pancakes3 wrote:Pointgod wrote:pancakes3 wrote:i got so riled up i forgot why i signed on.
count me +1 with TGW on this bs:
I don’t see any issue here. People are allowed to give their opinions. What’s the difference between him and Michael Moore saying that Bernie has the best chance to win. I can make a list of a lot of reasons why Bernie would struggle in the general, just like you could make the same list for any of the candidates. At the end of the day people are putting in their best guess on what could happen. No one really knows for sure.
well, a) messina giving an opinion is different than you or me giving an opinion and b) it's perpetuating a narrative that's framed in a way that already concedes false talking points to Trump.
"socialism" is already a murky definition that doesn't need moderate dems help in skewing and preconceived notions of what it entails. yeah Bernie self-identifies as a socialist but he's still part of the dem party, and is leading the way on a lot of dem platforms.
analysis that says:[Trump] can say, ‘I’m a business guy, the economy’s good and this guy’s a socialist.’ I think that contrast for Trump is likely one that he’d be excited about in a way that he wouldn’t be as excited about Biden or potentially Mayor Pete or some of the more Midwestern moderate candidates.”
a) doesn't address what policies are at issue
b) reinforces that socialist policies are by definition bad for the economy
b) Biden, Pete, and Klobuchar are somehow better for the economy than Sanders
c) there's a divide between "socialist" values and "dem" values.
it's coded bias, and i don't like how it's able to have a lot of dems (like you, presumably) nod along. it's flimsy analysis, but easily digestible. m4a is just a natural extension of obamacare. putting checks on the rich is a long time dem position. these are necessary shifts in the overton window to address real problems in American society like a broken health care system and increased wealth disparity. the '50s notion of "capitalism good, communism bad" is an outdated state of mind. it's a method of governing from 70 years ago. America's changed, the world's changed.
maybe it's pragmatic advice behind closed doors in a real politik, brass tacks sort of way (i'd argue that it's still intellectually lazy) but it makes for pretty poor news commentary.
I read the article and it seems like a milqetoast analysis about how Trump would run against Bernie Sanders in the general election. You could do this kind of analysis for every candidate and the timing makes sense since Bernie is in the lead in Iowa and New Hampshire. The majority of Democratic voters would have zero idea who the hell Jim Messina is. This isn’t anyone tipping the scales. If you kept every person who’s worked on a political campaign from commenting on the primary you’d exclude a lot of people.
And let’s be honest most people don’t pay enough attention to politics to understand the difference between Democratic Socialism and Authoritarian Socialism. You and I know the difference but the whole socialism attack works because a lot of people are uninformed and intellectually lazy. Sanders hasn’t really been tested yet and the whole socialism boogie man is an effective foil. I don’t see this election being won on policy. Look at the UK, labor was decimated and this is in a country that Id argue is more favourable to socialist policies.