Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #3901  
Old 03-04-2020, 08:21 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monocracy View Post
I guess we have the answer to the "Bernie is the top second choice" and "there are no lanes" theories.

Yeah, was that just bad polling, or what do we think was behind that?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
The anti-Trump majority shrugs it off and votes against Trump. Gaffes don't matter anymore.

Exactly. I don't think there's a person in the country who is thinking "Trump needs to get out, Biden doesn't look like he's going to do anything too radical or scary...but wait, he just said something incoherent, so I'm back to Trump!"


Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
I'm no expert, but I am guessing the hatred of Trump will fuel large Dem turnout, regardless of who the Democratic nominee is or how he or she does on the campaign trail. Last time some people mistakenly thought 1) Trump probably wouldn't be so bad and/or 2) there is no way Hillary can lose so I don't have to vote since she doesn't excite me. This time, there will be nothing like that.

This.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #3902  
Old 03-04-2020, 09:08 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Yeah, was that just bad polling, or what do we think was behind that?
...
Second choice of those polled but not those who voted.

Buttigieg, for example, actually had fairly equal polling support in both the under and the over 45 groups. Those who were under 45 may have overwhelmingly had Sanders as a second choice and those over may have been a bit split between Biden and Klobuchar. Those under just stayed home, just like many Sanders polling supporters did. Those 45 and over came out and voted and went Biden.
  #3903  
Old 03-04-2020, 11:15 PM
Lantern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,141
There is talk of a Bernie-Warren ticket and I think it could be an interesting play which could shake up the race. Certainly Biden would be worried about Warren pounding him week after week on the campaign trail and in TV studios.
  #3904  
Old 03-05-2020, 12:07 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lantern View Post
There is talk of a Bernie-Warren ticket and I think it could be an interesting play which could shake up the race. Certainly Biden would be worried about Warren pounding him week after week on the campaign trail and in TV studios.

I don't think this would shake up the race, but I guess we'll see. A majority of voters seem to be choosing based on electability (thank god), and the ticket you are describing if anything looks less electable than Bernie on his own.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #3905  
Old 03-05-2020, 08:26 AM
Elendil's Heir is online now
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: 221B Baker St.
Posts: 90,143
I like Warren far better than Sanders, but two old white liberals from New England does not seem like a winning ticket going into November.
  #3906  
Old 03-05-2020, 08:42 AM
jsc1953 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 11,175
In the California results if you add up Biden + those who have endorsed Biden, it comes to 51%. That may tell us where Bernie's ceiling is.
  #3907  
Old 03-05-2020, 09:49 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,886
TV says Warren is dropping out.
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #3908  
Old 03-05-2020, 09:57 AM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,106
WaPo reporting it as well

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...faa_story.html
  #3909  
Old 03-05-2020, 11:01 AM
Dead Cat is offline
I was curious...
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4,624
I post this with an apology for not having read the previous near-4,000 posts in the thread, and in full knowledge of the eyerolls this will generate regardless. But as a Brit watching this from afar, largely disinterestedly and through the lens of this board, I can't help but feel that since the Democrats have had 3.5 years to come up with an alternative to Trump, how come Biden is the best they've got?

I tend to think he is more likely to stand a chance against Trump than Sanders - as we have found in the UK recently, winning elections isn't about idealism and sticking to your principles, it's about winning over the moderates. If Sanders gets the nomination, the Democrats will be making exactly the same catastrophic mistake as the UK Labour party did in sticking with Corbyn as leader. They are both, quite simply, unelectable.

The other recent drop-outs obviously have their own 'problems' - in particular, a lot of 'middle America' (if that term has any meaning - apologies if not) may well vote for Trump over a woman, or a homosexual man. Which is a great shame, obviously, but it's what we have to deal with.

I suppose my question boils down to: why wasn't Bloomberg seen as a better candidate than Biden? Is it largely because the Democratic party faithful are too left-wing to back a billionaire?
  #3910  
Old 03-05-2020, 11:09 AM
jsc1953 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 11,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Cat View Post
I post this with an apology for not having read the previous near-4,000 posts in the thread, and in full knowledge of the eyerolls this will generate regardless. But as a Brit watching this from afar, largely disinterestedly and through the lens of this board, I can't help but feel that since the Democrats have had 3.5 years to come up with an alternative to Trump, how come Biden is the best they've got?
Hoo boy. A perfectly valid question and worthy of its own multi-page thread. I ask myself the same question: Seriously? This is the best we can do?

