Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-08-2019, 10:20 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,340

Omnibus thread for pointless campaigns by Presidential candidates who won't get the nomination


We have threads going for many candidates already, but frankly the number of entrants is growing so large that we would jam the forum if we created new threads for all of them. Therefore I propose instead one single thread to cover all the losers who are certain to drop out, either before the voting starts or after the first few contests.

So here's to Jay Inslee, John Hickenlooper, Wayne Messam, Tim Ryan, Eric Swalwell, Marianne Williamson, Kirsten Gillibrand, and John Delaney. Meanwhile, nobody waits anxiously to hear whether Michael Bennet, Terry McAuliffe, Seth Moulton, Stacey Abrams, Steve Bullock, and Bill de Blasio will be running. And when we get through with those folks, there are others whose names are being tossed around.
  #2  
Old 04-08-2019, 10:23 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW.
Posts: 12,273
Hickenlooper has a chance. Slim, but a chance.
  #3  
Old 04-08-2019, 10:32 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,680
I'm still hoping for one from every state. Then, maybe a swimsuit competition........
  #4  
Old 04-08-2019, 11:17 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-DUB View Post
I'm still hoping for one from every state. Then, maybe a swimsuit competition........
Oh, there you go trying to rig the system against Bernie again!
  #5  
Old 04-08-2019, 11:44 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,396
I'm not very enthusiastic about any of the front-runners so I hope one of the dark horses, perhaps Inslee or Hickenlooper, strikes gold!
  #6  
Old 04-09-2019, 12:33 AM
foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,822
Inslee is at least saying the right things.
  #7  
Old 04-09-2019, 07:46 AM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
Hickenlooper has a chance. Slim, but a chance.
Nope
  #8  
Old 04-09-2019, 07:48 AM
AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,201
How did "certain not to drop out quickly" work last time?
  #9  
Old 04-09-2019, 07:54 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,994
Inslee is a solid candidate -- would be top tier in a "normal" year, I think. Hick too (though he seems to have stumbled with his rhetoric).
  #10  
Old 04-09-2019, 08:15 AM
davidm's Avatar
davidm is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Near Philadelphia PA, USA
Posts: 12,434
A large Democratic slate bothers me. I fear that the best candidates will divide the votes of the most thoughtful primary voters, giving the primary win to a more radical and less mainstream candidate.

We desperately need a solution to the spoiler problem, such as ranked choice voting, but I don't think it will happen in our lifetimes.
__________________
Check out my t-shirt designs in Marketplace. https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...php?p=21131885
  #11  
Old 04-09-2019, 08:29 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,463
I understand the general idea of this thread, but I'd question your specific list. Hickenlooper or Inslee (both on your list) are both longshots at this point, but they're more likely to get the nomination than Tulsi Gabbard (who's not on your list).
  #12  
Old 04-09-2019, 11:12 AM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm View Post
A large Democratic slate bothers me. I fear that the best candidates will divide the votes of the most thoughtful primary voters, giving the primary win to a more radical and less mainstream candidate.

We desperately need a solution to the spoiler problem, such as ranked choice voting, but I don't think it will happen in our lifetimes.
Keep in mind that all Democratic primaries and caucuses allocate their delegates proportionally. There are no winner take all or winner take most contests like the Republicans have which allowed Trump to steamroll with small pluralities.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42
  #13  
Old 04-09-2019, 11:56 AM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm View Post
A large Democratic slate bothers me. I fear that the best candidates will divide the votes of the most thoughtful primary voters, giving the primary win to a more radical and less mainstream candidate.

We desperately need a solution to the spoiler problem, such as ranked choice voting, but I don't think it will happen in our lifetimes.
In a way, caucuses are ranked choice voting - at any particular caucus site, if a voter's candidate doesn't get at least 15% of the vote, then he either leaves or moves to a candidate that does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
Keep in mind that all Democratic primaries and caucuses allocate their delegates proportionally. There are no winner take all or winner take most contests like the Republicans have which allowed Trump to steamroll with small pluralities.
At the same time, keep in mind the 15% rule - only candidates that get at least 15% of the vote in a particular district/state get that district's/state's (statewide) delegates. Note that if nobody gets 15%, it becomes "at least half of what the winner got."

Also note that the delegate count by state can already be calculated. Note that only the "pledged" delegate numbers on that page matter; "unpledged" delegates cannot vote on the first ballot if their votes could affect the result.
  #14  
Old 04-09-2019, 02:17 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
At the same time, keep in mind the 15% rule - only candidates that get at least 15% of the vote in a particular district/state get that district's/state's (statewide) delegates. Note that if nobody gets 15%, it becomes "at least half of what the winner got."
It's within ten point of the winner's result unless my cite missed a change. That could make it extra exciting if a large state has the winner come under threshold since it takes a majority of delegates to get the nomination.

There's another possible deviation from proportionality given the field and scheduling of this year's primaries. Most delegates are allocated by district not by the statewide result. IIRC it's 3-5 delegates per congressional district. Thresholds apply. The rounding rules can produce some potential issues if they don't average out. In a district with four delegates the rule in the cite above can produce some interesting results. With two candidates over threshold and one earning 2.51 delegates vs 1.49 based on vote percentages actually results in a 3-1 delegate tally. 2.49 vs 1.51 produces a tied of two delegates apiece for the district. That's a tie despite about the winner having a greater than 24 point win among the qualified votes.

Quote:
Also note that the delegate count by state can already be calculated.
Not entirely. There are rules that assign bonus delegates to states based on scheduling. There can also be penalties for national party rule violations. Your cite mentions explicitly that they don't include any bonuses or penalties. It's a good start but we can't entirely calculate delegate counts until states finish scheduling.
  #15  
Old 04-09-2019, 06:13 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,015
I don't understand how Inslee belongs here. He was in Congress before becoming the governor of a large and economically dynamic state, giving him experience both as a chief executive and in the federal government; and he is running hard on an issue many Democrats insist is the Great Issue of Our Time. If you watch his interviews, he is a really good politician with an upbeat message. Why is he treated like a nobody, but Buttigieg is legit?
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 04-09-2019 at 06:13 PM.
  #16  
Old 04-09-2019, 08:33 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,353
I'm in flyover country. No candidate has been here to even do fundraising, much less hold a rally. As far as I'm concerned, Marianne Williamson is pretty much on the same level as Bernie Sanders right now.
  #17  
Old 04-09-2019, 08:34 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc
I don't understand how Inslee belongs here. He was in Congress before becoming the governor of a large and economically dynamic state, giving him experience both as a chief executive and in the federal government; and he is running hard on an issue many Democrats insist is the Great Issue of Our Time. If you watch his interviews, he is a really good politician with an upbeat message. Why is he treated like a nobody, but Buttigieg is legit?
According to Gallup, only 4% of people view the environment as the most important issue; climate change was not listed as a separate issue. So even among Democrats, there's only a thin slice of voters who think that anything related to the environment is the most important thing. Supposing that Inslee got all of those voters, he still wouldn't have any shot at the nomination.

His bigger problem, though, is simply that virtually all liberal media outlets are focused on identity politics rather than policy. Buttigieg is young, gay, and married to a man. Thus we get articles such as Yes, it Matters That Pete Buttigieg is Gay. Inslee is just another older white man--zzzzzzzz. No articles in national publications declaring Yes, it Matters that Jay Inslee Cares about Climate Change.
  #18  
Old 04-09-2019, 11:13 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,015
I'm not saying he has a great shot at winning. I just don't think he belongs in the group of obvious also-rans.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #19  
Old 04-10-2019, 07:17 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,463
Similarly, Gabbard is getting a lot more press than Inslee, but most of that press is about how terrible she is. No Democrats actually like her.
  #20  
Old 04-10-2019, 08:49 AM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,791
Yeah, I gotta admit that both Inslee and Hickenlooper should be considered serious candidates. They've got the resumes and political skills to break through.

