Joe Biden defense thread

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Mr. Sanders' uncompromising laser-wire focus on healthcare is to his detriment. It's the only thing they focus on. And then when he's going around trying to save the ACA in 2017 with his pivotal role played in giving the election to Mr. 45 (and he was saying shortly after he'd won that we should give him a chance and work with him, so how is that not a double standard?), it turns me off. The ACA was was never good enough for them back in 2010. What is good enough here? Healthcare is not the only issue going on with this country.

As I'd said, healthcare is not the only thing going on this country, and I stand by my statement they get too laser-focused on that at the expense of all others. Like Mr. Sanders' comments that Cuba had excellent healthcare. Or that he would recommend a honeymoon to the USSR. It's how they are tone-deaf to the brutalities of dictatorships. The US is also not like these Norwegian countries, which tend to be more homogeneous cultures, not melting pots. That is why I wish we didn't have such massively overpopulated city regions. Their single-minded obsession with how the ACA wasn't good enough put Mr. 45 in office, where he began systematically chipping down at it.

Do people actually believe this?

Not that I've heard.

All of those concerns stated have more to do with the general population, not Democrats. Bernie's numbers are pretty solid as far as I can tell. He has respect from all around the block as far as different social groups, it's just very contrary to the establishment's development, which makes all these notions about having lofty goals kind of overstated. Appealing to the establishment is circular reasoning in this case.

[CmdrKing]

Aye, that’s what I mean. I think the average Democratic voter is as ideologically committed, or indeed moreso, to means testing and other exclusionary behavior as their elected officials. While certainly the DNC are shady fuckers and politicians are gonna politician, Actual party members and elected officials seem keen on staying in the ideological center of the party... but for whatever reason it’s firmly against actually helping people.

Lestwise I’ve been finding that political outcomes and behavior are making more sense through that lens than from the conventional wisdom, which seems more helpful for deciding ways to counter it.

[Captain Crimson]

Do people actually believe this? Apart from not especially being true that bitter Sanders supporters didn't turn out for Clinton in 2016 (I did, in fact, vote for the TERF y'all nominated, and compared to the last contested election it seems that more Sanders supporters voted Clinton than Clinton supporters voted Obama https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/24/did-enough-bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-for-trump-to-cost-clinton-the-election/ ), it manages to completely miss the actual substance of Sanders and progressivism more broadly.

The spoiler effect is well-studied, and well known to politicians by this time, as well as most of the voting base. Statistics can also be warped to fit the agenda of those pushing them, whether by left or right, and it is so difficult to distinguish truth from lie now. What needs to be commented on is voters who'd supported Mr. Obama that also went to vote for Mr. 45. So there was definitely more overlap in other areas past those you are mentioning. And the rhetoric of people like Mr. Sanders that the ACA wasn't good enough contributed to the red wave back in 2010. They tend to think very short-term, never long-term, and TBF, most voters and dare I say, most people don't either. That is why you get election results like these. That Mr. Sanders played no role in shifting the election seems more like rationalization bias to comfort themselves, when elections are complex things that can swing back and forth in unexpected ways. Because you can't predict people.

Like, aside from being literal life and death, y'know why people usually talk about healthcare? Because it's more obviously broken and easier to understand WHY it's broken than most of the myriad other goals of progressives or leftists. And more than that, the goals of progressives are largely unified under a desire to correct a single set of misplaced priorities and exploitative systems, so if you can get people to understand better approaches to healthcare, it is easier to explain how the same things apply in many other aspects of life.

It's an illusion. Life is strife, life is chaos, that could kill you in a heartbeat. Yes, healthcare is important. My sole contention was those like Mr. Sanders put too much focus on that above all others. I don't think we should compromise on women's rights, but to them, healthcare is blown up to such an exaggerated degree you'd think it was the only important issue. Where's that passion for other crucial principles? He rejects reproductive freedom and body autonomy as a litmus test to progressive ideals, but it is the same man who's written some dubious gaslighting articles on women's issues before, so it is not surprising to me he wants to compromise on abortion issues. Healthcare is not the only issue we have going on in this country. It's the truth. And it's not like free healthcare would have stopped the pandemnic.

Additionally, focusing on healthcare makes it easy to blame a small handful of bad actors rigging the system in their favor over a long stretch of time. We have other countries that didn't fall into that trap to compare with, we have countries who have moved closer to our system who are actively getting worse in real time because of it, it's easy to talk about in a very clean, politically friendly way. By which I mean avoiding the hard work, of acknowledging the ways liberal voters generally have allowed and encouraged these systems to be broken and exploited. 'cuz based on how y'all act, seems to me you're more concerned about making sure the """right""" people get helped rather than making a better, more equitable society, and the breathless defense of Biden and drive to shut down even the most obvious and necessary critiques of him, his record, and the shortcomings of his platform make it hard to believe any other conclusion.