It may partly be that there's a sense of entitlement with regards to Bernie & Biden. Bernie (some feel) may not have been treated fairly in 2016, and (some feel) that he brings a lot of enthusiasm and fresh ideas (a theory not borne out by Tuesday's results). And Biden...it's his turn. He should have run in 2016 but took himself out of the race after the death of his son (think how the world would be different otherwise) and now Democrats owe him another shot.

Given that there were 25 or so candidates in the first debate, this doesn't seem to have stifled the competition, but it may have been the reason why a dozen of perfectly viable candidates never got any traction.
  #3911  
Old 03-05-2020, 11:21 AM
FlikTheBlue is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Cat View Post
I post this with an apology for not having read the previous near-4,000 posts in the thread, and in full knowledge of the eyerolls this will generate regardless. But as a Brit watching this from afar, largely disinterestedly and through the lens of this board, I can't help but feel that since the Democrats have had 3.5 years to come up with an alternative to Trump, how come Biden is the best they've got?

I tend to think he is more likely to stand a chance against Trump than Sanders - as we have found in the UK recently, winning elections isn't about idealism and sticking to your principles, it's about winning over the moderates. If Sanders gets the nomination, the Democrats will be making exactly the same catastrophic mistake as the UK Labour party did in sticking with Corbyn as leader. They are both, quite simply, unelectable.

The other recent drop-outs obviously have their own 'problems' - in particular, a lot of 'middle America' (if that term has any meaning - apologies if not) may well vote for Trump over a woman, or a homosexual man. Which is a great shame, obviously, but it's what we have to deal with.

I suppose my question boils down to: why wasn't Bloomberg seen as a better candidate than Biden? Is it largely because the Democratic party faithful are too left-wing to back a billionaire?
Regarding Bloomberg, I believe a big part of why he didnít do well was his history of being a Republican in the past. There was also the perception that he was trying to buy the election.

As far as the other moderates in the race, I think what happened is that there were too many of them for too long. If the debate stage last fall had been Biden, Sanders, Warren, and 4 or 5 middle of the road candidates, one of those middle of the road candidates would have had a better chance to break through. Instead there were something like 12 other candidates, and with that big a field no one was able to take command of the race. Obama only had to worry about Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. Bill Clinton also had a relatively small field to contend against. Had either of them been running against a 16 candidate field, they would have been a lot less likely to win the nomination.
  #3912  
Old 03-05-2020, 11:25 AM
divemaster's Avatar
divemaster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Gainesville, VA
Posts: 4,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Cat View Post
I suppose my question boils down to: why wasn't Bloomberg seen as a better candidate than Biden? Is it largely because the Democratic party faithful are too left-wing to back a billionaire?
I have no answer for the rest of your post, but I can certainly see why Democrats did not glom on to a (much-of-the-time) elderly white New Yorker Republican billionaire known for locker-room jokes, sexual harassment/hostile workplace, and potentially racist police policies; who thinks the answer to all of society's ills (guns, sodas, cigarettes, etc.) is to just ban the fuckers "because he can."

We already have an elderly white New Yorker (sometime) Republican billionaire known for locker-room jokes, sexual harassment/hostile workplace, and possibly racist person in the White House. Why elect another?
  #3913  
Old 03-05-2020, 11:31 AM
Lantern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I don't think this would shake up the race, but I guess we'll see. A majority of voters seem to be choosing based on electability (thank god), and the ticket you are describing if anything looks less electable than Bernie on his own.
I agree she doesn't help with electability but she does potentially bring Bernie some new groups like college-educated women and she will be a great surrogate who can attack Biden on the campaign trail and on TV. Plus picking her will change the narrative and earn a lot of free media.

What are Bernie's other options? A ticket with Stacey Abrams? Sherrod Brown? Both could be interesting. Whatever it is I think Bernie needs a big move, like a left unity ticket, to change the narrative. He will no doubt unload a lot of attack ads on Biden and hope for a strong debate performance but my hunch is that won't be enough.
  #3914  
Old 03-05-2020, 12:19 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Cat View Post
I post this with an apology for not having read the previous near-4,000 posts in the thread, and in full knowledge of the eyerolls this will generate regardless. But as a Brit watching this from afar, largely disinterestedly and through the lens of this board, I can't help but feel that since the Democrats have had 3.5 years to come up with an alternative to Trump, how come Biden is the best they've got?..

