HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Bernin4U » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next »

Bernin4U

Profile Information

Member since: Fri Oct 16, 2015, 04:58 PM
Number of posts: 812

Journal Archives

DWS/DNC = Oedipus ?

(Cue the "popcorn" smiley.)

Sign Bernie's Refugee Petition

<snip>
Sign the Petition

Say You Support Continuing the Refugee Program that Promises to Resettle Syrian Refugees

In terms of the Syrian refugee situation we are now facing, now is not the time for us to succumb to racism and bigotry. In this moment, it is particularly important that we not allow ourselves to be divided by the anti-immigrant hysteria that Republican presidential candidates are ginning up.

When hundreds of thousands of people have lost everything and have nothing left but the shirts on their backs, we should not turn our backs on these refugees escaping violence in the Middle East. Of course we have to investigate the backgrounds of people coming into the country -- and we will -- but to suggest that we would even turn away orphans is incredible.

Support continuing the refugee program that promises to resettle 10,000 Syrians, mostly women and children, who are escaping violence in their home country.

https://go.berniesanders.com/page/s/support-refugees

</snip>

This can and should be a huge win for us. Anyone who listens to actual journalism has already heard many times how this would be a far more difficult and unlikely way for a terrorist to successfully infiltrate us than simply going thru standard immigration. The rest is just fear mongering. We owe it to these people to become vocal supporters!

Funny thing about trajectories

They're rarely linear.

Anything in popular culture can exist under the radar for years, then suddenly explode. Especially in the internet age. Things can go viral in the blink of an eye. It's perhaps more likely for public awareness and acceptance to grow exponentially than linearly.

A huge amount of HRC's support is -because- she appears to have a lot of support. But what happens if that support is shown to start slipping?

Those who jumped on her bandwagon -because- it's a big bandwagon (the "she can win" mentality) can just as easily jump right off it if they see it to be shrinking. The difference in support could change 20 points, literally in a matter of days.

Of course it's the media's job to run interference, to make sure this doesn't happen...

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
-Mark Twain

Everything is Awesome

The fact that the old guard is 100% all-in for HRC only makes them too obvious.

All it's going to do is fire up the rest of us all that much more.

Gonna be somethin to see.

Support a Real Democrat

Who else is getting a little tired of:

1. "The people want Hillary, just look at the polls."

Right, just as the people wanted the war in Iraq, because 90+% of Americans supported it, according to some polls. Might makes right?

2. "Going against Hillary is going against the party."

Just as not supporting the Iraq war was standing against America.

3. "This time it's critical. We can't survive another repub in the WH."

Just as we no longer needed to play by the rules (Constitution), because 9/11 "changed everything".

4. "Bernie supporters should stop 'attacking' Hillary."

Just as "the center" is exactly midway between Fox News and the rest of the (liberal) MSM.

5. "Bernie is sexist / racist / just another politician, who actually does care about those emails."

Just as certain radio hosts have made megabuck careers by creating hysterics in telling half-truths.

Edit:
I need Third Way telling me how to be a Democrat like I need PNAC telling me how to be an American.

Right and wrong approaches to winning

(This is from another tread, but I think worth starting a new one. To point out how the HRC/DWS strategy is not a winning one. If it's seen as a redundancy, pls delete with my apologies.)

While arguments can be made for which of them, Bernie or Hillary, is stronger against the repubs, the real problem is laying out the assumption that any candidate is, even before making any argument.

The repubs outright suck. Both Bernie and Hillary are strong enough candidates to win.

Yet we have the ABSOLUTE LOSER, DWS, continuing her campaign for HRC, this time from the inside.

And they're taking the ch!ckensh!t approach of, we better rig the game, and not take any chances. Hey, let's make the primaries little more than an exhibition match, so we can put all our energy into the general.

The Clinton campaign imploded in 08, and DWS is doing it again.

Trying to put the fix in, with the idea to help your side easily coast into the finals, is the worst thing you could do. It shows that you're a coward. That you don't believe in your candidate enough to win in a fair fight.

It creates two huge issues (as a big NHL fan, so please accept the analogy).

1. Trying to get to the Finals while avoiding the fight along the way is a losing strategy.

You only get to the Stanley Cup Finals by building upon every game you played before. In NHL, the Finals are sometimes called "a season within a season". Detractors will chide it for being way too long, which (relative to all other pro sports) is a reasonable complaint. Fans love it, because it's an epic war, requiring you to win 16 huge battles.

Now, if you were somehow able to circumvent all of the season, all of the playoffs, and go straight from exhibitions to the finals, how do you think your team would do? You'd be creamed, right? You'd have no prayer.

Going to battle and winning in a good, honest fight is what makes you stronger. If you don't win, then so be it. The other team has proven themselves. Trying to avoid the fight, so that you may "live to see another day" may keep you alive, but it only makes you weaker. If you want to compete in the finals, you do that by battling and winning, at least as much as your opponent did.


2. A clean win to a hard, fair fight is how you get your opponents' support. Anything less only serves to alienate them.

It's all about the small battles. A smart team never looks further than their next game. Put up a good, honest fight, and both sides will respect and support you.

If you want your opponent's respect, you don't do it by beating them with a win at any cost approach. You do it by playing tough but fair. If you put up an epic battle to win a series, the fans of both sides will hugely appreciate it. And have tons of respect for both teams. Even if it's not your team that wins, you'll have way more appreciation for the other team. Whereas if you feel they won by playing dirty, you'll hate them and hope they get destroyed.

Bernie is trying to run like a Stanley Cup Champion team. Hillary is trying to run as an NHL All-Star team. NHL fans certainly know what I'm talking about.

"Vote for me, or the party can't win!"

Isn't it kind of unprecedented, for any party to take this approach?

Isn't it then unreasonable to have a problem with those who have a problem with it?

Why Warren?

Yes, this probably belongs more in the GD-P, but it's become(?) such a Nigel ("Mine goes to 11" Tufnel circle jerk, that I'll be keeping my distance for now.

Anyway, while I could see her as a great First Female US President, I have to wonder why so much enthusiasm for the idea of "Warren 2016"?

Why her, but not Bernie?

Starting to feel a little sorry

for our friends here.

They can't find much to go after Bernie, that isn't related to gender or popularity. So now they're having to invent scandals (which I like to think my schoolage kids would be sophisticated enough to see through)?

So unfortunate that the irony is no doubt lost.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next »