Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #851  
Old 03-17-2019, 12:08 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,271
Hey, aren't you guys forgetting Bill de Blasio??
  #852  
Old 03-18-2019, 08:30 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,953
Beto's first-day draw of $6.1 million is tops so far.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...ing-all-rivals
  #853  
Old 03-29-2019, 05:51 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,340
Some not-so-good news for Joe Biden today.
I found my way to the holding room for the speakers, where everyone was chatting, taking photos, and getting ready to speak to the hundreds of voters in the audience. Just before the speeches, we were ushered to the side of the stage where we were lined up by order of introduction. As I was taking deep breaths and preparing myself to make my case to the crowd, I felt two hands on my shoulders. I froze. “Why is the vice-president of the United States touching me?”

I felt him get closer to me from behind. He leaned further in and inhaled my hair. I was mortified. I thought to myself, “I didn’t wash my hair today and the vice-president of the United States is smelling it. And also, what in the actual fuck? Why is the vice-president of the United States smelling my hair?” He proceeded to plant a big slow kiss on the back of my head. My brain couldn’t process what was happening. I was embarrassed. I was shocked. I was confused. There is a Spanish saying, “tragame tierra,” it means, “earth, swallow me whole.” I couldn’t move and I couldn’t say anything. I wanted nothing more than to get Biden away from me. My name was called and I was never happier to get on stage in front of an audience.

By then, as a young Latina in politics, I had gotten used to feeling like an outsider in rooms dominated by white men. But I had never experienced anything so blatantly inappropriate and unnerving before. Biden was the second-most powerful man in the country and, arguably, one of the most powerful men in the world. He was there to promote me as the right person for the lieutenant governor job. Instead, he made me feel uneasy, gross, and confused. The vice-president of the United States of America had just touched me in an intimate way reserved for close friends, family, or romantic partners.
  #854  
Old 03-29-2019, 06:26 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,953
I'm finding myself drawn to Booker more and more, and I think it's actually because he has national recognition, he can potentially reach a number of voter groups, but most importantly, he's not reaching his peak a year ahead of the primaries. He's either just really dull and not popular, or he's wisely biding his time to make a move until later in the year.

I feel like Biden, Pete, Beto, Kamala and Bernie have the potential of being chewed up and spit out by Christmas.

Something to consider though: if he ends up marrying Rosario Dawson, there are pics and movies out there that make Melania's photo shoots look tame enough for Highlights Magazine. Is America ready to know what it's first lady's vulva looks like?
  #855  
Old 03-29-2019, 06:28 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,776
Right now, I'm rooting hardest for Bill Weld.
  #856  
Old 03-29-2019, 06:57 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,157
Has Biden said anything?
  #857  
Old 03-30-2019, 03:21 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,281
My sense is that Biden has a shit-ton of #MeToo moments out there. Not to the extreme end like Trump or even Franken, but bad enough—and in bottomless quantities.
  #858  
Old 03-30-2019, 06:06 AM
Boycott is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
My sense is that Biden has a shit-ton of #MeToo moments out there. Not to the extreme end like Trump or even Franken, but bad enough—and in bottomless quantities.
Agree and that is probably the reason he has not announced a run yet. The media line has been that being the former Vice President means he can afford to *bide* his time as name recognition is his advantage. But I believe he is well aware that his long career in the public eye opens up scrutiny in more than one way, and hit jobs coming out now will cause him to sit out. Better now when he is still on the sidelines than dirt dropping as soon as he starts campaigning. If he runs his reputation could get tarnished beyond return.
  #859  
Old 03-30-2019, 06:48 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,741
Biden's image, like Hillary's, was rehabilitated because of his time within the Obama political orbit. People liked Biden better when he was Obama's wing man. Do people like Biden better than Trump? Yeah, but that's probably true of everyone of the Dem candidates. He has to get through the primaries first, and I honestly doubt he can win the nomination. Biden will soon realize he's in a new political environment, and he won't like it. I think he wants to beat Trump, but I don't think he wants to compete against the rest of the Democrats - I think he's struggling with that psychologically. But make no mistake: he absolutely will have to fight it out, and the rest of the field is warming up in the locker room and more than eager to step in the ring with him.

