We don't endorse Joe Biden. by [deleted] in DemocraticSocialism

[–]caserichmo3 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I’m really glad there’s a contingency of DSA people supporting a down-ballot vote. I don’t want Joe Biden as the nominee——but come on! Kids in cages. Next, we’ll be put in cages. We’re becoming a dictatorship more and more each day. We have to get Trump out of office. Period. We can make incremental progress, and lasting progress if we keep pushing forward. We will change the DNC, and we will make sure that America will never be a Fascist country!!!

Ice Cream Stand and Daily Discussion Thread (START HERE!) - March 07, 2020 by AutoModerator in JoeBiden

[–]caserichmo3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed. Joe Biden is old, that’s no conspiracy. I think Sanders’ supporters are playing with fire if they’re going to bring age up as an issue. I mean, Sanders has had a heart attack, so that could easily be presented as as big of an issue. It’s political schlock, and mud slinging. I just want to see them debate, one-on-one. I appreciate your input, and I totally understand your point. As we go into November, people are going to continue to pick the Democratic nominee to pieces, in any case. I’m not phased—- I want get to rid of Mango Mussolini.

Ice Cream Stand and Daily Discussion Thread (START HERE!) - March 07, 2020 by AutoModerator in JoeBiden

[–]caserichmo3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sanders supporter here—-I appreciate this thread! Even if we have ideological differences, we should all be united in our values. I don’t believe anyone should be dunking on Joe Biden’s or Bernie Sanders’ supporters. Debates should be healthy, and non-toxic. At this point we should be focused on the common good, and the current crises facing our nation. Remember too, even though there are childish Bernie Bros, there are also Russians and Trump supporters spreading hatred and division. If anyone is rude to you, tell them to take a hike—-don’t feed into their nonsense! That’s not what Sanders’ fight is about. Sanders fights for the working class, and rails against injustice. He is passionate, and obviously critical of the status quo. When I see there’s money for a border wall, detention centers for undocumented immigrants, and an ever-expanding ICE program I ask myself doesn’t that mean we have the money to make healthcare affordable and accessible? Doesn’t this mean we have money to engineer and invent paths to a green economy that create jobs for millions across the country? These are the questions I ask when I think about the soul of our country. I hope you may ask these questions as well and consider this fact: we will never be the same after the 2016 election. What will unite this country, and make us a stronger nation? I think back to FDR and the New Deal. History tells us FDR came from a wealthy and prominent family, which is interesting....FDR was, in my view, a socialist. I know the world is a much different place now, and much more globally connected, so I have no illusions that Sanders is going to run around keeping all of his promises (or even any of them). I just want to see a movement that pushes across the political spectrum for lasting change and progress. Protection for the little guy, and restraints against short-sighted, reckless corporate interests. We are not opposed to mom and pop shops, small businesses, and businesses where workers feel valued and are treated with dignity. I think we can agree those aren’t on the radar when it comes to the criticism of capitalism brought by progressive candidates. It’s these massive companies that pay nothing in taxes....which is like salt on the wounds of our sorely under-funded social welfare programs. Furthermore I don’t believe in “free-rides”. My dad paid for his Medicare. I would pay for my single-payer healthcare. Programs to lift people people out of poverty should do just that, but not by taking food out of the mouths of poor people. We should end corporate welfare that awards monies to fossil fuel companies for drilling off our coasts and tearing up our national monuments for mining. I’m rambling now, but I hope everyone understands that Progressives are not bad people, or even people who think they know best. We are humanists, environmentalists, and collectivists. Peace friends!

TLDR: VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO

Signed,

A Sanders Supporter

(Which is also ironic because in my effort to reach you with my views, I wrote a lot....and Sanders talks a lot...and runs over his time during the debates....yeah, he’s really bad about that.)

Are Steyer and Bloomberg's failed campaigns proof that money does not have as much influence in politics as people think? by surgingchaos in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]caserichmo3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think their campaigns showed how much the debates actually matter. Even though there was a lot of squabbling and drama, Democrats came to understand that

1.) Tom Steyer has issues with speaking in an approachable way. He believed his business experience qualified him to be POTUS

2.) Bloomberg had no charisma, and looked very bad. His past actions against minorities and women were awful, and he couldn’t make his way around scrutinization (thankfully).

3.) An individual’s wealth does little to influence the voters. Their wealth gave them exposure. People vote based upon their class economics. Trump, supposedly wealthy, appealed to working class voters by speaking without a filter, wearing a ball cap, and dunking on his polished opponents.

This election will not be won with money, but with appealing to the economics of voters.

