IMO this question summarises the entire discussion in Dem party right now. (not what we should be having but what the establishment is having). And that is the crux of this video:
I’ll explain after a few people have voted.
So basically, I think that the entire discussion establishment is having right now is this:
Do we keep trying to win the presidency or do we give up the presidency and focus on down ballot races.
Because the difference between open convention and “anointing” Harris is just this : What happens to the money that has been pledged on the Biden Harris ticket?
If you anoint Kamala, then she keeps the money. Which means you wish to fight for the presidency. (francesca and Jordan’s position)
If you go to an open convention, then all that money is done. You transfer it to a SUPERPAC and use it for down ballot races.(Cenk’s position)
Now that needs Harris to consent to it because you cant just bequeath money pledged to a ticket into a PAC. It needs the consent of candidates on the ticket and the donors.
So I am assuming they will just cut a deal with her that she will get nominated anyway and get some of the funding which will allow her to run. But they will be using the money on down ballot races. And I guess the idea is because it is a SUPERPAC there is no limit so donors can keep pouring money in it so they can use it. I don’t understand that math because donors can spend way less money and just donate to repubs and get their corporate shit from there. Which is another reason why this is a disastrous idea.
But by doing this they are doing 2 things.
Now I couldn’t care less about kamala. And frankly my position has always aligned with Nina’s. “This is a centrist fight”. As far as I am concerned, Unless they want to fully open the convention to all and have VOTERS decide, I don’t care. But I cannot digest the idea that we are already throwing down our weapons in the fight for presidency.
The way I see it, dems and repubs are not that different. They basically vote in line for everything corporate. The problem is Trump. While I would love a Dem supermajority in the house and senate with the presidency, if I had to pick one, I would definitely pick defeating Trump in a blink.
Which is why it is abhorrent to me that they are trying to save their own arses over trying to defeat Trump. And why Cenk is siding with that is unfathomable to me.
shocking, I do not agree with this. If Biden is on the ticket we lose everything.
We only win some (house, Senate, Whitehouse) or all if Biden is replaced.
Ofcourse it is shocking. Nowhere in the post did I talk about keeping Biden on the ticket. What are you on about? Are you even being genuine about your comments?
The Biden holdouts are trying to argue how messy this is, as if it is more risky to dump Biden. I thought the whole point of AOC’s video is to say it’s just easier to stick with Biden.
You wrote, “Do we keep trying to win the presidency or do we give up and focus on down ballot races” This seems to imply keeping Biden = trying to win the Presidency? But then I also see that you wrote: anointing Kamala = fighting for the Presidency because of the Biden/Harris pot of existing $$$
How do you know Harris will not win in the open convention? Cenk and others believe if Harris wins an open convention, she comes out stronger than if she was just anointed. I agree. Because of her failed Presidential campaign, she needs to prove she has in fact gotten better at campaigning. No word salads. She needs to sound more authentic, not a puppet saying what her handlers tell her to say. This would be the first time she would be representing herself as the candidate since 2020. Speaking on behalf of Biden is not the same as advocating for yourself.
I think Francesca and Jordan were not getting what Cenk was saying. Cenk tried to clarify his explanation about the $$, and it looked like it fell on deaf ears. Cenk repeated, new $ from the donors would go to the new Presidential candidate, whomever it is, because these big donors would start giving new $ again, instead of withholding it while Biden refused to step aside. So regardless of who comes out of an open convention, they will get plenty of new donor $ to compete in the Presidential race, and the old $ can still be put to good use to fight the House and Senate races. So they can fight for it all, whether or not Kamala survives an open convention.
Re your poll Q… how does a Trump win not translate down ballot for Republicans to win the House and Senate as well. The only way Dem’s have a chance of winning Senate and House races (in a Trump win) is if Biden is not on the ticket. Dems must be freed from defending Biden and his lack of fitness for the office. If Biden is on the ticket, I do not think we can win the House or Senate. And Trumpers will control, the House, Senate, Presidency and Supreme Court.
Of course there is a possibility we may not win our House or Senate races even with a new Dem Presidential candidate, but we have zero chance if Biden is the candidate. That’s what I understand Cenk is saying, and I agree. We need the strongest candidate that wins over the Biden delegates. Kamala can get stronger if she fights for it against other challengers and comes out on top. The fix may still be in for her with Biden delegates, but at least an open convention with publicly televised debate or presentations gives the appearance of the fairest contest possible given the circumstances. Hopefully voters from the public will be paying attention to their delegates and how they vote. There could be public, media, as well as party pressure on these delegates.
You cannot start arguing someone else’s position when I haven’t mentioned Biden on the ticket anywhere in my comment. I am talking about anointing harris vs open convention.
Read and respond to what is being said. Else I cant take you as a serious person who is acting in good faith.