I could be way wrong on this - it's hard to predict political futures these days. But my bets are on Booker, Harris, or Beto. There will be one or two others who outperform expectations (Yang, Buttigiege?), and perhaps Biden and a few others will under-perform or just never get off the ground.
  #860  
Old 03-30-2019, 07:45 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,576
We've all been breathlessly anticipating the announcement, but here it is: Wayne Messam, the mayor of Miramar, FL, is in it to win it.
  #861  
Old 03-30-2019, 08:51 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 83,407
OK, at least I'd heard of South Bend.
  #862  
Old 03-30-2019, 02:14 PM
jsc1953 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 10,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
OK, at least I'd heard of South Bend.
Only because they have a football team, I'll warrant.
  #863  
Old 03-31-2019, 01:44 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,281
Right: Miramar is actually bigger than South Bend.

Asahi, I like your analysis. But a lot of people would be shocked you don't include Bernie on that list!
__________________
Some people on TV are nice to look at.
  #864  
Old 04-02-2019, 10:28 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Right: Miramar is actually bigger than South Bend.

Asahi, I like your analysis. But a lot of people would be shocked you don't include Bernie on that list!
Yep, Bernie should be on the list of Dem contenders. But he'd probably lose against the Don.
  #865  
Old 04-05-2019, 11:44 AM
squidfood is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 417
So, Warren just called for the end of the filibuster for legislation today.

She's now firmly, firmly off my list, almost to the extent of not voting if she's the nominee. She's gone from "I like her policies, but don't think she's making smart political decisions to win the General" (the Native American thing) to "out of touch on what people care about at all" (going after tech companies like Amazon as opposed to, say, Comcast and AT&T) to "downright dangerous" (remove the filibuster).

Regardless of what McConnell et al. have done with judges, can't she see how much worse things would be right now if the R's had been filibuster-free for the past two years?
  #866  
Old 04-05-2019, 11:48 AM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 22,530
Huh. And the Filibuster thing makes me more likely to vote for her.
  #867  
Old 04-05-2019, 11:52 AM
squidfood is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
Huh. And the Filibuster thing makes me more likely to vote for her.
Sorry, since some of my own job budget comes from Federal sources I tend to track the politics around that. Remember the awful Trump budgets and all the things they propose to cut? It's pretty much the filibuster that stopped a huge % of those. Those cuts remove capabilities from the government that take years to rebuild even if the funds come back.
  #868  
Old 04-05-2019, 12:01 PM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 22,530
When used by Republicans for whom the rules don't apply.

Comes a time when, once you realize your opponent is no longer playing by the same rules, you have to change the game.

Last edited by JohnT; 04-05-2019 at 12:01 PM.
  #869  
Old 04-05-2019, 02:15 PM
squidfood is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
When used by Republicans for whom the rules don't apply.

Comes a time when, once you realize your opponent is no longer playing by the same rules, you have to change the game.
Well so far, the legislative filibuster is the only remaining red line McConnell has been vocal about defending. I agree that "if a rule is going to be broken anyway, you want your side to do it first to not be a chump" but as an slow-change institutionalist I still find it hugely disturbing that Warren as a senator is bringing it to the table (which also raises the probability that the R's will do it first).
  #870  
Old 04-06-2019, 07:05 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,281
All the hard lefties I know want to abolish the filibuster. It's a very poorly conceived idea, for the reasons outlined above. Give Bernie credit, he's resistant to the idea--although he may have to cave if his fans want it bad enough.
__________________
Some people on TV are nice to look at.
  #871  
Old 04-06-2019, 08:50 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 83,407
Yeah, the filibuster is the only thing that stopped the tax givaway to rich folks, too! Oh, wait.

