.

But if you rely on something like the ACA or some of your family is undocumented and looking for clear path to citizenship to prevent future deportation, you don't really have the luxury of that protest vote do you. And even if those policies didn't immediately effect you, I'll bet you personally know someone(s) who it would.

So, it's great that some people chose 'perfectly acceptable protest,' but contrasted with the impacts of letting the GOP dismantle the ACA, pass a ridiculous tax bill, steal at least one if not two (or even three) supreme court seats, and increase restrictions on immigration hitting both refugees and asylum seekers, those prioritizes seem more than a little divorced from material reality.

And two years in, I'm hoping that we've learned well enough to avoid repeating 2016's catastrophe.
---

I despise Trump, but Ill absolutely vote for him again if either or both are in the democrat ticket.

If the democrats want my vote, they need to distance themselves from the far-left.

Any candidate that refers to themselves as progressive or caters to the dregs of the left will never get my vote.
---

0TiamaT0 posted...

I despise Trump, but Ill absolutely vote for him again if either or both are in the democrat ticket.

If the democrats want my vote, they need to distance themselves from the far-left.

Any candidate that refers to themselves as progressive or caters to the dregs of the left will never get my vote.

Hmm. I've never heard on a mainstream political party in America referred to as far left. What specific far left politics and policies are you referring to here?
---

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

What about superdelegates saying they were gonna put their points towards hillary regardless of how the vote turns out before primaries? That suggests they were bought or tainted. That shows the colors of the DNC. There is a reason Debbie got fired and ended up on the Hillary campaign after the primaries.

1. Superdelegates have the right to vote for whoever they want. The Democratic Party gives them that privilege in exchange for all the work they do to support the party.

2. Hillary had been their favorite pick to succeed Obama ever since he got elected. And even without their votes she still won and surpassed the nomination. You people act as though nobody actually voted for her, as if all those millions of people didnt actually support her.
---

TheMikh posted...

bernie sold out

Literally lol'd at this.
---

iPhone_7 posted...

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

What about superdelegates saying they were gonna put their points towards hillary regardless of how the vote turns out before primaries? That suggests they were bought or tainted. That shows the colors of the DNC. There is a reason Debbie got fired and ended up on the Hillary campaign after the primaries.

1. Superdelegates have the right to vote for whoever they want. The Democratic Party gives them that privilege in exchange for all the work they do to support the party.

2. Hillary had been their favorite pick to succeed Obama ever since he got elected. And even without their votes she still won and surpassed the nomination. You people act as though nobody actually voted for her, as if all those millions of people didnt actually support her.

Exactly. So why should i work with a party that actively disenfranchises voters? When superdelegates say they are gonna go hillary even if we go Sanders then its clear they arent caring about peoples interests.

hollow_shrine posted...

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

i preferred Sanders over Clinton and a rebel vote is an acceptable protest for a convention that disenfranchises its voters and actively works unbiased such as scheduling debates during game of thrones and sunday night football

Sure, if you prioritize your protest over the likely, and deeply harmful, policy decisions of your opponents.

But if you rely on something like the ACA or some of your family is undocumented and looking for clear path to citizenship to prevent future deportation, you don't really have the luxury of that protest vote do you. And even if those policies didn't immediately effect you, I'll bet you personally know someone(s) who it would.

So, it's great that some people chose 'perfectly acceptable protest,' but contrasted with the impacts of letting the GOP dismantle the ACA, pass a ridiculous tax bill, steal at least one if not two (or even three) supreme court seats, and increase restrictions on immigration hitting both refugees and asylum seekers, those prioritizes seem more than a little divorced from material reality.

And two years in, I'm hoping that we've learned well enough to avoid repeating 2016's catastrophe.

We've already covered that all that is subjective. The justices, refugee issue, aca issue, etc is the definition of subjective.

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

We've already covered that all that is subjective. The justices, refugee issue, aca issue, etc is the definition of subjective.