Those countries are largely monocultural. I'd raised this point before. You're also missing a key factor here. The whole system is rigged, in ways beyond health insurance companies. It is so stacked against the deck for us now, it is very hard to get ahead. It also feels to me like you are appearing to low-key mischaracterize me. Let me clear all this up now. I do NOT support any form of worker exploitation in other countries because I'm one low-grunt factory worker, who has no larger clout anywhere. How am I to blame for all that? I've also been very skeptical of Mr. Biden before, so if you are trying to debunk points about something other people have said, then make it clear, in your response to me, that I did not make them. I've questioned the hypocrisy between both sides in how allegations are handled, and I've said before I feel as if Mr. Biden will take the EC, but amass less votes than Mr. 45. And there it is. Your democracy in action, folks. It's why the system is rigged.

Edit: and let's be clear- I believe that dislodging Trump and indeed the entire Republican party are a necessary step if we wish to preserve electoral politics as a valid avenue of reform in this country. I've no intent of fucking off and not voting just because both nominees are equally likely to deny my basic humanity and let their base strip away my rights. But dislodging this idea among liberals that the system cannot be questioned, and that "winning" means nobody gets to disagree with you is vital to making those necessary changes as well, and sitting quietly isn't going to do that.

Are you talking about me, or someone else? Because without the GOP, what else do you have? The two-party system has been going strong for a long time and that is doubtless to change any time soon. Where did I also imply you shouldn't vote? Do whatever you want. I have also never stated the system should not be questioned. It seems like you went off on a bit of a tangent unrelated to me at the end there.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Mr. Sanders' uncompromising laser-wire focus on healthcare is to his detriment. It's the only thing they focus on. And then when he's going around trying to save the ACA in 2017 with his pivotal role played in giving the election to Mr. 45 (and he was saying shortly after he'd won that we should give him a chance and work with him, so how is that not a double standard?), it turns me off. The ACA was was never good enough for them back in 2010. What is good enough here? Healthcare is not the only issue going on with this country.

As I'd said, healthcare is not the only thing going on this country, and I stand by my statement they get too laser-focused on that at the expense of all others. Like Mr. Sanders' comments that Cuba had excellent healthcare. Or that he would recommend a honeymoon to the USSR. It's how they are tone-deaf to the brutalities of dictatorships. The US is also not like these Norwegian countries, which tend to be more homogeneous cultures, not melting pots. That is why I wish we didn't have such massively overpopulated city regions. Their single-minded obsession with how the ACA wasn't good enough put Mr. 45 in office, where he began systematically chipping down at it.

Do people actually believe this? Apart from not especially being true that bitter Sanders supporters didn't turn out for Clinton in 2016 (I did, in fact, vote for the TERF y'all nominated, and compared to the last contested election it seems that more Sanders supporters voted Clinton than Clinton supporters voted Obama https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/24/did-enough-bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-for-trump-to-cost-clinton-the-election/ ), it manages to completely miss the actual substance of Sanders and progressivism more broadly.

Like, aside from being literal life and death, y'know why people usually talk about healthcare? Because it's more obviously broken and easier to understand WHY it's broken than most of the myriad other goals of progressives or leftists. And more than that, the goals of progressives are largely unified under a desire to correct a single set of misplaced priorities and exploitative systems, so if you can get people to understand better approaches to healthcare, it is easier to explain how the same things apply in many other aspects of life.

Additionally, focusing on healthcare makes it easy to blame a small handful of bad actors rigging the system in their favor over a long stretch of time. We have other countries that didn't fall into that trap to compare with, we have countries who have moved closer to our system who are actively getting worse in real time because of it, it's easy to talk about in a very clean, politically friendly way. By which I mean avoiding the hard work, of acknowledging the ways liberal voters generally have allowed and encouraged these systems to be broken and exploited. 'cuz based on how y'all act, seems to me you're more concerned about making sure the """right""" people get helped rather than making a better, more equitable society, and the breathless defense of Biden and drive to shut down even the most obvious and necessary critiques of him, his record, and the shortcomings of his platform make it hard to believe any other conclusion.

Edit: and let's be clear- I believe that dislodging Trump and indeed the entire Republican party are a necessary step if we wish to preserve electoral politics as a valid avenue of reform in this country. I've no intent of fucking off and not voting just because both nominees are equally likely to deny my basic humanity and let their base strip away my rights. But dislodging this idea among liberals that the system cannot be questioned, and that "winning" means nobody gets to disagree with you is vital to making those necessary changes as well, and sitting quietly isn't going to do that.