But that's really it. Technically, everyone belongs on this list right now. The two top dogs, Bernie and Biden, are pretty much there because of name recognition. Ditto Beto - who arguably should be considered a weaker candidate than either Hick or Inslee.

The real answer here is...it's early. It's very early. We've got a long way to go before the real sorting begins. It helps to raise money early because it allows you to do things and try to catch attention. But in the end, it'll come down to October of this year to January of next to find out who's really an also-ran. There's too much time to go to say anyone's really in it or not.

Hell, Booker's considered a real candidate but he's only - in the last poll RCP has - testing at 2% while Inslee is at 1%. Should Booker be dropped from the grown up table?
  #21  
Old 04-10-2019, 09:25 AM
MEBuckner's Avatar
MEBuckner is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 12,111
At this point in the 2008 cycle, it had already been two months since Barack Obama had begun his candidacy. But at this point in the 2016 cycle, we still had two months to go before Donald Trump announced his candidacy. My reaction to Trump's announcement was--like that of a lot of people--derision and scorn and a confident expectation that obviously this bozo won't get far, will he? So I have no idea yet whose campaigns are "pointless".

(Except for the guy who started a campaign and has already dropped out. Well, him and Marianne Williamson; she's obviously a flake and has no chance. I mean, Jesus, I can't be that wrong in two presidential elections in a row, can I?)
__________________
"In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves." -- Carl Sagan

Ceterum censeo imperium Trumpi esse delendam
  #22  
Old 04-10-2019, 09:50 AM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEBuckner View Post
(Except for the guy who started a campaign and has already dropped out. Well, him and Marianne Williamson; she's obviously a flake and has no chance. I mean, Jesus, I can't be that wrong in two presidential elections in a row, can I?)
Whoa, buddy. Don't hex us, here.

We're already a republic teetering on the brink. Another shock like that and I don't know how we muddle through.
  #23  
Old 04-10-2019, 10:04 AM
MEBuckner's Avatar
MEBuckner is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Posts: 12,111
Right! Uh...there's also no chance I will win hundreds of millions of dollars playing the Powerball and/or Mega Millions, then find myself in a torrid love triangle with Scarlett Johansson and Brie Larson.
  #24  
Old 04-10-2019, 10:47 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,960
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEBuckner View Post
At this point in the 2008 cycle, it had already been two months since Barack Obama had begun his candidacy. But at this point in the 2016 cycle, we still had two months to go before Donald Trump announced his candidacy. My reaction to Trump's announcement was--like that of a lot of people--derision and scorn and a confident expectation that obviously this bozo won't get far, will he? So I have no idea yet whose campaigns are "pointless".
A slight nitpick but the Iowa caucus in 2008 was a full month earlier than 2016&2020.
  #25  
Old 04-10-2019, 11:36 AM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEBuckner View Post
Right! Uh...there's also no chance I will win hundreds of millions of dollars playing the Powerball and/or Mega Millions, then find myself in a torrid love triangle with Scarlett Johansson and Brie Larson.
Why settle for a triangle when you can wish for a threesome?
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #26  
Old 04-10-2019, 11:43 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,582

Moderating


This thread is about arguably fantasy political candidates. Not about romantic fantasies. Please stay on topic.

[/moderating]
  #27  
Old 04-10-2019, 01:00 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Inslee is a solid candidate -- would be top tier in a "normal" year, I think. Hick too (though he seems to have stumbled with his rhetoric).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ITR champion View Post
[Inslee's] bigger problem, though, is simply that virtually all liberal media outlets are focused on identity politics rather than policy. Buttigieg is young, gay, and married to a man....
Yes. Look at the front-runners: A (non-observant) Jew, aging and socialist; a black man; a blackish Tamil-Jamaican woman; a youthful Catholic Irishman with a Spanish nickname; and a woman whose Cherokee ties may be a campaign item. Even the second tier features a gay, an Hispanic and an ethnic Chinese. (Do we have a lesbian yet?) Where's the W.A.S.P. male? (Even Biden is a Catholic, not that that matters anymore.)