I literally explained the while conversation is about the MONEY pledged to the Biden-harris ticket. The whole thing about SUPERPAC literally means shifting it from the presidential run to downballot races = giving up the fight for the presidency. And the shift ONLY happens if harris Agreed to it (bcz of DNC rules) and she wont agree to fund her replacement because this is her only shot. So they will anyway cut a deal with her to keep her on the ticket even in Open convention. So the Q no longer is Who will be on the ticket, its only about whether you anoint harris or pick her in open convention. Anointing means you are fighting for the presidency, Open convention means giving up on it, A point to refuse to address while you run circles strawmanning everything else.
Focus and stay on topic. Please stop trying to derail the discussion being had here.
Because neither Trump nor Biden are affecting downballot races. Despite Biden tailing in the national polls, down ballot regular dems are doing well in their districts.
It is hilarious that you assume presidency automatically means downballot wins. Either you have no knowledge of how elections work or you are purposefully misrepresenting things. Because this is a ridiculous point to make. By your logic, funding presidency on the dem side would automatically translate to House and senate wins for dems. Which makes the open convention shifting the money to the downballot races a worse idea.
My answer is both. While Trump’s most obvious threat is the destruction of democracy. A political party controlling the white house while the other party controls Congress seems like it’s a guarantee that nothing with get done. Maybe a Democratic Congress might be able to keep Trump in check somewhat. But I still fear what Trump might do if he gets elected. While a Democratic President with a Republican Congress is disastrous idea to me. It will be an increase of theater politics with White Christian Nationalist ideology. Overall, the White House and Congress has been nothing but a disappointment to the average American, and those who are poor, elderly, and marginalized.
Yeah that was my analysis. LIke the worst that happens with Dem president and Repub house and senate is nothing gets done because Repubs are being obstructionists. But Trump in power will still go insane with executive orders and do who knows what else?
I doubt that. Just because we have 4 hacks in congress who do that doesn’t mean its going to increase anything. White Christian nationalist ideology has been Republican MO since the Southern Strategy. Nothing new and nothing too concerning. When they go too far in that, they end up losing elections because White Chriustian nationalists are just not a majority.
You are a bit too ugly on this forum. no need to get personal.
Why do you think Nancy Pelosi Jeffries and Chuck Schumer had gone to ask Biden to step aside… it had been repeatedly reported that down ballot Dems were worried they were going to lose because of Biden.
Ugliness is in the eyes of the beholder. What was personal about any of that? It is a ridiculous statement that presidential wins automatically translate to downballot races. Just because you don’t agree with my viewpoint, you don’t have to make it personal about YOU.
yeah, you are just explaining my actual point,. “Some” (ahem establishment) downballot dems were afraid they were losing, so Pelosi and Schumer went to Biden to ask him to step aside to use the money on the Biden-Harris ticket for downballot races. THAT IS the problem. MONEY wins elections. And they want to start using money for the presidential ticket on down ballot races and hand the presidency to Trump so they can save the careers of establishment dems in congress. Instead of actually allowing progressives to run in those districts ion the first place. This is why you have seen the split between establishment dems trying to oust Biden and Progressives backing him. It really irritates me when people are obstuse about this. It is like you are trying not to understand it.
I disagree with the framing of this question. It’s not about being “afraid” of any outcome.
Reducing political analysis to a fear response suggests emotional immaturity is the driving force behind everyone’s opinions. I suppose it can be; it just certainly doesn’t have to be.
I know this wasn’t your point in asking the question this way, but it’s a pet peeve of mine. And it’s become more of a sore spot since a certain TYT host adopted this framing the last couple years.
I dont like it either. I would much rather people analyse things. However, there was a purpose to this question which has been served. Whether you (or I) like it or not most people are going to behave in election years based on emotions. The prime right now are fear and hate. The analysis I wanted to do is better encapsulated by the word fear hence I used it. I am not under the impression that everyone’s responses are coming from emotions. But it is a simple word that encapsulates a wide range of positions. overcomplicating things doesn’t always help. The reason why one would use emotions in questions like this is because not everyone has an internal monologue. Not everyone thinks the same way - with a running commentary in their head. Some people do “think” with emotions. People who don’t can still relate. Like it or not, using motions to describe opinions is actually more inclusive if that makes sense. And, I respectfully don’t care about pet peeves.
Certainly, people vote according to emotional cues, usually without being consciously aware we are doing so. It’s human psychology; I agree.
My objection to shorthanding motivations down simply to fear and hate is that both terms have been weaponized in the arena of political debate. With the former, the claim is that those who disagree on electoral strategy have fallen victim to their irrational fears. Likewise with the latter, strong criticism of a favored candidate or party gets dismissed as mere blind hatred.
With these tactics being used so often then, it becomes hard to accept them uncritically. Years ago, I doubt I’d have objected to this framing. Now, it strikes me as too imprecise and biased to credit with being fully explanatory.
lol, I am assuming that people here have not fallen victims to their irrational fears. Its just a much succint way to encapsulate all the points that I would like to poll. So instead of asking for an overcomplicated word salad i used that word. Dont worry, I don’t think you are running scared from Trump’s blonde toupe. lol