Cheers, mate. I'll drink to that.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Crimson, the Obama-Trump voters are as NOTHING to the legion of non-voters. A great many people who, seeing this system that is so heavily rigged, and seeing the less evil party bend over backwards to defend it and say "Well, what are you gonna do about it? Vote for the OTHER GUY?" secure in the knowledge that they don't have to put forth effort or a compelling platform to win our votes, throw their hands up in disgust and figure it's beyond their power to affect change through electoral platforms anyway. And no, those people aren't me, but the more I have to sully my eyes with the words you type, the more I understand where they are coming from and think a molotov cocktail sounds like the most effective form of political praxis.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Fuck man, this is the Joe Biden defense thread, so DEFEND him! Don't just tell me how Bernie cares too much about stopping people from dying because they can't afford insulin, or how much worse 45 is. I have eyes and ears in my head, I can see he's worse! CONVINCE ME! I WANT to be sold! I'm already more or less resigned to voting for the creepy rambling bastard. Make me feel better about it! Help me to swallow this shotput-sized pill! Cripes he can't even give good speeches that are empty fluff but make us feel a little better like Mayor Pete did!

[Captain Crimson]

Crimson, the Obama-Trump voters are as NOTHING to the legion of non-voters. A great many people who, seeing this system that is so heavily rigged, and seeing the less evil party bend over backwards to defend it and say "Well, what are you gonna do about it? Vote for the OTHER GUY?" secure in the knowledge that they don't have to put forth effort or a compelling platform to win our votes, throw their hands up in disgust and figure it's beyond their power to affect change through electoral platforms anyway. And no, those people aren't me, but the more I have to sully my eyes with the words you type, the more I understand where they are coming from and think a molotov cocktail sounds like the most effective form of political praxis.

By that token, it's hard to lay all the blame on the feet of the government, the military, and big business, since many are willingly laying down for state control because the system is too broken to fix and we want kings, not democracy. This is why I don't watch cable news. The MSM only reports on negativity. They want us to do what they say and believe the world is an evil hell-land. You just never see the reports about all the good things that other people do. And it's not about doing the right thing so people can see it and you get points. It's in that place where no one will ever see you, or know you did it. In the dark.

It's also online that just brings out the worst in us all. Hatred, anger, aggression, condescension, prejudice... it's why I'd recommend to everyone just take some time out during the day. Disconnect from the media, the news, and do something positive. We can't live on anger and hate alone. That is no way to live, and it's what they're telling us to do, how to behave, on both sides now. And it has to stop.

Fuck man, this is the Joe Biden defense thread, so DEFEND him! Don't just tell me how Bernie cares too much about stopping people from dying because they can't afford insulin, or how much worse 45 is. I have eyes and ears in my head, I can see he's worse! CONVINCE ME! I WANT to be sold! I'm already more or less resigned to voting for the creepy rambling bastard. Make me feel better about it! Help me to swallow this shotput-sized pill! Cripes he can't even give good speeches that are empty fluff but make us feel a little better like Mayor Pete did!

Well, look at it this way. Mr. Biden is going to choose Ms. Abrams as his VP. And while it's cringe and I object to the patronizing view that a woman cannot win the WH on her own, and that it is being done to score points with women voters, he is not likely to survive the WH for eight years. It my come near the very end of his tenure, but it is likely to happen. And I... I hate saying that, since it feels like I am borderline praising his death, but... I'm not. I'm just noting this. He is an older man who's lived a long life. My point, which I hope I haven't warped completely out of perspective, is that you'll take away a more competent woman president who is more in line with those values you like.

This is going to get a lot more scrutiny in the months to come, so when debating others on this, please don't say that they're sexist when the conversation turns to the inevitability of Ms. Abrams succeeding him. You want to convince them, you need to take something of a middle road to get there. I've been critical of this idea. Doesn't make me sexist. No more than anyone else.

Also take heart on the allegations. They sound shockingly similar to the case made against Mr. Kavanaugh and from the same source, I hear. It is secondhand, so a lot can get lost in translation. I've known some of my female friends to talk about r$%@ that way as a hyperbole for someone who is just grabby, like Mr. Biden is. Not that is an excuse, but you get what I mean. So it's entirely possible this is not the case here either. Though it may mean you'd need to reevaluate some of your opinions about Mr. Kavanaugh. Or, and keep in mind this is said for my own personal curiosity and NOT to throw any shade on you, is that just because he's a Christian republican? We all have our cognitive biases and double standards, so it's not a personal attack.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Aye, that’s what I mean. I think the average Democratic voter is as ideologically committed, or indeed moreso, to means testing and other exclusionary behavior as their elected officials. While certainly the DNC are shady fuckers and politicians are gonna politician, Actual party members and elected officials seem keen on staying in the ideological center of the party... but for whatever reason it’s firmly against actually helping people.

Lestwise I’ve been finding that political outcomes and behavior are making more sense through that lens than from the conventional wisdom, which seems more helpful for deciding ways to counter it.

