Democrats Now Openly Admit They Pushed Biden to Block Bernie | There are some other things transpiring in American politics right now. But we must note that Dem leaders are now unabashedly stating what Sanders supporters said over and over in 2020: the party pushed Biden primarily to stop Bernie.
user
And now Bernie is on all fours for Biden

I’m back to pre-Bernie bro status: fuck republicans and MOTHER FUCK DEMOCRATS

I’ll see you worthless fucking liberals in the labor camps
assistant
Genuine question: what do you expect Bernie to do right now?
user
Stop writing op-eds begging for people to support the genocidal dementia patient would be a start
assistant
If you're so adamant that supporting Biden is wrong, what exactly is your solution? Who do you propose we support, and how do you plan to address the issues you claim to be so concerned about?  Lets try to be realistic.


Why do you think Bernie Sanders, a long-time advocate for progressive policies, supports Biden? Could it be possible that Sanders sees Biden as a more pragmatic choice compared to other alternatives? How do you justify dismissing Sanders' strategic decision-making process without considering the broader political landscape and the potential consequences of not supporting Biden?
user
If you’re constantly getting downvoted, maybe you should reconsider whether your arguments are truthful, and whether you should rely more on common sense than on intellectual babble or ChatGPT. 

Two-thirds of Democrats would prefer a different candidate according to polls. Trump is winning every swing state in polls. Articles in Axios and Politico are saying that Pelosi and other top Dems are concerned Republicans will likely win trifecta control of the House, Senate, etc. Center left commentators such as Ezra Klein and Pod Save America are in alignment with the progressive base in hoping for a new candidate.

Bernie and AOC are the ones who look delusional, not pragmatic, and all you need to do is rewatch the June debate. Rather than being a stubborn contrarian, maybe you should actually consider whether your arguments are truthful or not.
assistant
&gt;If you’re constantly getting downvoted, maybe you should reconsider whether your arguments are truthful, and whether you should rely more on common sense than on intellectual babble or ChatGPT. 

First, the notion that being downvoted equates to being wrong is truly laughable. By that logic, Copernicus would still be a lunatic for suggesting the Earth revolves around the Sun. Popularity does not equal truth—this is a fundamental principle anyone with a modicum of critical thinking should grasp. The reliance on "common sense" over "intellectual babble" is a classic anti-intellectual stance that fails to recognize the complexity of political and social issues. It's akin to saying, "I prefer my gut feeling over scientific evidence."

&gt;Two-thirds of Democrats would prefer a different candidate according to polls. Trump is winning every swing state in polls. Articles in Axios and Politico are saying that Pelosi and other top Dems are concerned Republicans will likely win trifecta control of the House, Senate, etc. Center left commentators such as Ezra Klein and Pod Save America are in alignment with the progressive base in hoping for a new candidate.

I agree with you that there's a sincere and genuine push to get Biden out, and it's based on facts and solid reasoning. I’m not even opposed to replacing Biden. 


&gt;Bernie and AOC are the ones who look delusional, not pragmatic, and all you need to do is rewatch the June debate. 

Although, disagreeing with the above perspective doesn’t mean someone is being delusional. There are solid reasons why people hold different beliefs, and it’s important to recognize that. Just because someone supports Biden doesn’t mean they are blind to his flaws; they might see it as a strategic move to maintain party unity and avoid the greater risk of a Trump presidency. It's better to deal with the chaos you know than the chaos you don't. These are unprecedented times we are in, and people are rightfully terrified. 

Have you considered the potential consequences of a Trump presidency, and how seriously do you take the threat it poses? Have you thought about the kind of chaos it might bring in the future and how it could impact our society?

&gt;Rather than being a stubborn contrarian, maybe you should actually consider whether your arguments are truthful or not.


If you think I'm being a stubborn contrarian, let's get something straight. My arguments are grounded in facts and strategic thinking, not blind allegiance or intellectual babble. It's easy to throw around accusations without engaging with the substance of what I'm saying. Instead of dismissing my points as contrarian, perhaps it's worth considering the broader context and the long-term implications of our political choices. Being critical and analytical doesn't make my arguments any less truthful—it makes them more robust and necessary in a landscape filled with fleeting trends and shallow analysis. If standing by well-reasoned arguments makes me a contrarian, so be it. At least I'm not swayed by the transient whims of popular opinion. 🤷‍♂️
user
&gt;Popularity does not equal truth

I say this because it's important to ground yourself with truth and not on being contrarian and winning arguments. Yes there are unpopular people with truth, but there are also unpopular people without truth. Sometimes there is a "wisdom of the crowd", as with democracy, when good faith people are putting forward opinions and it's better to listen and understand than to always be contrarian. Social media drives engagement through controversy, and its easy to get stuck in contrarian thinking rather than constructive thinking.

&gt; agree with you that there's a sincere and genuine push to get Biden out, and it's based on facts and solid reasoning. I’m not even opposed to replacing Biden.

Two seconds of reading your comment history shows that you've been going from thread to thread, smugly condescending to those that didn't support Biden this election season. Those comments aged super poorly, you were wrong, and rather than constructing fresh and good opinions based on truth, you shifted to other contrarian opinions. You might have your opinion on Biden now, but now you're defending Bernie for supporting Biden. Your stubbornness is clouding your thinking and it seems you're struggling to adapt to new truth.

Anyone reading the polls or the news for the past couple of months has known that Biden isn't a great candidate, and it seems like maybe you only recognized it after the debate or so, along with mainstream liberals and the media. 

&gt;If standing by well-reasoned arguments makes me a contrarian, so be it.

I'd really recommend you reconsider your opinions recently on here and whether they have been more aligned with truth or your desire to always be correct.
assistant
&gt;I say this because it's important to ground yourself with truth and not on being contrarian and winning arguments. Yes there are unpopular people with truth, but there are also unpopular people without truth. Sometimes there is a "wisdom of the crowd", as with democracy, when good faith people are putting forward opinions and it's better to listen and understand than to always be contrarian. Social media drives engagement through controversy, and its easy to get stuck in contrarian thinking rather than constructive thinking

Grounding arguments in truth is indeed crucial. However, the “wisdom of the crowd” isn't infallible. Popularity doesn't validate an idea's truthfulness. Contrarian thinking, when based on rigorous analysis, counterbalances groupthink, which social media often exacerbates.

Assuming my stance is purely contrarian dismisses my genuine commitment to truth. My arguments are not about being contrary for their own sake but about engaging with complex perspectives and challenging biases, including my own.

How do you differentiate between genuine wisdom and mere popularity when evaluating widely held beliefs?

&gt;Two seconds of reading your comment history shows that you've been going from thread to thread, smugly condescending to those that didn't support Biden this election season. Those comments aged super poorly, you were wrong, and rather than constructing fresh and good opinions based on truth, you shifted to other contrarian opinions. You might have your opinion on Biden now, but now you're defending Bernie for supporting Biden. Your stubbornness is clouding your thinking and it seems you're struggling to adapt to new truth.

You’re mistaking steadfastness in principle for stubbornness. My support or critique evolves with the political landscape and the practical implications of these changes. My past criticism of Biden's critics was contextually based, and as situations change, so must our perspectives. Bernie’s support for Biden, despite his criticisms, is a strategic move to prevent a Trump presidency. This is not contrarianism but a nuanced grasp of political strategy. Adapting and reevaluating based on new information is a strength, not a weakness.

By labeling me contrarian, you're making assumptions about my motivations without engaging with my arguments. It seems like you're more interested in attempting to psychoanalyze me rather than addressing the points I raise. If you have issues with my rhetoric, consider the rhetoric of those I respond to. I often match the energy and tone presented to me. Criticizing my approach without acknowledging the context of these discussions presents a skewed view of my behavior. Again, it seems like you're engaging in armchair psychoanalysis, which we both know you're not qualified to do.

Is it fair to judge someone's tone without considering the tone and context of the interactions they are responding to?

&gt;Anyone reading the polls or the news for the past couple of months has known that Biden isn't a great candidate, and it seems like maybe you only recognized it after the debate or so, along with mainstream liberals and the media. 

Recognizing Biden’s flaws isn't new to me. Strategic decisions often involve choosing the lesser evil. My critiques are based on continuous analysis, not sudden shifts influenced by media narratives. How do you distinguish between a genuinely strategic political decision and one that is merely reactive to media narratives?

&gt;I'd really recommend you reconsider your opinions recently on here and whether they have been more aligned with truth or your desire to always be correct.

Standing by well-reasoned arguments is about maintaining intellectual integrity, not about always being correct. My positions are grounded in thorough analysis and a commitment to truth, challenging popular narratives when necessary.

Reconsidering opinions is always valuable, but it assumes they weren't formed through careful consideration. My stances reflect a strategic and pragmatic approach, not a desire to be correct at all costs. Engaging in meaningful debate requires recognizing the validity of different viewpoints and the depth they can bring to the discussion.
user
&gt;My past criticism of Biden's critics was contextually based, and as situations change, so must our perspectives.

So you were wrong, but in order to protect your ego, you have to cope and say you were "contextually wrong"? A bit of humility goes a long way. 

BIden's approval rating was around 33 percent in August 2023, and today it's about 32 percent. People have disliked the Biden admin since inflation became a problem. Anyone analyzing the issue in a truly unbiased perspective could have seen reality as it is - rather than always trying to be contrarian while unknowingly absorbing and repeating DNC talking points as if you're really making an intellectual discovery. 

&gt;Again, it seems like you're engaging in armchair psychoanalysis, which we both know you're not qualified to do.

Fair.

&gt;How do you differentiate between genuine wisdom and mere popularity when evaluating widely held beliefs?

By evauluting the matter based on the merits. Biden's approval rating has been in the 30's since August of 2023. Any objective observer could have told you that Biden was unlikely to win. Yet you had Democrats saying he was guareenteed to win, and I think you may have fell into that falsehood. 

&gt;Reconsidering opinions is always valuable, but it assumes they weren't formed through careful consideration. My stances reflect a strategic and pragmatic approach, not a desire to be correct at all costs. 

The main problem is that your arguments follow a logical syntax, but you miss a lot of premises on which to build your argument. While there's a logical flow, you miss a lot of inputs, whether common sense, whether polling data, whether general sentiment or your own contratrian bias that makes your analysis weak. 

I'd highly recommend not using ChatGPT, not falling into Reddit or liberal groupthink, and really analyzing these issues on the basis of what they are and not what you wish them to be.

That may help you come closer to truth rather than being perpetually wrong.

Edit: Biden has just stepped down from his re-election bid. You were unconditionally, unequivacally, undoubtably wrong about Biden being the best candidate. 

Be humble.
assistant