I'm not saying we need a W.A.S.P. male specifically. But it almost seems like W.A.S.P. males are disqualified, lacking a politically correct identity! Absurd, but it almost seems that way.
  #28  
Old 04-10-2019, 01:39 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by DinoR View Post
It's within ten point of the winner's result unless my cite missed a change. That could make it extra exciting if a large state has the winner come under threshold since it takes a majority of delegates to get the nomination.
2020 Delegate Selection Rules for the Democratic National Convention, rule 14.F, says: "In all situations where no preference reaches the applicable threshold, the threshold shall be half the percentage of the vote received at each level of the delegate selection process by the front-runner."
The Nebraska, Idaho, Georgia, and Massachusetts delegate selection plans use the "half of the winner" rule.
However, the Ohio plan specifies the "10% rule."

Quote:
Originally Posted by DinoR View Post
There's another possible deviation from proportionality given the field and scheduling of this year's primaries. Most delegates are allocated by district not by the statewide result. IIRC it's 3-5 delegates per congressional district. Thresholds apply. The rounding rules can produce some potential issues if they don't average out.
The breakdown is "about" 2/3 to districts and 1/3 to statewide. Without any bonus, a state with a "base" of 100 delegates gets 75 district and 40 (25% of the base, plus an extra 15% of the base for "Party Leaders and Elected Officials" (these are things like big city mayors; they are not "superdelegates," but are pledged to particular candidates) statewide. Any bonus for scheduling has to be split 75/25.

Last edited by That Don Guy; 04-10-2019 at 01:44 PM.
  #29  
Old 04-10-2019, 06:16 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Yes. Look at the front-runners: A (non-observant) Jew, aging and socialist; a black man; a blackish Tamil-Jamaican woman; a youthful Catholic Irishman with a Spanish nickname; and a woman whose Cherokee ties may be a campaign item. Even the second tier features a gay, an Hispanic and an ethnic Chinese. (Do we have a lesbian yet?) Where's the W.A.S.P. male?
Jay Inslee?
  #30  
Old 04-10-2019, 06:41 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,960
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
Jay Inslee?
He's currently tied for last place on the last Morning Consult poll. Little hard to call him a front runner.

*eta: but O'Rourke and Biden are the white males, don't think Protestant means much in this context.

Last edited by CarnalK; 04-10-2019 at 06:44 PM.
  #31  
Old 04-10-2019, 07:05 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,463
What percentage of the population are white protestant males? What percentage of the Democratic population are they?
  #32  
Old 04-10-2019, 07:49 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,371
Buttigieg is a WASP.
  #33  
Old 04-10-2019, 08:12 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,960
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Buttigieg is a WASP.
Sort of. He could be the first DINK president!
  #34  
Old 04-10-2019, 11:11 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,070
Hickenlooper is also a WASP.

Eric Swalwell and Seth Moulton too.

This field is lousy with WASPS.
  #35  
Old 04-11-2019, 12:51 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
I'm not saying we need a W.A.S.P. male specifically. But it almost seems like W.A.S.P. males are disqualified, lacking a politically correct identity! Absurd, but it almost seems that way.

Cosigned. (Just because several are running doesn't mean they are being seen as contenders.) And I'd say this would be fine, temporarily, if we were still in 2000 and had nominated nothing but WASP men (with just a few Catholic white men sprinkled in), ever. But it's been 20 years since we nominated a WASP man, and 16 since we nominated any white man. That doesn't mean, as you say, that it's got to be a white guy again this time; but it does strike me that they should now be back in the mix again. Not only is it unfair to the individual candidates if they are not; but it sends a signal to white male voters that they are not welcome in the party, and (despite what many people think), without significant support from white male voters, Democrats have no chance in national elections.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
What percentage of the population are white protestant males? What percentage of the Democratic population are they?

