Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Gorn

  • Rank
  • Birthday 06/15/1987

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Previous Fields

  • Name

Recent Profile Visitors

3,476 profile views
  1. So far on this thread the toxicity has been pretty one-sided. Within the last three pages of discussion, Sanders was called a Russian asset, demagogue, narcissist, and sourceless rumors about Gabbard vice-presidency were presented as facts. By the same standard, Bloomberg and the other "moderates" should be hounded to publicly renounce their online supporters on this board.
  2. Gorn

    US Politics - Primary Numbers

    Personally, I don't trust Bloomberg when he says that we will support the Democratic nominee no matter who he is. He already changed his mind once this cycle (about running for president in the first place). In early 2016, he declared he would run as an independent in general election if ends up being Sanders vs Trump. If Sanders wins the Democratic nomination, I'd say there's a better than 50% chance that's exactly what he will do.
  3. Gorn

    US Politics: I Say a Little Prayer for You!

    My point is that winning elections for the sake of winning elections is not enough. It's not an end, it's means to an end. If "my" party is too terrified of losing elections to meaningfully advance my interests once in power, then why should I invest my time and money in supporting it? For Carville and the Democratic half of the political class, victory means getting paid, but the base wants something else. Hence the "ideologues" he dismisses in his interview.
  4. Gorn

    US Politics: I Say a Little Prayer for You!

    Re: bolded. Um, no, it isn't. If Democrats and Republicans are merely two groups chasing power for the sake of power itself, there's no point in voting for either of them, or in getting involved in the election process at all (unless you're one of the power players like Carville). If Democrats will gain power and do nothing with it, why should I care?
  5. Here's a poll from April 2015, showing that 58% of Democrats had never heard of Sanders: https://www.people-press.org/2015/04/02/campaign-2016-modest-interest-high-stakes/most-democrats-see-a-good-chance-of-supporting-clinton-many-possible-rivals-are-not-well-known/ Another poll from March 2015 showed 24% name recognition (lowest in the presidential field) and zero net favorability: https://news.gallup.com/poll/181949/clinton-favorability-familiarity-bests-2016-contenders.aspx
  6. Or, she barely squeaked by an outsider candidate with zero support among elected party officials (who also started out with almost zero name recognition), and lost the general election to the least popular major-party candidate in history. I shudder to think how Rubio-Clinton (or Kasich-Clinton, or Walker-Clinton...) election would have looked like.
  7. I'm starting to think that Biden and Warren both missed their chance by not running in 2016. Either of them could have walked away with the nomination, since it turned out Clinton was a paper tiger. Plus, Warren running in 2016 would have meant that Sanders doesn't run.
  8. DNC needs to: 1. End Iowa's "first in nation" status in future contests due to demonstrated dire incompetence of local officials. 2. Ban caucuses and switch all contests to primaries. At least there would be some upside to this fiasco if either of the two happened.
  9. In high school? Voting for the other Democratic candidate with universal name recognition, who was endorsed by pretty much every other left-wing politician, and who spent the previous 24 years preparing for the election?
  10. I think the best description of Bloomberg's (nonexistent) chances of winning the presidency was given by Josh Marshall of TPM in 2016: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/bubble-boy-2
  11. Gorn

    Gun Control

    As someone who's generally supportive of individual gun ownership (on a purely philosophical level; I don't own any myself, and never have), I find the opposition to any sort of regulation... baffling at the very least. After all, you need to jump through a whole bunch of hoops to be able to legally operate a car, which is far more important and beneficial on both social and individual level than owning a gun, and which directly affects people's ability to work and general quality of life. You have to be of certain age, you have to pass a test to prove you know how to drive - which, at least in my country, includes passing a theoretical test to prove you know the relevant laws and regulations, mandatory number of driving practice hours, and passing physical and mental health tests. After you receive your licence, you're still limited in how you're allowed to drive (drunk driving laws, speed limits, seatbelt laws...), and your right to drive may be taken away from you based on your actions. None of these laws will physically prevent a drunk teenager without a licence from getting behind a wheel and driving 100 km/h through a residential street, but they make this an exception rather than the rule, and they save countless lives.
  12. Except that Sanders happens to be the best-liked candidate in the entire Democratic field, so he's actually the candidate most likely to unite the party: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-ups-and-downs-of-candidate-popularity-in-4-charts/ Edit: Turns out even Tom Steyer is a fan
  13. I, for one, would like to thank Mrs. Clinton for her comments. In this crucial pre-primary period, there is no more effective way to solidify the support of the left wing of the party behind Sanders than what she just did, or to improve the turnout of existing supporters. I hope Sanders campaign will send her a thank-you note when they win Iowa.
  14. Gorn

    US Politics: Mail and Managers for Mitch

    Yeah, I believe something like this as well. They both appear to be fully convinced they're telling the truth, and I don't think either is straight-up lying. It's easy for something like "it's difficult for a woman to beat Trump" to become "a woman can't beat Trump" (or the reverse) when recalling a conversation which happened more than a year ago. Especially since, and I hate to say this, they're both over 70 years old.
  15. Gorn

    Nuclear weapons

    Haven't modern papers pretty much disproved the "nuclear winter" hypothesis? Even in the original scenario, it would only come about as a combination of multiple worst-case scenarios ("40 coin-tosses coming up heads").