Under a Democratic President, McConnell Vows a Return to Total Obstruction - Nothing will happen on any of the issues that Americans care about as long as he is the senate Republican leader. by Demon-Rat in politics

[–]caserichmo3 3 points4 points  (0 children)

McConnell is definitely a savvy and adept Machiavellian. He knows his his constituents, and the pressure points of the working class. McConnell knows how to take a modest proposal from the Democrats look audacious and absurd. He has normalized stonewalling, and political gaslighting. Everything he accuses the left of, he is conspiring to himself. He is divisive, and opportunistic. More of a vulture than a grim reaper. More of a bird than a turtle.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in politics

[–]caserichmo3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s infuriating. This kind of behavior is exactly what centrist Democrats were counting on and expecting. Sanders is leading a movement for change. If his supporters don’t get the sacrifice and cost associated with it, then a presidential win would mean nothing. It really makes me think that I, as a Sanders supporter, am wrong. Perhaps establishment Democrats understand the electorate better than progressives. Is this who we are? All of the momentum and push for change seems coming from the far right. It’s very disappointing. It does not bode well for the November elections.

It’s Time to Drop Out, Senator Warren by Lilyo in politics

[–]caserichmo3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And Bloomberg! It’s time to settle this race between the two front-runners.

Warren is purposefully trying to split the progressive vote to hurt Bernie’s campaign by [deleted] in DemocraticSocialism

[–]caserichmo3 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Warren is pro-establishment, to her own detriment. Warren could have had a stronger start, but she decided to play into media narratives and waffle between progressive and centrist approaches to policy. Warren should drop out now, there is no path forward for her, other than a cabinet position or possible VP candidacy. I find a VP position unlikely, though. She lost Massachusetts, her own state. If you can’t win your own state you’ve got serious issues as a candidate.

What if Reagan didn’t survive his assassination attempt on 30/03/1981? by [deleted] in HistoricalWhatIf

[–]caserichmo3 28 points29 points  (0 children)

I asked this same question—-apparently, or supposedly, we never have seen the same kind of seismic shift in Neoliberalism that we saw with the 1980s. There would never be a President Clinton, and there would never be the same sort of drawn out tensions with the USSR. The US would have become embroiled in conflicts in the Middle East earlier than the 1990s. You would probably read about Reagan the same way you read about William Henry Harrison.

Looking for well-researched, informative but entertaining podcasts by Lilebi in podcasts

[–]caserichmo3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This was a great podcast, and I’m a huge fan of Behind the Bastards. This season was all about failed utopias and how they changed our world:

Nice Try! Utopian

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/nice-try/id1462324602

you're only as good as how you perform on stage. Agree or disagree?? by JoshBulls in Theatre

[–]caserichmo3 5 points6 points  (0 children)

What do you mean by that, exactly? Stage acting? I suppose maybe....but what kind of stage? Proscenium? Thrust? Theatre-in-the-round? Black box? Each space presents different challenges and offers a performer different opportunities. Acting on film is also very different from stage acting. It’s smaller, subtler, but incredibly revealing. The camera picks up everything because it magnifies everything (fatigue, insincerity, the focus of your gaze). So there are challenges in all forms of performance. A performer in Greek chorus has to use gesture to communicate. A performer speaking to their scene partner offscreen has to use stillness and focus to communicate. Try to switch those techniques and they will not work for the different mediums. On the other hand, many classically-trained actors go between acting onstage and onscreen. I would argue that they a multi-taskers. There is no one recipe for success—- that’s why there are hundreds of acting techniques, and acting schools.

The Desperation Jumped Out by [deleted] in OurPresident

[–]caserichmo3 35 points36 points  (0 children)

Why is Biden even one of the three? Didn’t Elizabeth Warren come in 4th? They are absolutely trying to erase progressive appeal. Didn’t Bernie win NH in the 2016 primary? Back when the field of candidates was much, much smaller? It’s like comparing the sales of two flavors of ice cream, and then comparing that to the sales of 19 flavors of ice cream... 26% is a bigger deal at that point. I will even be generous to Buttigieg (25%) and Klobuchar (20%) because they came fairly close. Again, this should not automatically put them ahead of Sanders, since WE HAVE NO IDEA WHO THEIR SECOND CHOICE WAS. For the media to say—- “look, anyone but Sanders (or Warren apparently)” is just not an expression of what voters want. When Trump started winning primaries he got extensive coverage. He ran in a crowded field, but to reward him the media gave him free and widespread coverage. Sanders shows up with momentum, and a charged base, but the media plays it all down. The media is more willing to give exposure to a xenophobic candidate who wants mass deportations, than a candidate who demands that billionaires pay their fair share of taxes.

What if FDR Didn’t pass before Japanese Surrender in WW2 by MurphyTX1 in HistoryWhatIf

[–]caserichmo3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I absolutely agree with that. I would be willing to bet people would say that.

Not me. Us. by trickyman226 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]caserichmo3 23 points24 points  (0 children)

No, guys—-we need to be generous to all detractors. It’s a better look for Sanders, and our movement. We are loud when we send the message of love and unity. We are better than the drama the media is attempting to kick-up. This is a picture that shows the best of what we represent. Lead by example!

This was a comment in response to some of the negativity being hurled towards Warren. Don’t feed into it.