It is. But we've also, during the course of this discussion, chosen to analyze all of it from the perspective a Bernie Sanders supporter voting in 2016 faced with a Clinton-Trump ballot. That perspective removes a lot of that subjectivity. There are certain priorities we would expect that voter to have, because Sanders himself had them. And indeed it was that very appearance of conviction that lead them to become a Sanders supporter in the first place.

We don't have to shrug our shoulders at the subjective vagueness of that voter. If that person is honest in their support of Sanders's political positions, we know that they would categorically reject Trump on principle.
---

Yeah but whats more important? To some people, sending that message is better in the long run if the dnc learns its lesson

Most of Sanders' support was people wanting to make him a meme. It's really not a surprise these sorts of people shifted to Trump. They don't give a fuck about policy.
---

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

iPhone_7 posted...

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

What about superdelegates saying they were gonna put their points towards hillary regardless of how the vote turns out before primaries? That suggests they were bought or tainted. That shows the colors of the DNC. There is a reason Debbie got fired and ended up on the Hillary campaign after the primaries.

1. Superdelegates have the right to vote for whoever they want. The Democratic Party gives them that privilege in exchange for all the work they do to support the party.

2. Hillary had been their favorite pick to succeed Obama ever since he got elected. And even without their votes she still won and surpassed the nomination. You people act as though nobody actually voted for her, as if all those millions of people didnt actually support her.

Exactly. So why should i work with a party that actively disenfranchises voters? When superdelegates say they are gonna go hillary even if we go Sanders then its clear they arent caring about peoples interests.

The superdelegates are individuals who are free to talk their minds. You act as if each and every one of them stated they would vote against the partys choice.
---

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

Yeah but whats more important? To some people, sending that message is better in the long run if the dnc learns its lesson

That's their opinion, apparently. But they only hold it because their priorities are FUBAR and have no basis in reality.
---

hollow_shrine posted...

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

Yeah but whats more important? To some people, sending that message is better in the long run if the dnc learns its lesson

That's their opinion, apparently. But they only hold it because their priorities are FUBAR and have no basis in reality.

Fubar?

iPhone_7 posted...

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

iPhone_7 posted...

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

What about superdelegates saying they were gonna put their points towards hillary regardless of how the vote turns out before primaries? That suggests they were bought or tainted. That shows the colors of the DNC. There is a reason Debbie got fired and ended up on the Hillary campaign after the primaries.

1. Superdelegates have the right to vote for whoever they want. The Democratic Party gives them that privilege in exchange for all the work they do to support the party.

2. Hillary had been their favorite pick to succeed Obama ever since he got elected. And even without their votes she still won and surpassed the nomination. You people act as though nobody actually voted for her, as if all those millions of people didnt actually support her.

Exactly. So why should i work with a party that actively disenfranchises voters? When superdelegates say they are gonna go hillary even if we go Sanders then its clear they arent caring about peoples interests.

The superdelegates are individuals who are free to talk their minds. You act as if each and every one of them stated they would vote against the partys choice.

They are but then the left cant complain when the dnc is disenfranchising its voters especially when complaining about the EC

But those superdelegates voted with the people they represented. Where is the disenfranchisement? Hillary did actually win the majority of votes during the democratic primary.
---

hollow_shrine posted...

But those superdelegates voted with the people they represented. Where is the disenfranchisement? Hillary did actually win the majority of votes during the democratic primary.

The disenfranchising comes from the superdelegates saying they were gonna go hillary no matter how the primaries went before the primaries. On top of that, we have the emails from wikileaks showing the DNC actively working against Sanders. On top of that, we have Debbie getting fired only to end up on the Clinton campaign team. Its very clear a lot of shady things happened.

There was a reason Hillary got heavily booed at her own event when the dnc was to declare her the nomination.

Godnorgosh posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

To this day, I still don't understand Sanders voters who couldn't do the same, because their actions suggest they found the prospect of a President Trump less objectionable than a President Clinton.