To tell you the truth, it took me a second or two since you brought up means testing last time in such a problematic sense because ideally everybody should be in favor of thoroughly comprehensive policy that doesn't leave those unaccounted for. Needless to say, inability to do so for a multitude of factors has led to a more modern reform development.

But oh oh yeah there is a sect in the Bernie crowd that is pretty fiscally conservative and driven more by Union principles, which is pretty understandable given this is the closest thing we've had to a labor party as far as I can tell. I mean these are just people that I actually know of in real life but also you see reverberations of the sentiment on the internet. I believe they share a common ancestor with the conservatives that are put off by the escalating military intervention abroad, which channeled like voltron into an anti-Hillary campaign either in favor of Bernie or Trump but on the same principle.

As far as voter conscious though, I don't think the new principles are lost with people going Democrat, even as much as Bernie's turnout suggests. I believe that a lot of the voters vote Democratic because they are actually sympathetic with social issues behind societal conventions, even if in spite of their own customs. If anything though I think as I've said of Bernie recently to you, that the newer reforms can come off kind of opaque in the partisan frey.

[CmdrKing]

It's an illusion. Life is strife, life is chaos, that could kill you in a heartbeat. Yes, healthcare is important. My sole contention was those like Mr. Sanders put too much focus on that above all others. I don't think we should compromise on women's rights, but to them, healthcare is blown up to such an exaggerated degree you'd think it was the only important issue. Where's that passion for other crucial principles? He rejects reproductive freedom and body autonomy as a litmus test to progressive ideals, but it is the same man who's written some dubious gaslighting articles on women's issues before, so it is not surprising to me he wants to compromise on abortion issues. Healthcare is not the only issue we have going on in this country. It's the truth. And it's not like free healthcare would have stopped the pandemnic.

I'm going to highlight this part of your post because it's a good window into what I'm getting at.

Abortion access and reproductive health generally are already in crisis in the US, and that would be true even in the alternate universe where the 45th president was Hillary Clinton.

Setting aside the increasingly onerous restrictions various states have placed on clinics and the rise of decoy "pregnancy crisis centers" for a moment, an increasing number of hospitals and other health centers are owned and operated by the Church or other religious institutions, who can make abortions defacto unavailable by simply making them against hospital policy. Since there are fewer hospitals and a greater proportion of them are religiously-owned, even regions that don't suffer from formal state level restrictions. And of course, thanks to Burwell vs Hobby Lobby, empoyer-based insurance has increasing reign to decrease their coverage on religious grounds as well. That case was about contraception, but legally there's not much of a leap between that and abortion.

The assault against abortion rights and other forms of bodily autonomy are coming from multiple angles, but many of them are better defended from the position of a single-payer system. Removing more gate keepers standing between people and their health care means less opportunity for shady insurance companies to deny access to specific kinds of care, for employers to dictate the nature of their coverage, and removes an overhead cost burden from hospitals which should help stem the bleeding that's removing so many rural and low-service healthcare facilities from the system.

But let's pick back up the state's "rights" issue again. The approach many states have taken is to make dedicated abortion services and other women's health centers de facto illegal by placing needless legal obligations upon them to force them to shut down. But at a national level (and we're talking originally about DNC strategy and Joe Biden, so this is the relevant part for this discussion), what exactly are Democrats selling? Well, the line is "protect Roe v Wade". That's it. But Roe v Wade hasn't gone anywhere, these rights have been assaulted without actually undoing the fundamental ruling in Roe v Wade. So by being a platform to address the non-law areas where abortion access is being restricted, a move towards a single payer system is actually doing more more the national level Democrats are for abortion.

When you claim progressives/leftists don't care about these issues or aren't addressing them, you reveal a lack of understanding about the nature of the problem at hand and how ill equipped liberal thinking is to deal with it. We can't settle for merely having rights, we have to create a world in which we can meaningfully act upon them.

[CmdrKing]

To tell you the truth, it took me a second or two since you brought up means testing last time in such a problematic sense because ideally everybody should be in favor of thoroughly comprehensive policy that doesn't leave those unaccounted for. Needless to say, inability to do so for a multitude of factors has led to a more modern reform development.

Well, by "means testing" I mean the approach of "submit this income form and if you're poor enough you can have this much assistance". It's used by bad actors to artificially deny people access to programs, set thresholds far lower than the intent of the program originally was (rending it ineffective), and as a means of control in some of the worst instances. Democratic voters are very easily lured by the argument "but we don't want the kids of billionaires to get this!!", not realizing that the thresholds are always set far, far lower than that and they're handing a tool of discrimination to those bad actors. Nevermind that sometimes this argument is applied to programs where it would actually be cheaper and more efficient to stop trying to figure out who "needs" help and just restructure the system a bit to centralize the system.