I suppose my question boils down to: why wasn't Bloomberg seen as a better candidate than Biden? Is it largely because the Democratic party faithful are too left-wing to back a billionaire?
Because Biden is a excellent candidate, despite what you may hear from the Bernie-bros. He does well with minorities, he is a moderate, and people like him.


https://bluewavecollective.com/so-bi...D0i_6EsTJ3WDF4

The American people will be FAR more likely to give Democrats control of Senate with Biden vs. other candidates
We on the left all love positions and various attributes of Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Bloomberg, etc. but letís face it Ė some key demographics of this country arenít ready for it. The 2016 elections were decided by around 3 points. Independents, Christians, Senior Citizens, the South, etc. Swing elections. Biden appeals to all of these demographics, while other candidates were very polarizing among them.
With Recession before elections almost certain, Wall Street will take Biden seriously as someone in power when the country was pulled out of the last recession
Similar to point one, but an important difference. ďWall StreetĒ support Ė which is a way of saying the capitalist establishment, will 100% support Biden over Trump. Those in power understand that they have had a feeding frenzy for the last 3 years, and that itís time to get serious again and focus on the fundamentals of this country and its infrastructure, organizations, and mechanisms.



Obama and his coalition will activate to defeat Trump
We will see it as soon as today, the Obama machine (which is considerable) will activate for Joe. Prior to Super Tuesday, this would have been a bad idea and risky, as it was important to Obama (based on statements) that the primaries be fair and unencumbered with bias. Despite outcry, Tom Perez has done a fairly decent job of this, and Obama has done a great job staying out of the fray. That will change today.

Itís not about Biden as president, it is appointing who he appoints
The biggest swaths of damage that Trump is responsible for isnít just in his actions, it is in who he appoints. Gorsuch and Kavanaugh to SCOTUS, Pruitt to EPA, DeVoss to education, Zinke and Bernhardt to the interior, and any magnate or lobbyist who could gain from sacking their department as appointment to every department. The damage that three years of this has done to our country will be felt for decades. Biden already has a mechanism in place to restore these agencies by choosing people he knows, has worked with, and understands how to reverse that damage in place.



The debates will be hilarious
While Joe isnít known for being the most erudite individual, he does have a quick wit when it comes to debates. He knows he can goad Trump into hilarious outbursts that will only emphasize Trumpís weak and petulant persona.



Joe Biden is the best chance at getting an obstructionist GOP Senate to work with him."


And, oh Brit- look at your current PM and the "best" the opposition could come up vs him. First take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye!
  #3915  
Old 03-05-2020, 12:38 PM
Balance is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 8,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
Regarding Bloomberg, I believe a big part of why he didnít do well was his history of being a Republican in the past. There was also the perception that he was trying to buy the election.
Let's not forget that his "strategy" amounted to buying a lottery ticket. He skipped the first few contests to go all-in on Super Tuesday. Deliberately passing up chances to win votes because you're afraid the outcome won't look good for you is not a great way to demonstrate how electable you are.
  #3916  
Old 03-05-2020, 12:41 PM
Boycott is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 607
Sounds like Bernie is conceding the south and going all in on the midwest. Biden vote for NAFTA/involvement in TPP will come under scrutiny.

https://twitter.com/GeoffRBennett/st...29982723997697
  #3917  
Old 03-05-2020, 01:25 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lantern View Post
I agree she doesn't help with electability but she does potentially bring Bernie some new groups like college-educated women and she will be a great surrogate who can attack Biden on the campaign trail and on TV. Plus picking her will change the narrative and earn a lot of free media.

What are Bernie's other options? A ticket with Stacey Abrams? Sherrod Brown? Both could be interesting. Whatever it is I think Bernie needs a big move, like a left unity ticket, to change the narrative. He will no doubt unload a lot of attack ads on Biden and hope for a strong debate performance but my hunch is that won't be enough.
Why does he need options? People rarely pick their running mates halfway through the primaries and I don't remember those cases ending well.
  #3918  
Old 03-05-2020, 04:44 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
Bernie writing off the South is a real sign of desperation.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lantern View Post
What are Bernie's other options? A ticket with Stacey Abrams? Sherrod Brown? Both could be interesting.

I can't see them wanting to jump on that sinking ship, and I doubt Warren really wants to either. I suspect she will just not endorse anyone. She may even endorse Biden!
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #3919  
Old 03-05-2020, 07:19 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
Regarding Bloomberg, I believe a big part of why he didnít do well was his history of being a Republican in the past. There was also the perception that he was trying to buy the election.
The main reason Bloomberg crashed and burned is really his personality. He has no charisma. When people hear "billionaire" they expect swagger. They expect a persona that radiates success and confidence. Mike Bloomberg is the EXACT opposite of that persona. If he weren't a billionaire, I don't think he could even get a date with a woman.
  #3920  
Old 03-06-2020, 05:50 AM
Dead Cat is offline
I was curious...
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4,624
Thank you very much for all the replies, they are extremely helpful and informative.

I just wanted to respond to this one in particular:

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
And, oh Brit- look at your current PM and the "best" the opposition could come up vs him. First take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye!
Maybe we're just talking past each other, but that was my point - the UK currently has a prime minister who is a serial liar, womaniser, and buffoon (among other things - I'm trying to stick purely to the facts), and yet he was still elected instead of Corbyn. If Sanders wins the nomination, something similar could happen in the US. So basically, my hope is that the US Democratic Party doesn't make the same mistake the UK Labour Party did.

It seems Biden does have a decent chance of defeating Trump, I guess I was just saying it's a shame he isn't a bit more inspiring, younger, and a better public speaker.
  #3921  
Old 03-06-2020, 08:47 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
The main reason Bloomberg crashed and burned is really his personality. He has no charisma. When people hear "billionaire" they expect swagger. They expect a persona that radiates success and confidence. Mike Bloomberg is the EXACT opposite of that persona. If he weren't a billionaire, I don't think he could even get a date with a woman.
No. Bloomberg was always the emergency parachute. When Biden bounced back in South Carolina and party support poured in, it wasn't needed.
  #3922  
Old 03-06-2020, 09:12 AM
RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41,314
Biden Wondering Where All This Support Was When He Still Had Functioning Brain
  #3923  
Old 03-06-2020, 10:43 AM
Monocracy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
No. Bloomberg was always the emergency parachute. When Biden bounced back in South Carolina and party support poured in, it wasn't needed.
I think you're partially correct. At the debates, everyone saw that the parachute was full of holes, so moderates had to rally around someone else. Bloomberg didn't fail because Biden bounced back, Biden bounced back because Bloomberg failed. You could see Biden's surge starting in Nevada where he over performed the polls.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc
Yeah, was that just bad polling, or what do we think was behind that?
(on Bernie being the top second choice)

I just don't trust hypothetical polls. And I believe the people pushing the theory were only citing one poll. Anyone could clearly see from Iowa's numbers that Sanders didn't have a lot of second choice support.
  #3924  
Old 03-06-2020, 11:19 PM
Siam Sam is offline
Elephant Whisperer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 42,055
My man Joe has been kicking some serious ass. Hawaii's primary is in about a month, and I can't wait to vote for him.
__________________
"Hell is other people." -- Jean-Paul Sartre
  #3925  
Old 03-07-2020, 10:46 AM
jsc1953 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 11,175
The departure of Elizabeth Warren has unleashed a torrent of punditry this week, on women and the presidency. All warranted, of course, but:

Amy Klobuchar, who actually got more votes and more delegates than Warren, must be thinking "what am I...chopped liver?"

One author said: this shows that America is not ready for a woman president. Completely ignoring the fact that a woman won the popular vote 4 years ago.
  #3926  
Old 03-07-2020, 11:02 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsc1953 View Post
The departure of Elizabeth Warren has unleashed a torrent of punditry this week, on women and the presidency. All warranted, of course, but:

Amy Klobuchar, who actually got more votes and more delegates than Warren,
This is not true at all. Warren received almost 1.8 million votes and 69 delegates before dropping out. Klobuchar didn't even crack 400,000 votes and only got 7 delegates.

