Maybe she meant, “You have inferred from my bizarre actions that I have a mental illness.” Which totally could be the case.
I have likely pulled more collective votes than some of these folks from my quiet habit of writing myself into elections with only republican candidates on the ballot locally the last couple of years…
Timex
3036
Another person pushing the argument that folks here say no one pushes.
A random trans person who sells nudes for $10? How did you find this person?
Timex
3038
Retweeted by pixelated boat.
Lol at the fact that she’s a trans person that sells nudes. I just saw that she was a check marked person with a decent number of followers.
LOL I now see that it’s actually in her Twitter description. That’s amazing.
Clearly representative of the electorate
Let’s set aside the source and discuss the logic. “An establishment democrat vote only prolongs the system”. Okay. Does it somehow prolong the system MORE than Trump winning reelection would prolong the system? Really?
You have your primary vote, and then your general vote. They are two separate decisions with different consequences. For better or for worse, the second one is a binary decision. It isn’t hard to model the consequences of each, relative to each other. And because it is binary, you HAVE to do it relative to each other.
Also, Timex, she lives in fucking England.
I know y’all really want Bernie Bros to be real, but they aren’t. They’re imaginary internet people.
Timex
3042
I mean, this is an actual real person.
The point isn’t “all Bernie supporters are this person”.
The point is, “this Bernie supporter is saying and doing stupid shit.”
Nesrie
3043
And you know, Bernie is part of the establishment. He’s literally been in there for decades, but I guess he gets a pass because, you know, reasons.
I have no idea who that person is.
Except, they’re real. Don’t you feel the Bern?
That’s really your position in this day and age of polarized politics? This is all a fiction or a statistically insignificant number? I suspect they’re well below the majority of Bernie supporters, but I highly doubt that folks who express that view (note, that’s different than whether they go through with it) are a insignificant number.
Hell, voter turnout has, for a very long time, been the name of the game. There are definitely folks, Bernie or other, who don’t turn out for the general when their primary candidate doesn’t win. It just happens that the consequences are more dire this time around.
Nesrie
3045
Yeah they’re not the majority of Bernie’s support. I mean Bernie has women who support him, and Bernie Bros is not a replacement label for people who support Bernie anyway.
They absolutely exist.
It’s like Trump Supporter, except Trump supporter is not used to label everyone who voted for Trump in 2016. Plenty of people did who do not wear MAGA hats and chase down minorities for sport, stockpile guns and manage to believe scientists.
Timex
3046
Also, the point is that the statement made in that tweet is fucking dumb as shit.
Hopefully we can all just agree about that.
This is true, of course. James Kwak wrote a book about it that he released online so that it would be out before the 2020 election.
It doesn’t, of course. And people who are actually using logic to make these decisions know that. It’s the morons who are reacting emotionally to every tweet that lead to the “Bernie bros” uproar.
Timex
3048
But that’s literally the argument being made by these folks. It’s literally the argument that Susan Sarandon made in 2016, and she continues to be on stage at Bernie rallies to this day. That having Trump win will result in the corrupt system dying faster.
This isn’t just some idea held by randos on Twitter.
ShivaX
3049
A reminder:
I mean it’s possible Susan Sarandon doesn’t exist and it was a collective hallucination, but that seems unlikely.
Nesrie
3050
Psst. It’s just all in our heads, didn’t you know?
The attitude reminds me of what Nader supporters were saying in 2000, only the stakes feel higher now.
I don’t think that Susan Sarandon was being helpful there, nor was the British person on Twitter earlier. There was a Reagan adage that I don’t entirely remember and so now will butcher, that we should: “say good things about people on the Right and bad things about people on the Left”. I think that is good policy (but reversed, obviously), and we should try to be at least as smart as a Reagan.
It’s fine to criticize Sander’s supporters on these grounds, and say that they shouldn’t be as mean towards the other Democratic candidates. But people also need to have a sense of context and perspective in their criticisms:
E.g. 1: If you are upset about a Sander’s supporter not stopping the booing of Hillary Clinton, you should also be upset about Hillary’s rather mean surprise attack on Sanders earlier in the news-cycle.
E.g. 2: If you are complaining about Sander’s having a vocal and rabid online component, when you yourself have attacked Sanders hundreds of times online, ehhhh. :D
E.g. 3: If you are referring to the supporters of another candidate with cutesy nicknames, but would get upset if similar style nicknames were applied to you, ehhhhhh.
Anyway, I feel like a lot of the discussion of Sanders (at least in the internet spaces I inhabit) has a “They’re coming right for us!” vibe.
E.g. it pays attention to every provocative thing a Sander’s supporter has said, while ignoring the same sorts of provocative actions coming from the Democratic center towards the Democratic Left.
Anyway, in conclusion, I look forward to voting for whoever the Democratic nominee is this year.
ShivaX
3053
Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.
Thing is… that’s how we got here imo. The fact that the GOP stuck to Reagan’s 11th Commandment, meant that when the party turned down the road to fascism and idiocy everyone in the back just sat there quietly and let it happen. Hell, they’re still doing it with Trump. Because he’s a Republican. It’s a terrible idea.