I couldn't find info about Protestant white men specifically, but if we look at all white men, they made up 34 percent of the electorate in 2016, outnumbered only by white women (37 percent). Hillary got 14 million votes from white male voters. While 94 percent of black women voted for her, that still only represented 9 million votes. And those 9 million are not nearly as much at risk of flipping to the other side as the 14 million white men are.

BTW, Hillary got another 5.5 million votes from black men, meaning that white men are virtually tied with black women and men combined in terms of their proportion of her voting coalition. I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of people don't realize this. And again, the white men are the most vulnerable to jumping ship. We need to make sure they know they are still welcome in the party, or we're sunk.

Source (combined with Wikipedia raw numbers): https://www.cnn.com/election/2016/results/exit-polls
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #36  
Old 04-11-2019, 12:56 AM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
I'm a 56 year old white male and I'm not living in fear of being demographically challenged or of going extinct. Or of being unwelcome in the Democratic party.
  #37  
Old 04-11-2019, 01:09 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,015
That's great. You are probably a liberal (or progressive) white male. Another thing most people don't know is that although white males are the demographic group most likely to describe themselves as "very conservative" to pollsters, they are also the group most likely to call themselves "very liberal". (That is, the percentage of white men who describe themselves that way is higher than in any other demo.) Your group is not the one we need to be concerned about. But there are plenty of moderate white men who are less strongly attached, and we'll lose them if we don't tend to them carefully and make them feel important (even if the very notion might be nauseating to many progressives: sometimes you just have to grit your teeth, swallow hard, and do what needs to be done).
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #38  
Old 04-11-2019, 08:22 AM
Captain Amazing is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 25,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Buttigieg is a WASP.
Are you still a WASP if only your mom's family is English? Does the fact that hes half Maltese disqualify him from WASPness?
__________________
If you will it, it is no dream.
  #39  
Old 04-11-2019, 02:26 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by DinoR View Post
There's another possible deviation from proportionality given the field and scheduling of this year's primaries. Most delegates are allocated by district not by the statewide result. IIRC it's 3-5 delegates per congressional district.
Going by the numbers listed in the 2020 Call for the Convention, which don't include any date-based bonus delegates, 75% of which would be at Congressional district level, the average delegates per district runs from around 4 to 11, although only states with one or two districts have an average of 8 or higher.

According to the Delegate Selection Rules, each state gets the choice of one of four methods to decide how many delegates go to each of its districts:
1. Half are divided based on the district's population, and the other half based on the average of the votes for Obama in 2012 and Clinton in 2016;
2. Half are divided based on the votes for Clinton in 2016, and the other half based on the votes for the Democratic candidate(s) in the state's most recent Gubernatorial election;
3. Half are divided based on the number of registered Democratic voters on 1/1/2020, and the other half based on the average of the votes for Obama in 2012 and Clinton in 2016;
4. 1/3 of the delegates based on the method 1 result, 1/3 based on the method 2 result, and 1/3 based on the method 3 result.

In 2016, California's delegates per district ranged from 5 to 8.
  #40  
Old 04-11-2019, 03:47 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,774
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Amazing View Post
Are you still a WASP if only your mom's family is English? Does the fact that hes half Maltese disqualify him from WASPness?
Nobody whose last name makes you think "what the hell kind of name is that and how is it pronounced?" can be WASP.
  #41  
Old 04-11-2019, 03:53 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,371
Weird to see all this handwringing about the Party being hostile to white men when the two frontrunners are both white men!
  #42  
Old 04-11-2019, 04:13 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,960
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Weird to see all this handwringing about the Party being hostile to white men when the two frontrunners are both white men!
"All this handwringing" is mostly just septimus and Slackerinc.
  #43  
Old 04-11-2019, 04:40 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Yes. Look at the front-runners: A (non-observant) Jew, aging and socialist; a black man; a blackish Tamil-Jamaican woman; a youthful Catholic Irishman with a Spanish nickname; and a woman whose Cherokee ties may be a campaign item. Even the second tier features a gay, an Hispanic and an ethnic Chinese. (Do we have a lesbian yet?) Where's the W.A.S.P. male? (Even Biden is a Catholic, not that that matters anymore.)

