2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHamburger vs Steak
Most people would rather have a filet mignon but many can only rarely eat it.
So they settle on a hamburger and then have all sorts of points to explain how a hamburger is good for you.
1. It is less chewy
2. It can be seasoned much better
3. It has more nutrients
4. It is tastier because it has various cuts of meat
5. It is easier for left-handed people to eat
6. It has more Vitamin B-12
7. One cannot choke on a hamburger etc. etc.
All the people proclaiming the above attributes would take a filet mignon if offered for free in a heartbeat but as long as the filet remains elusive, they will sing praises of the hamburger.
Let me connect. At the beginning of the primary discussions, no one mentioned Bernie. Elizabeth Warren was all the rage. Multiple signature lines and Avatars promoting Elizabeth Warren. She was and remains the filet.
As Senator Warren declined to run, there was a period when people wondered if they would go hungry without the steak.
Then, on the horizon, appeared the hamburger ... I mean... Senator Sanders and there was a feeding frenzy and all the posts appeared about how the hamburger is so much better. Many a signature line with Senator Warren remain ... evidencing the fact that she is the first choice.
So my dear fellow democrats who are promoting Senator Sanders, deep down inside, you know he is just a fallback choice and shall always remain a hamburger because what you really crave is not available and will never be available this cycle.
While proclaiming honesty, I doubt anyone has the openness to post that Bernie is no where as good as Senator Warren will never be as good as Senator Warren and that is all he is -- a second choice fallback.
randys1
(16,286 posts)for that matter.
I like her, but no, she never was the filet mignon to me.
Wilms
(26,795 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)You and Wilms have it right.
Aspirin is needed after reading this OP.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)Also Bernie is the best candidate.
--imm
I suppose one could go into an amateur psych analysis about hamburger for regular middle class people and fillet for rich elites if one really wanted to point out the possibly subliminal Freudian choices going on in the OP but that would be silly...
and yeah, anybody that appreciates good steak chooses bone-in ribeye, grilled over mesquite especially.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)I would prefer Sanders because he seems less hawkish and more generally progressive. It would be a tough choice, though, because unlike Sanders or Clinton or O'Malley, Warren has real serious expertise on economic issues and that might make her more effective on those kind of issues.
RGinNJ
(1,020 posts)whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)think
(11,641 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Thanks for posting.
RGinNJ
(1,020 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Bologna and mystery meat!
Hydra
(14,459 posts)No phony, re-constituted, pre-formed meat with unknown ingredients for me.
DVRacer
(707 posts)But I think you are absolutely on the right track with that analogy. Why would we want a mushy barely classified meat product when at least we can have a hamburger and a USDA PRIME one at that! I will be glad to eat my hamburger given the alternative is a hotdog or bologna.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)My major reason for supporting Warren as my first choice earlier, is that it would serve to make it that much harder for the media and others to emphasize "identity politics" in a primary battle versus Clinton that we had so much of in the last election and at times we've had in this election too instead of focusing on the issues. Bernie's at least through a strong effort on his part has made a huge effort to direct those talking to him to focus on issues, which is what SHOULD be how we judge the candidates we are voting for.
Both of them are filet mignon, if you are going to use that metaphor, compared to the other candidates. Though that implies they are also a "rich person"'s plate too. I want someone that can provide us a great steak or other very enjoyable and healthy food for that matter that everyone can afford, not just the wealthy that our corrupt country tries to serve more today.
LiberalArkie
(15,713 posts)her to the right. HRC started with certain ideas from associating with her crowd. She is now associating with some different people and her views are being more refined. This is what happens. This is the way it should work.
firebrand80
(2,760 posts)If her reason for not running was that she didn't think she could take down Hillary, then she might be looking at what Bernie is doing despite his disadvantages and thinking she could be pulling at least 40% of Dems right now.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Fearless
(18,421 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Your metaphor is dry, tasteless and way overdone.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)"HES JUST A PLAN B! HE DOESNT REALLY MEAN ANYTHING TO YOOOUUU!!! WHY DONT YOU CHOOSE THE STEAK THAT IS HILLAAARRRRYYYY"
Ahem, I learned about Liz warren after bernie. lol
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Where would we be if we didn't have the cosmic one telling us what to think?
why we'd be lost!!!
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)As for Hillary, she's off the menu.
Mnpaul
(3,655 posts)Having both on the ticket and having to decide between the two. It would make for interesting debates as well.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)in helping to argue why a lower standard of living in the US wouldn't ultimately matter (in the wake the passage of NAFTA or outsourcing US jobs), because "people will switch from steak to hamburger".
Mnpaul
(3,655 posts)I can't believe that people want to continue down this path.
bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)I don't even want to speculate what that makes Hillary. Not fit for human consumption?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)That's a joke from The Simpsons, before anyone starts having a hissy fit.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)TSIAS
(14,689 posts)I'll eat it when I have absolutely no other options.
aikoaiko
(34,169 posts)Not an adequate substitute.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)LOL
merrily
(45,251 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)The Stones answered that best.
merrily
(45,251 posts)I remember the for or her over draft Warren before Sanders stepped up.
The answered that best.
What does that mean?