The Republicans want the filibuster rule to continue to exist, because they're just going to break the rule whenever they feel like it.
  #872  
Old 04-06-2019, 11:41 AM
Boycott is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 42
I find it a little weird how Joe Biden is touted to bring back some normality to the White House, yet at the same time people are concerned about his age that they would prefer him to be a one term and done president. Handing over the reigns to a young VP like Beto or Harris.

In that case Biden is essentially a lame duck after one year. 2022 is the mid-terms, 2023 is when candidates start their campaigns for president and 2024 is the year a new president is elected.

What is normal about that?

I guess the same applies to Bernie Sanders who is older than Biden.
  #873  
Old 04-06-2019, 05:14 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Yeah, the filibuster is the only thing that stopped the tax givaway to rich folks, too! Oh, wait.

The Republicans want the filibuster rule to continue to exist, because they're just going to break the rule whenever they feel like it.

As Bernie pointed out, Trump does NOT want to preserve the filibuster: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...59245106278400

But I'm not just opposed because Trump wants to do it. Progressive programs and institutions take time to create, build, fine tune, and get public support behind them. Repealing them takes none of that: you can instantly tear them down. So if we just seesaw back and forth based on whoever gets a slight majority, small government budget slashers have the advantage.
__________________
Some people on TV are nice to look at.
  #874  
Old 04-07-2019, 12:10 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,380
Filibuster?? Is someone here defending the filibuster??

Remember P.L. 115-97, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017? The law that transferred Trillions of dollars from the needy to the rich, guaranteeing an ever-increasing debt as far as they eye could see. The middle class was bought off with $339 average tax cut just so that millions each — or billions — could be given to corporations and the super-rich. Now the Republicans are whining that there's no money for regulators, no money for food stamps, no money to help the neediest children attend school. Of course there's no money left — it was all given to the billionaires and the big corporations that fund the political shit-show. P.L. 115-97 passed the Senate by a 51-49 margin; there was no filibuster-proof majority there.

Remember Betsy DeVos, one of the most egregious criminals ever to sit in a U.S. Cabinet? Tom Price? Scott Pruitt? They and other Trump appointees make Teapot Dome look like a model for good governance. Not one of these criminals received 60 confirmation votes. To install Betsy DeVos, whose open goal is destroying public schools, as head of the Department of Education, her fellow deplorable Jeff Sessions had to un-recuse himself to get a 50-50 tie in the Senate. Mike Pence made the vote 51-50; that's why this filthy criminal is in the Cabinet. There was no filibuster-proof majority there. (Merrick Garland, OTOH, would have had well over 51 votes, but he was denied a vote by the evil-doers.)

Oh, the GOP is still clever enough to keep filibuster rules active when they serve their interests! Why has ACA never been repealed? McConnell and his fellow turds could rule out that filibuster in a flash if they wanted to, but they're not stupid. It's much better to whine "The Ds won't let us replace ACA with something better" then to actually deny medical care to millions of Americans.

For several years now, R policy is very simple: It takes 60 D votes or 51 R votes for a measure to pass the Senate. Ds, mostly honest good-spirited folk, don't see what's happening — they just can't believe how utterly despicable the R Senators (or at least their leaders) have become.

TL;DR: @ Any Doper who thinks there's the slightest smidgen of honor among R's in the Senate, or who think its historic rules have any relevance in today's clime: Wake up and smell the coffee!
  #875  
Old 04-07-2019, 07:30 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,004
Bad news for Warren.

http://emersonpolling.com/2019/04/07...with-his-base/

Doing that poorly in your home state does not bode well.
  #876  
Old 04-07-2019, 07:48 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 83,407
Wow, yeah. Granted that that's just one poll, but with anything resembling a reasonable margin of error, she's toast with those numbers. If it were, say, Biden and Booker ahead of her, but she were still ahead of Sanders, she'd have a chance, but with the voters preferring Sanders 2 to 1 over her, it's pretty clear that she can't even take the progressive lane.
  #877  
Old 04-08-2019, 10:41 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,953
Swalwell is in. Likely another dude looking for a cabinet position.
  #878  
Old 04-08-2019, 10:58 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,598
His signature issue is gun control. I mean that's the issue that he's actually making the focus of his campaign, according to his Wikipedia. And I actually remember when he said something to the effect of "if a civil war broke out over the 2nd Amendment, the government would use nukes."

