969
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] worldwidewave@lemmy.world 325 points 1 month ago

Sanders, who competed against both Harris and Biden in the 2020 Democratic primary, said in Monday's interview that he wants Harris to make clear that "it is not acceptable that 60% of our people are living paycheck to paycheck while the billionaire class has never, ever had it so good."

"It's not acceptable," Sanders continued, "that we've got millions of seniors who can't afford dental care, hearing aids, eyeglasses, that we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major country on Earth, and almost all of the new wealth and income is going to the people on top."

While the facts have worsened over the years, Bernie really has never changed. I credit him with Biden moving to the left in his presidency and I’m excited to see him work with Harris.

[-] NewWorldOverHere@lemmy.world 26 points 1 month ago

I hear Bernie’s voice and cadence when reading the quote.

[-] aphlamingphoenix@lemm.ee 6 points 1 month ago

I always imagine his little orchestra-conducting hand movements.

[-] Lemming6969@lemmy.world 18 points 1 month ago

Harris needs to skewer the Republicans with the dirtiest shit imaginable that Sanders isn't remotely capable of being, and then be normal after the win.

The issues Sanders cares about are important to resolve long term, but they will not win the election.

[-] Facebones@reddthat.com 75 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

People really need to drop this Insistence that progressive/leftist shit won't win an election. Even with Trumpism as the alternative, dems can't get a leg up because they think chasing trumpers further right will flip them - but trumpers are trump loyalists and even "normal" Republicans are all in. There's no votes for dems there, but they've completely lost their potential base playing this game. Nobody votes because our options are corporate far right or corporate mid right.

If Dems want to mobilize apathetic voters, bring the left vote in, AND flip some "traditional Republicans," they need to run on those policies that are largely popular like M4A and run a candidate with a track record of fighting for more progressive shit that people dont think will drop it all on day 1 like every other dem.

The problem is dems will take Trump over moving an inch to the left 10/10 times.

[-] roguetrick@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

If anything, it's been proven time and time again that centrism doesn't win elections. Centrism is a strategy where you adopt it and hope your opponents just fuck up horribly. You're certainly not out to create a platform for change or chase votes. See the recent UK election for an example, the Tories collapsed but in actual numbers labour gained almost no ground. That's almost an impressive amount of walking in a victory.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HurlingDurling@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

The issues Sanders cares about are important to resolve long term, but they will not win the election.

But would get a very large portion of voters interested enough to vote in Nov. Lately most people in both sides (except MAGAs, them too braindead) is they are tired that the elite control everything, and while the Harris campaign might not turn the majority of Republicans, it may get the centrist and left energized that there might actually be change coming and vote.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 92 points 1 month ago

If Harris becomes president, the number one thing I want from her is to listen to the experts. I want her to listen to climate experts, public health experts, economic experts, etc. I think Democrats are generally better than Republicans at listening to and following the advice of experts, so I think she will meet this requirement.

However, there can be peril in this, as the experts don't always agree on everything and aren't always objective. For instance, one of the preeminent economists of the mid to late 20th century was Milton Friedman, who argued that just about everything the government did was bad. His opinions about deregulation, tax cuts, privatization, etc, became gospel, and then policy. We are living with the effects of that gospel and those policies today.

I am certain that Friedman believed his ideology would result in the best outcomes for the largest number of people. I don't for a minute believe he thought his policies would hurt people or make them worse off. But while economists (or any experts, really) like Friedman may have had the best of intentions, what they lacked was a willingness to be wrong. This is the true weakness of ideologues, and why they can make for poor scientists.

We don't only need leaders who listen to experts, we need experts who can see beyond their own ideological biases, and rely on evidence and data instead of belief. If we can achieve this, I think many things will improve in the United States.

[-] Jaderick@lemmy.world 47 points 1 month ago

I refuse to believe economists have the best of intentions in mind when they write in absolutes lol. Too many refuse to factor human costs and irrationality into their calculations, Friedman being one of main examples.

I’m sure there are economists that do, but the few I’ve spoken to talk about people abstractly and as expendables.

[-] DogWater@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yeah it's batshit that an economist won a nobel prize for his theory that people don't act 100% rationally so that's why economic models were failing to predict reality.

Like, I'm sure it wasn't obvious and I'm not trying to sound like I'm smarter than economists, but holy fuck duh

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 8 points 1 month ago

My economics teacher would publicly fellate Alan Greenspan in class. Cue the subprime mortgage crisis and Mr Greenspan is out there going "I didn't account for bankers being stupid and greedy."

[-] iknowitwheniseeit@lemmynsfw.com 7 points 1 month ago

Hahaha that's fantastic! Do you remember who it was? I'd love to read about this....

[-] Pandalus@programming.dev 8 points 1 month ago

duckduckgo'd: 'economist won a nobel prize for his theory that people don’t act 100% rationally so that’s why economic models were failing' results was this:(theconversation(dot)com link), so I guess Richard Thaler is who you're looking for.

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's even worse than that it's not even just the irrationally that's unaccounted for. It's also that people rationally optimize for variables that are disregarded. Neoclassical economics takes obviously falsifiable assumptions as axioms. It's brutally stupid shit. No amount of numbers attached to it would make it work if those axioms are wrong. Yet it's been used to enact major economic policy all over the world. Including "shock therapy" that got applied to many countries around the world, such as my country of origin where that led to dramatic drop in GDP, standard of living, life expectancy, more than a decade of poverty and a 20% population exodus. People like to badmouth Psychology as a shit science, boy, Psychologists check their results a lot more than these folks.