I'm not saying we need a W.A.S.P. male specifically. But it almost seems like W.A.S.P. males are disqualified, lacking a politically correct identity! Absurd, but it almost seems that way.
Hell, couldn't you say the same thing about the 2016 Republican Primary? Trump is German descent. Cruz is Cuban. Kasich is Czech & Croat. Rubio is Hispanic.

You have to go all the way to down to Huckabee (who got 0.16% of primary votes) to get a W.A.S.P. male.
  #44  
Old 04-11-2019, 11:52 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Weird to see all this handwringing about the Party being hostile to white men when the two frontrunners are both white men!
Well, watch carefully just who is doing the hand-wringing. Because they sure ain't anywhere near a significant percentage of Democrats.
  #45  
Old 04-13-2019, 07:56 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,911
Wayne Messam is running for president:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/stude...124020955.html
  #46  
Old 04-13-2019, 08:26 PM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Wayne Messam is running for president:
I saw his interview with TYT yesterday.

He's the mayor of Miramar, Florida. His big plan is student loan forgiveness by repealing the Trump tax plan. Aren't others already espousing that? People are making it seem like it's an audacious idea.
  #47  
Old 04-13-2019, 08:39 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
I saw his interview with TYT yesterday.

He's the mayor of Miramar, Florida. His big plan is student loan forgiveness by repealing the Trump tax plan. Aren't others already espousing that? People are making it seem like it's an audacious idea.
Forgiving student debt would also piss off a lot of voters who paid off their debts the old-fashioned way, especially those who just finished paying it off.

Doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad idea, just that it could piss off people who missed out on the forgiveness.
  #48  
Old 04-14-2019, 03:43 PM
Chimera is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Forgiving student debt would also piss off a lot of voters who paid off their debts the old-fashioned way, especially those who just finished paying it off.

Doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad idea, just that it could piss off people who missed out on the forgiveness.
Being pissy because people got something you didn't get may be the American Right's way of life, but it isn't necessarily a sympathetic position.
  #49  
Old 04-14-2019, 08:59 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
At the risk of sounding like a republican, I think the reality that any real progressive is going to run into is that they're going to have to fix the budget first and restore some fiscal responsibility before getting too ambitious about Medicare-for-All. That's one reason why, as much as I like Bernie Sanders' rhetoric, I question whether he can really achieve even a fraction of what he wants. I question whether anyone can, frankly. I would settle for just getting a bipartisan tax agreement and ensuring the financial health of programs we already have, like Medicare, Medicaid, SS, and Obamacare subsidies.
  #50  
Old 04-14-2019, 11:51 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
Being pissy because people got something you didn't get may be the American Right's way of life, but it isn't necessarily a sympathetic position.
Life is unfair. We can accept that when fate or luck is against us, but not so much when the unfairness is due to capricious changes in government policy.

Suppose there were a general gun ban with confiscation. Law-abiding citizens turn in their guns, watching prized and expensive collections being destroyed with no compensation. Criminals and rednecks hide their guns in the cellar. A new government comes in with "Changed our minds! Keep your guns (or any you've got left); no problem!" Do you think some people might be annoyed?

Mr. A and Mr. B graduate from an expensive college and get jobs. Mr. A spends his salary on cocaine and a sports-car, while his debt becomes more and more delinquent. Mr. B scrimps and scrimps and finally gets his debt paid off early. Just then, the government agrees to pay off all student debt though not Mr. B's debt of course; it's already paid off. Do you have no sympathy when Mr. B asks "Where's my sports-car?"
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 12:09 AM.

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