I'm sorry, that's an idiotic remark and he caught flak for it deservedly. There is no conceivable scenario where the American government uses nuclear weapons against people inside its own borders. Whatever the hell you think about either gun owners, or some hypothetical anti-government rebels who would probably never exist in real life, nuclear weapons are nuclear weapons. They're hell on earth.

Whether he actually believes they would be used, or was just joking, Swallwell majorly fucked up his chances of advancing politically with that remark. It's way beyond "Dukakis in the tank". If by some INSANE - utterly INSANE - twist of fate, he actually got the nomination, he would be completely destroyed by Trump. The NRA and all the right wing groups would work up Republican voters into a frenzy based on that idiotic gaffe, and he would be toast.

Having debates like the ones on this board, or between individual acquaintances, and someone bringing up this hypothetical about civil war in America and gun owners, and someone saying, "well, I mean, the government has nuclear bombs," is one thing. A politician in office, a representative of the government, saying it, is quite another thing.
  #879  
Old 04-08-2019, 11:09 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,776
Honestly, for quite a number of these, I think their runs are just no-harm-no-foul rehearsals for another presidential run in the future.

The many folks in the race diffuse Trump's ability to focus on just one target, it allows them to speak simultaneously about a wide variety of important kitchen table issues and gives them the opportunity to cut their teeth in a race and gain valuable experience where soon, it will come down to just a few.

While it will be interesting to see who outperforms expectations, I don't take many of them seriously at this point. I'm grateful for their diverse messages, their fundraising efforts and their enthusiasm. It will take them all to bring out enough voters in 2020 for a decisive win for Dems sufficient to overcome voter suppression efforts by Republicans, Russians and god knows who else. But the key is unity, and they all seem to understand that. (Except Howard Schultz, who is a dickhead who should GTF out.)
  #880  
Old 04-09-2019, 01:10 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
Swalwell is in. Likely another dude looking for a cabinet position.

I happened to catch his announcement on Colbert just a little while ago, which was on because I hadn’t changed the TV after basketball yet (lead-ins are still a thing, apparently). I was pretty impressed. I sent him a few bucks, so that should help his first-day number.
  #881  
Old 04-09-2019, 01:28 AM
Guest-starring: Id!'s Avatar
Guest-starring: Id! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
(Except Howard Schultz, who is a dickhead who should GTF out.)
As should Tulsi Gabbard.
  #882  
Old 04-10-2019, 09:38 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,004
Harris also way behind in her own home state.

https://poll.qu.edu/california/relea...ReleaseID=2615

Early yet but Biden’s strength in the wake of a negative news cycle is notable.
  #883  
Old 04-10-2019, 09:51 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,157
I think there's still a significant non zero chance that Biden announces and then wins the first several states.

I'll note that this is not my preferred outcome.
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #884  
Old 04-16-2019, 10:04 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,380

Which candidates early-state activists are considering


Early state activists may be a good predictor. These are from February, but I'm pleased to see greatest strength among my own favorites. (Turn off SultanBugs to view the table.)

Code:
That's why I've been repeatedly interviewing a group of roughly 60 Democratic Party activists in
Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada and Washington, D.C ...