[-] DogWater@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

It's like people are the ones doing the things that create an economy so economists should be integrating the study of human psychology into economic theory.

Which, to the credit of the discipline seems to be happening finally (at least more than it was in the past).

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Oh yes. But more generally there's a significant need for empiricism. Not just on the psychology of the economic individual. For example the fact that MMT's empirical observations of reality aren't mainstream yet is staggering. If empiricism was a mainstay or economics, these observations would have been tested and accepted if not falsified in the 90s or 2000s. Yet you have a country like the UK devastated by austerity following the great recession because that didn't happen.

[-] tate@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 month ago

Joseph Stiglitz

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

I refuse to believe economists have the best of intentions in mind when they write in absolutes

The same can be said for most professions when they think in terms of absolutes.

The world isn't binary, and treating it in those terms almost always creates worse outcomes.

[-] FrankLaskey@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 month ago

This kind of technocratic approach can sound great and it’s always good to have policy and positions formed by those most knowledgeable in the relevant field. The problem is that the “experts” that will likely have her ear will be the ones that are vetted and approved by the power elite, the wealthiest in this country who will largely recommend what is best to protect their privilege, wealth and position.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Steve@communick.news 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

When I learned about him I was surprised that a big part of Friedman's ideology was the Negative Income Tax. A form of Universal Basic Income. That would have made a big difference if that was implemented also.

[-] skittle07crusher@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I want her to listen to climate experts

Yep!

public health experts

Yep!

economic experts

You lost me.

Economics is just political economy somehow supposedly divorced from politics.

The economics Nobel prize is not even a “real” Nobel prize. No kidding, look it up.

[-] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

The economics Nobel prize is not even a “real” Nobel prize. No kidding, look it up.

I know. Believe me, I have had my issues with the field of economics. But, who else should our elected officials seek guidance from on economic issues? The only alternative seems to be choosing some heterodox economic ideology and forming policies based on those unproven theories. Do we know if those theories, when put into practice, will make people's lives better or worse? Is it ethical to make the American people guinea pigs in an experiment to find out? I don't think so.

[-] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 91 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I like that Sanders treats Harris just like he has treated every other political colleague.

And I hope that Harris awakens every day happy to have Bernie on her side.

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 59 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

In a separate interview Monday with CNN's Anderson Cooper, Sanders said he is "sure" he will ultimately endorse Harris for the Democratic nomination but stressed that he wants to see her put forth an agenda "that speaks to the long-neglected needs of working families," specifically calling for a permanent expansion of the child tax credit and an increase in the stagnant federal minimum wage.

"I just want to make sure that her campaign understands that for too many people in this country, when they look at Washington, D.C., they feel ignored. They feel insulted that people are not understanding what is going on in their lives," said Sanders. "Life expectancy for working-class people is 10 years shorter than it is for the rich. And working-class people want a government that represents them and not corporate America."

This is all good stuff for people who like Bernie and for people who like Kamala, remind Kamala/give her the opportunity to remind everyone else she supported Medicare for All in the 2020 primaries and was willing to get into specifics

She's willing to go along with moderates when that's what the teams she's on has already decided (see; her time as California AG dealing with a moderate governor, her time as a VP dealing with Biden), but when she's starting from square one she looks left for support. She's not my favorite Dem ever, but she's absolutely someone we can work with.

[-] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago

Biden managed to get a bunch of unions to endorse him for the elections, both due to negotiations and his policy. Given that Kamala was in his team, the only thing she needs is the will to declare that she will continue along Biden's lines.

[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 30 points 1 month ago

Honestly, I really like Harris, but I'd still prefer Sanders.

[-] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 1 month ago

A Sanders/Harris ticket (in either order) would have been great for people like me but I don't think it would fly with much of the US

[-] aStonedSanta@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

It’s kinda wild but I really like that idea. Socialistic ideologies moderated by a person who understands law and nuance surrounding it. Could be good for America.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

I love Bernie, but he's even older than Biden, who is dropping out due to concerns over his age.

[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 7 points 1 month ago

Yeah, Bernie definitely shouldn't run, but I mean policy-wise I like Sanders a bit better.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] xantoxis@lemmy.world 29 points 1 month ago

Something I learned yesterday: Statistically, Harris' voting record is closer to Sanders than anyone else's record.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] verdantbanana@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

we the people still have one voice left fighting for us

Sanders was arrested at a protest against segregation while at the same time Biden was fighting for segregation in the 70s

choice of who to support as leaders was clear then and should be just as clear today

[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl 17 points 1 month ago

Yeah, it should be clear... It's Kamala Harris. That's who we need to support. Bernie isn't running, and neither is Biden. I love Bernie, but we need to support the Nominee, not let perfect be the enemy of good.

With that said, I hope she listens to him and advances administration goals to actually improve people's lives.

[-] EvilEyedPanda@lemmy.world 21 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

America's stance has been "fuck the working class" since the 80's at this point I'd love to see anyone try

[-] Chewget@lemm.ee 12 points 1 month ago

Before it's too late

[-] Pistcow@lemm.ee 11 points 1 month ago

I am once again asking you not to be a dick.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2024
969 points (98.9% liked)

News

22800 readers
3262 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS