JackRiddler » Fri Oct 04, 2019 9:40 am wrote:PufPuf93 » Fri Oct 04, 2019 10:20 am wrote:6) Warren is the best candidate for Native Americans (despite the manufactured controversy over her genetics, Warren has more to say about NA and is more woke about NA issues and conditions).
This is not remotely true.
There is a woman running who has a lot more to say about NA and is even more "woke" about NA issues and conditions, woke enough that she would never dream of making a fool of herself by presenting a DNA test confirming her remote ancestry.
She protested at Standing Rock in person and is an actual native American, or rather, a native Pacific Islander.
Warren's policy proposal is very long, but doesn't seem to differ from Sanders'. Inform me if you feel otherwise. The question is which one of them can be trusted to actually mean it and stick to it in a crunch.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/empowe ... l-nations/
PufPuf93 » Fri Oct 04, 2019 1:07 pm wrote:The question is the matter of effectiveness in enacting legislation and policy and IMO Warren would be more effective than Sander just as she has been more effective in Congress than Sanders despite no where near the time in office.
JackRiddler » Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:17 am wrote:PufPuf93 » Fri Oct 04, 2019 1:07 pm wrote:The question is the matter of effectiveness in enacting legislation and policy and IMO Warren would be more effective than Sander just as she has been more effective in Congress than Sanders despite no where near the time in office.
This is claimed by the usual Sanders-bashing elements (which does not include you) but I don't think it is true. Sanders has succeeded in getting so many amendments included that he has come to be known as the "Amendments King." Recently he engineered the Yemen resolution that passed both houses, an impressive achievement. He got the Federal Reserve to release bailout details. He is very effective at making statements with real-world results, as with the STOP BEZOS Act that did not move forward but, as intended, prompted Amazon to raise wages.
RocketMan » Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:25 am wrote:It is not a "faux pas" but a decades-long pattern of misrepresentation, as laid out in the article I posted.
She has recanted only under pressure. And she continues to muddy the waters around her devotion to Republican policies earlier in life. It's just shady af.
JackRiddler » Fri Oct 04, 2019 12:44 pm wrote:To be honest, I think Warren's baggage is much worse.
Unlike almost any other American politician, people may hate him and reject him and mock him, but no one thinks Sanders is fake. (Only us and a few others like us, when he says something about Venezuela and certain other hot topics he fears to touch.) Also, he doesn't sell himself, although he is forced to play that game up to a point if there is to be any chance of winning. He sells a program. There's no doubt about what the substance is, or whether he means it and will try to get it. That's not just why I support him, as someone who wants this politics and believes it is only possible when one fights for it. It, the quality of believability, is also why other people like him, even if they are not fully with the program. It's why he has appeal in Trumpland, and more importantly, among those who don't vote and stopped giving a shit because they were forced to surrender belief in any of this shit.
Warren's hardly the worst at being fake but her triangulation, routine in the political class, is evident. Her persona is revised and invented so as to sell her. Not as bad as with so many other cases, but enough to be visible. It's hard to see her as more trustworthy than politicians generally are. She's probably not a fully purchased subsidiary like the majority of politikers but if she thinks it will win, she will do it. If she doesn't, she won't. Her appeal is strictly within the Democratic Party, among whites of the upper strata, and among some of the wolves of the corporate media and capitalist establishment who want ABB above all. If Bernie were out, most of them would instantly turn on her and do all to destroy her, to make way for Lord Pete or some other alternative; though they are running out of them, it is true. (I keep assuming Biden is done, and he probably is.) The fake WFP notwithstanding, workers don't believe in her, even if she may get the labor endorsements. Even Biden's support is far more diverse and working class and if and when he goes down, much more of that vote is going to Sanders. The shift to talking "corruption" rather than system as the main issue makes it very hard to take her seriously, no matter how long the policy prescriptions.
PufPuf93 » Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:06 pm wrote:I would like to see Warren with Sanders as VP.
"Kerry’s , Biden and son and Pelosi and family . Where does it stop ?"
PufPuf93 » 04 Oct 2019 15:20 wrote:RocketMan » Fri Oct 04, 2019 12:17 am wrote:Why would you "easily" favour Warren over Sanders? This never ceases to be puzzling to me, this phenomenon. She's Sanders Light. She copies his policies, hell, she even recently copied his idea of "anti-endorsements". She will fold like a cheap suit if elected on her most radical policies, which are fuzzy to begin with.
First I am perpetually fated to having to vote for politicians who would not be my choice and have experienced this fact since first registered to vote in 1971.
I favor Warren over Sanders because:
1) Warren has broader and more moderate appeal (and is thus more electable)
2) Warren is calmer in personality.
3) Warren is more intelligent and has the detailed knowledge of a economist.
4) Warren is younger and of better health than Sanders.
5) Warren is a woman and it is past time to break the barrier of a woman POTUS.
6) Warren is the best candidate for Native Americans (despite the manufactured controversy over her genetics, Warren has more to say about NA and is more woke about NA issues and conditions).
7) Warren looks to be a strong environmental POTUS.
I voted Sanders in the 2016 CA primary and wrote in Sanders in the final election. If CA had actually been in play, I may have voted HRC to avoid Trump (though I hold HRC in distain and distrust and ultimately blame HRC for Trump ever being POTUS).
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 15 guests