Share of respondents who said they were considering a candidate or
had already committed to support a candidate in the 2020 Democratic
presidential primary

Candidate 	Dec 2018 	Feb 2019

Harris 		60.5% 		54.3%
Booker 		44.7 		48.5
Brown 		39.5 		45.7
Warren 		23.7 		40.0
Klobuchar 	34.2 		37.1
Biden 		39.5 		34.3
Sanders 	28.9 		28.6
Gillibrand 	21.1 		22.9
Hickenlooper 	21.1 		22.9
Merkley 	 7.9 		20.0
Delaney 	15.8 		17.1
Castro 	 	-		17.1
Buttigieg 	- 		17.1
O'Rourke 	34.2 		14.3
McAuliffe 	 5.3 		14.3
Bloomberg 	15.8 		 8.6
Holder 		18.4 		 8.6
Gabbard 	- 		 8.6
Bullock 	 2.6 		 5.6

Source: Seth Masket, "Learning from Loss: The Democrats, 2016-2020"
  #885  
Old 04-16-2019, 10:58 AM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 83,387
Just in case you were wondering, the Democratic blogosphere is not the Democratic electorate: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...mepage§ion=The Upshot
  #886  
Old 04-17-2019, 11:00 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,953
Terry McAuliffe isn't running. Gotta say this is the first "Not running" announcement that made me think "Good fucking riddance."

Although Bloomberg did make me think "Good riddance," but without the F-bomb.
  #887  
Old 04-22-2019, 07:02 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,576
Rep. Seth Moulton is in. A fine man but he's overreaching.
Quote:
And when Trump claimed to be the target of the “single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history,” Moulton responded that “as the Representative of Salem, MA, I can confirm that this is false.”
...

He’s called health care “a right every American must be guaranteed,” pushed to toughen gun laws, was a co-sponsor of the Green New Deal, has championed a federal “Green Corps” modeled after the Civilian Conservation Corps of the 1930s, and has called for an end to the Electoral College.
  #888  
Old 04-25-2019, 06:38 AM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 22,530
Biden officially announces:

"The core values of this nation… our standing in the world… our very democracy...everything that has made America -- America --is at stake. That’s why today I’m announcing my candidacy for President of the United States. #Joe2020"

https://t.co/jzaQbyTEz3

Last edited by JohnT; 04-25-2019 at 06:38 AM.
  #889  
Old 04-25-2019, 08:09 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,157
As of the present moment, I am leading towards Bernie Sanders or Amy Klobuchar (based on a combination of issues, record, and my sense of electability -- I recognize that those two are very different), with Cory Booker somewhat close behind (mostly since I think he's the most talented pure politician of the field, with a natural political ability as close to Obama or Bill Clinton as we're likely to get with this field), and Kamala Harris close behind Booker. There are only a few of the field that I'm actively rooting against for the nomination -- most of them are fine with me on the issues and their record.
  #890  
Old 04-25-2019, 09:23 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 83,407
If I could get whoever I wanted, I'd want Sanders or Warren. But electability is a major concern, and I don't yet have enough data on that for most of the candidates. Nor do I trust my own gut assessment of the candidates' electability: After all, whose gut told them that Trump was electable?
  #891  
Old 04-25-2019, 09:25 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
As of the present moment, I am leading towards Bernie Sanders or Amy Klobuchar (based on a combination of issues, record, and my sense of electability -- I recognize that those two are very different), with Cory Booker somewhat close behind (mostly since I think he's the most talented pure politician of the field, with a natural political ability as close to Obama or Bill Clinton as we're likely to get with this field), and Kamala Harris close behind Booker. ...
I agree with these choices ... EXCEPT exclude Sanders please! This guy, who is five years older than Trump, will be branded as a Socialist; I'm afraid he's unelectable. Recall that his strength in the 2016 primary season came from caucuses, with a demographic completely opposite from the Rust Belt know-nothings who will decide a general election.

I'm also hoping that one of the longshots — perhaps Jay Inslee — will rise up, shine, and become a contender.
  #892  
Old 04-25-2019, 09:45 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
I agree with these choices ... EXCEPT exclude Sanders please! This guy, who is five years older than Trump, will be branded as a Socialist; I'm afraid he's unelectable. Recall that his strength in the 2016 primary season came from caucuses, with a demographic completely opposite from the Rust Belt know-nothings who will decide a general election.