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)My phone is not an ideal medium.
Before Sanders, the progressives solidified around Warren. She chose not to run, and most of that demographic moved to Sanders.
So I posted my link to the Rolling Stones.
They did not get what they wanted. Sanders appears to fill the progressive need for a revolutionary candidate.
merrily
(45,251 posts)on this thread from Bernie supporters say he was their first choice.
As for me, I didn't think there was a prayer he would run, so, yes, I "coalesced" around Warren in vast preference to anointing Hillary. Still, Sanders was my first choice. See my Reply 33.
Problem with your reply and treestar's is that they ignore what Bernie supporters posted on this thread about the order of their preferences, which is what the OP is about, after all.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Warren versus Sanders is more like "people who want steak discover that steakhouse A isn't open, so they move along to steakhouse B". Maybe steakhouse A is more conveniently located, or has better desserts, but they're still quite happy to be getting a steak at steakhouse B.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)"Yes we all know you are pretending to like Warren. But you really would have preferred that Sanders run."
merrily
(45,251 posts)on DU for the very first time. I hope you're happy.
I hoped Warren would run because I assumed there was not a prayer that Sanders would run. I was ecstatic to be proven wrong.
For me, Sanders is restaurant quality filet mignon, Warren is prime rib, O'Malley is sirloin and I've crossed Hillary off my menu.
Now, I have to go unclog my virtual arteries.
Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)This country needs radical change to correct the radical insanity of the last 3 decades.
I don't believe Hillary even desires radical change.
merrily
(45,251 posts)influences on his life (the other he cited being JFK). Quigley posited that certainty was best for financial markets. Therefore, it was best for financial markets that differences between Presidential administrations be minimal. Ergo, Democrats and Republicans being a lot like each other was good for financial markets.
Since then, our economy has become less dependent on manufacturing and even more dependent on things like investing.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)No shame in making the right choice from the start. Just the opposite!
merrily
(45,251 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)and were anti-Hillary already then jumped on the BS wagon when it came into being.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Bravo! Never let facts get in your way!
Autumn
(45,057 posts)Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)We need Warren right where she's at to help Sanders wrestle control of this country away from the plutocrats.
brooklynite
(94,503 posts)...and was the Hamburger Bun organic?
aidbo
(2,328 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Raine1967
(11,589 posts)She, like Warren and Sanders was always part of the menu.
And where would one put O'Malley on said menu?
Seriously, if we are gonna compare candidates that are and are not running as entrees, where do the others fit in? Are they all cattle?
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)Raine1967
(11,589 posts)I didn't ask the question to get such a trashy answer.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)She's Spam...she'll do if you're starving to death.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)i was hoping bernie would run before he even announced. and that is the truth. he is not "hamburger" to me. and if they were both in the primary i would still vote for bernie as much as i like warren
who is the steak that clinton is the hamburger to? because she is NOT the "steak progressive" for sure
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)So--- you're arguing that those presumably settling for something less than ideal should settle for something they want even less than that, because....
ah.....
hmmmm....
errrrr....
ahhhh....
oh, wait.... you're not trying to make an actual logical point, just poking Sanders supporters because it's fun! derp
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)I prefer salmon anyway.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...for your meal while Wall St executives stuff their faces around you.
merrily
(45,251 posts)And you get to bus tables....as an unpaid intern.
polly7
(20,582 posts)LOVE this thread .........
Good work, cosmicone.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Probably just my imagination (runnin' away with me).
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
SamKnause
(13,091 posts)Most people would rather have a filet mignon ???
I prefer a burger (no bun) made from ground round or ground sirlion. 92% lean/8% fat.
I like a big patty with a baked potato, cottage cheese, applesauce, and fresh tomato.
If I were going to eat steak, filet mignon is the only steak I would eat.
I don't like fat or bone so rib eyes and t-bones are out.
Bernie is not my fallback choice.
Bernie has always been my first choice.
I would be very pleased with Elizabeth as well.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)The second choice over that of a recent republican really shows how he has become idealized and that its ABBC. We have also reached a point where Kucinich isn't carrying the flag for the group in our party who leans more left. When all is said and done I believe Sanders will pull around the same support as Kucinich in the primary. By the time the votes roll around all of the libertarians, isolationists, and Paul supporters will have gone back to the party they always support. You can already see the novelty aspect wearing thin.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)Deep down inside, while I appreciate Warren, I was never pushing her to run.
I simply wanted a non-neo-liberal candidate to support and nominate. I would have been happy with ANY non-neo-liberal...and I said so repeatedly.
Sanders is the one who stepped forward, so he's got my support.
The bottom line? I won't support nor vote for a neo-liberal. Period.
Neo-liberals: dlc, centrist, 3rd way, "new democrat" or whatever other label they want to give themselves, are the soylent green of the Democratic Party.
I'll stick with authentic, home-grown, grass-roots food.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)and they were anti-Obama before that.
Sid
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)Deep thinker eh?
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)I'll try to do better next time.
Sid
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)By describing the situation with Elizabeth Warren, you don't just put Sanders into the "fallback" or "Plan B" position, but Clinton as well. So why should we eat the Clinton hamburger instead of the Sanders or O'Malley hamburger?