If that were the case, wouldn't they have just voted Trump? I'm always puzzled by the liberal tendency to draw an equivalence between not voting and voting for the candidate you oppose.

You're right. That phrasing is unclear. They didn't care enough about Clinton presidency to vote for it, but didn't care enough about the possibility of a Trump presidency to vote against it either.
---

You know, when you think about it, Sanders offered A LOT that neither Clinton or Trump offer. I mean, if you cant get what you want, why vote towards two people you are indifferent too?

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

But those superdelegates voted with the people they represented. Where is the disenfranchisement? Hillary did actually win the majority of votes during the democratic primary.

The disenfranchising comes from the superdelegates saying they were gonna go hillary no matter how the primaries went before the primaries. On top of that, we have the emails from wikileaks showing the DNC actively working against Sanders. On top of that, we have Debbie getting fired only to end up on the Clinton campaign team. Its very clear a lot of shady things happened.

There was a reason Hillary got heavily booed at her own event when the dnc was to declare her the nomination.

She still got more votes so it doesn't at all matter what a bunch of superdelegates might have done, in fact after she lost due to electoral votes everyone was all gungho about the idea of faithless electors magically saving the day.
---

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

You know, when you think about it, Sanders offered A LOT that neither Clinton or Trump offer. I mean, if you cant get what you want, why vote towards two people you are indifferent to?

I would ask how could you be 'indifferent' to Trump's proposed policies. Because it sounds like you were simply unaware of what was actually at stake.
---

hollow_shrine posted...

SSJosHBK_Blue posted...

You know, when you think about it, Sanders offered A LOT that neither Clinton or Trump offer. I mean, if you cant get what you want, why vote towards two people you are indifferent to?

I would ask how could you be 'indifferent' to Trump's proposed policies. Because it sounds like you were simply unaware of what was actually at stake.

Im just speaking in the general sense. Im glad you have passion for politics but the average person doesnt care. So whether or not Trump or Hillary won at that point, nobody cared. Look at the politics board for instance and all they say is this russian stuff is gonna hurt him but the average person doesnt care about this russian stuff. The DNC needs to find a new message and certainly need a charasmatic person.

I guess what im saying is, and you are free to disagree, but if you just pick ten random people off the street, they arent just indifferent to trumps policies but indifferent to politics in general. At least Sanders, unlike Clinton, fired up the base(granted election year is when people pretend to care about politics so who knows if he could have kept that fire)

You think people didn't vote on policy? You don't actually know any/remember of the 2016 policy positions for the Dems or the GOP, do you?
---

hollow_shrine posted...

You think people didn't vote on policy? You don't actually know any/remember of the 2016 policy positions for the Dems or the GOP, do you?

Do you think the majority of people voted on policy? I feel like you are giving Americans too much credit. We may know sports and movies and stuff but politics is not something Americans typically know. You know its true

the dnc wouldn't be dumb enough to fund a two-time loser.

probably.
---

Well there isn't much point to voting if you can't give a shit about basic policies.
---

Tropicalwood posted...

Well there isn't much point to voting if you can't give a shit about basic policies.

People do it because people like being a part of somethinng bigger than themselves really.

Ehhh, there isn't much arguing with the idea of some voters feeling that way about politics, but most of the country doesn't even vote (~45%.) Most of the voters, honestly, they probably just vote for some basic concepts that each parties hold instead of the actual candidates (look at primaries and compare them to the general.)

Actually, come to think of it there are cases of write in candidates winning their election (Lisa from Alaska, and that guy that lived to be 100 in the senate) so there could be some voters that know who they voted for.
---

I'm a little irritated. At any point here, a basic Google search could have saved a lot headache, and it didn't happen because half of this conversation was essentially being held in bad faith. We've also completely and uncritically adopted this politics as sports team metaphor and elevated it to replace actual policy discussion. Not great.

Do we at least know what the likely Democratic platforms are for the Congressional races this fall?
---