I'm also hoping that one of the longshots — perhaps Jay Inslee — will rise up, shine, and become a contender.
Bernie won primary elections in Wisconsin and Michigan.
  #893  
Old 04-25-2019, 09:45 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
I agree with these choices ... EXCEPT exclude Sanders please! This guy, who is five years older than Trump, will be branded as a Socialist; I'm afraid he's unelectable. Recall that his strength in the 2016 primary season came from caucuses, with a demographic completely opposite from the Rust Belt know-nothings who will decide a general election.

I'm also hoping that one of the longshots — perhaps Jay Inslee — will rise up, shine, and become a contender.
Every Democrat will be branded as a socialist. But it's just my sense, based on various polling data I've seen and conversations with voters. I don't think Bernie is necessarily the most electable candidate, but I don't think he's the least either... and electability is not the only thing I'm considering.
  #894  
Old 04-25-2019, 10:19 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Bernie won primary elections in Wisconsin and Michigan.
Yes, but without the caucuses he never would have been a contender.
  #895  
Old 04-25-2019, 10:24 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Every Democrat will be branded as a socialist. But it's just my sense, based on various polling data I've seen and conversations with voters. I don't think Bernie is necessarily the most electable candidate, but I don't think he's the least either... and electability is not the only thing I'm considering.
Bernie is Ok. What I am concerned about is what the GOP and the Kremlin will use in their smear campaign. How will they Swiftboat him? So far, they were actually "supporting" him, so as to weaken Hillary.
  #896  
Old 04-25-2019, 10:28 AM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 20,931
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
I agree with these choices ... EXCEPT exclude Sanders please! This guy, who is five years older than Trump, will be branded as a Socialist; I'm afraid he's unelectable.
As best we can tell this is flat out wrong. Sanders consistently did better than Clinton in the polls versus Trump.

Quote:
As Democratic leaders and strategists consider how they should campaign in the crucial midterm elections of 2018, they would be wise to consider why so many polls throughout 2016 showed that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) would have decisively defeated Donald Trump in a general election contest.

My view, stated throughout the 2016 campaign, was that whether one supported Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders in the presidential primaries, it was vital that all Democrats fully understand why Sanders ran so far ahead of Trump in polling — usually by double digits — and markedly stronger than Clinton in match-up polling against Trump.

SOURCE: Sanders would've beat Trump in 2016 — just ask Trump pollsters

This time around not even Fox News is disregarding Sanders.

Quote:
Sanders’ base may be dyed-in-the-wool progressives, but his support extends far beyond that. In the 2016 Democratic primaries, rural working-class voters vastly preferred Sanders over Hillary Clinton.

And while that’s common knowledge, what is often overlooked is the fact that 10 percent of all those who backed Sanders in the primaries cast their votes for Trump in the general election. More importantly, these voters were the deciding margin in states like Wisconsin and Michigan.

Without the Sanders crossovers, Trump would not be president today.

How can a Bernie Bro also be a Donald Dude? This voting phenomenon tells us that working-class voters are disenchanted with the status quo.

The dynamic will become one of the central battlegrounds for 2020. Who can keep the working- class voter in the fold?

SOURCE: Could Sanders beat Trump in 2020? Yes – here’s how
"This voting phenomenon tells us that working-class voters are disenchanted with the status quo."

That would suggest Biden is a terrible choice since he is practically Clinton v2.0. No one in the current dem lineup represents the status quo more than Biden does. Hell, he embodies it.
__________________
"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it." ~John Stuart Mill

Last edited by Whack-a-Mole; 04-25-2019 at 10:32 AM.
  #897  
Old 04-25-2019, 11:01 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
As best we can tell this is flat out wrong. Sanders consistently did better than Clinton in the polls versus Trump.




...

That would suggest Biden is a terrible choice since he is practically Clinton v2.0. No one in the current dem lineup represents the status quo more than Biden does. Hell, he embodies it.
Only because no Kremlin & GOP smear campaign, and in fact the opposite, they supported him vs Hillary. Those much linked polls are thus useless. The Smear campaigns lowered Hillary's popularity by a significant amount. The Comey letter was the biggest, but the social media trolls and smear campaigns were significant.

Actually no, Status Quo may be what we need. And there wont be any Comey letter for Biden, and we can already see the smear campaign :

1. Biden is a good and honorable man who gave a eulogy for a long term co-worker, concentrating on the few good things he did/ Smeared as: Biden said some nice things about a very bad man, thus Biden concurred 100% with everything that bad man did.

2. Biden is a old school baby-kissing and put his arms around people in pictures politico/ smeared as he is a creepy pedophile.

3. Biden is a smart campaigner and accepts funds from many sources/ Smeared as Biden is a tool of Big Banks/whatever.

I want you to think about that- the Bernie-bros and co dug up a 2003 eulogy Biden did for a fellow Sentaro (Biden is the "go to" guy for eulogies in the Senate, see his very nice one for McCain) and somehow turned that into a smear. 16 yo eulogy.
What can the Kremlin and GOP smear Sanders with? Dont tell me there aren't things even worse that a 16 yo eulogy.
  #898  
Old 04-25-2019, 11:06 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 83,407
Right, Biden is a normal candidate. The electorate in 2016 clearly did not want a normal candidate. A firebrand like Sanders might appeal to many of the same people that Trump did.

Or maybe, after four years of Trump, people will come to their senses and want a return to normality. I don't know. And at this point, I'm not convinced anyone else does, either.

Have there been any head-to-head polls of the Democratic front-runners vs. Trump? Yes, I know that polls aren't entirely reliable, but they're still the best source of information we have.
  #899  
Old 04-25-2019, 11:20 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Right, Biden is a normal candidate. The electorate in 2016 clearly did not want a normal candidate. A firebrand like Sanders might appeal to many of the same people that Trump did.

Or maybe, after four years of Trump, people will come to their senses and want a return to normality. I don't know. And at this point, I'm not convinced anyone else does, either.
This is actually what I was coming in to say too. What really matters, imo, are the industrial states Trump took in '16-- Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin. Are more voters there looking to continue disrupting the status quo, or will more people there (and elsewhere) turn out for someone who represents a return to normalcy?

And that's how, as a Michigander, I'm gonna decide who to support. Bernie and Warren may represent my views ideologically, and I may want to see some real drastic change on behalf of the middle class, but I'm pulling the lever for the candidate I think will bring out more voters in November 2020, whether that's Bernie, Booker, Biden or somebody else.

Now more than ever, I'm looking at who will appeal to the most voters in those three states I mentioned. Is it more Bernie? Or more Biden? Right now I'm leaning toward a return to normalcy being the more popular option for voters in the industrial midwest, but who knows?
  #900  
Old 04-25-2019, 01:17 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,281
Looks like septimus and I are fairly close in our outlook.

Here's my current ranking (by preference, not as a handicapping of their chances) of the field--excluding those candidates I don't see as worth discussing. They are ranked all the way from top to bottom, including within tiers, but being a tier above another candidate means a lot more to me than outranking someone within a tier.

--------
HELL YES:

Booker

Inslee

--------
WORKS FOR ME:

Castro

Harris

Hickenlooper

Swalwell

Moulton

Ryan

--------
MEH:

O'Rourke

Gillibrand


--------
DO. NOT. WANT:

Klobuchar

Biden

Buttigieg

Warren

--------
DEAR GOD, NO:

Yang

Sanders

--------
GTFO:

Gabbard
__________________
Some people on TV are nice to look at.

Last edited by SlackerInc; 04-25-2019 at 01:18 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:05 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017