I simply don't understand why people think Klobuchar is a quality candidate. She performed terribly, at the polls, on the debate stage and on the campaign trail. She is absolutely a hot dish of chopped liver.
  #3927  
Old 03-07-2020, 11:10 AM
jsc1953 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 11,175
I regret my factual errors: I remembered that Klobuchar performed better than Warren in Iowa and New Hampshire and over-extrapolated without checking the numbers.
  #3928  
Old 03-07-2020, 06:35 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
You say Klobuchar “performed terribly on the debate stage” as though that’s a settled fact, when in fact it is widely believed to be the opposite. And she vastly outperformed Warren where it counts, in general elections among swing voters.

She delivered Minnesota for Joe, is stumping for him in Michigan as we speak, and she has a hell of a lot better chance of becoming the first female vice president than Elizabeth Warren does.
  #3929  
Old 03-07-2020, 07:23 PM
RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
she has a hell of a lot better chance of becoming the first female vice president than Elizabeth Warren does.
Vice-president? Oh wow!!

I mean seriously, so what? She's got a better chance than Warren does of winning a position that you 'win' by being picked by a single individual?

Well yeah, she does, since the individual's almost certainly going to be Biden, and Biden's not going to choose Warren as his running mate. (And Warren wouldn't want the job anyway!) So her chances of being picked for veep are in fact better than zero. Big freakin' deal!!
  #3930  
Old 03-07-2020, 09:18 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
You say Klobuchar ďperformed terribly on the debate stageĒ as though thatís a settled fact, when in fact it is widely believed to be the opposite. And she vastly outperformed Warren where it counts, in general elections among swing voters.
Ah, "widely believed." Well there you go.
  #3931  
Old 03-07-2020, 10:48 PM
Elendil's Heir is online now
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: 221B Baker St.
Posts: 90,143
Ha - love it!
  #3932  
Old 03-07-2020, 11:13 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
Ah, "widely believed." Well there you go.
Yes, your opinion about this is idiosyncratic to say the least.

The NY Times says "her debate performances were often well reviewed" and describes what happened after the NH debate:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/12/u...hampshire.html
Quote:
Money began to flow in — more than $5 million in the four days after the debate. Crowds swelled well beyond expectation and venue capacity; overflow rooms became a standard good-problem-to-have for the advance staff. And volunteers, who were once an infrequent trickle at field offices around the state, turned into a veritable army of door knockers and canvassers.
Others chimed in with similar takes:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/10/polit...ent/index.html
Quote:
Amy Klobuchar's closing statement in the New Hampshire debate was near-perfect
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...-new-hampshire
Quote:
Klobuchar ended the night particularly strongly...
The only question for Klobuchar is whether her strong performance came too late.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...mpshire-113561
Quote:
It’s become a familiar ritual for Amy Klobuchar — an impressive debate followed by a rush of fundraising and national media attention...
https://www.npr.org/2020/02/12/80515...-establishment
Quote:
Her performance Tuesday followed a strong showing in Friday night's Democratic debate, which appeared to win over late-breaking undecided voters.
The three-term senator dragged Buttigieg for being a "cool newcomer." And she portrayed herself as a more reasonable alternative to more left-leaning candidates. She vowed to change the tone of the presidency and to be an advocate for struggling Americans.
"There is a complete lack of empathy in this guy in the White House right now, and I will bring that to you," Klobuchar said to audience cheers during the debate. "If you have trouble stretching your paycheck to pay for that rent, I know you, and I will fight for you. If you have trouble deciding if you're going to pay for your child care or your long-term care, I know you and I will fight for you," she said.
"I do not have the biggest name up on this stage. I don't have the biggest bank account," she added. "But I have a record of fighting for people."
It's a message that resonated with New Hampshire voters. More than half of Klobuchar's supporters made the decision to vote for her in the last few days before the primary, according to an AP VoteCast survey of more than 3,000 Democratic primary voters in the state.

But you say she did a crap job in the debates, so I guess you must be right!
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 03-07-2020 at 11:14 PM.
  #3933  
Old 03-08-2020, 12:15 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Yes, your opinion about this is idiosyncratic to say the least.

The NY Times says "her debate performances were often well reviewed" and describes what happened after the NH debate:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/12/u...hampshire.html


Others chimed in with similar takes:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/10/polit...ent/index.html


https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...-new-hampshire


https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...mpshire-113561


https://www.npr.org/2020/02/12/80515...-establishment



But you say she did a crap job in the debates, so I guess you must be right!
Oh look you found some things that support your opinion. And I can find some things that support mine.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...h-carolina-cbs

Quote:
Klobuchar seemed barely present for most of the night amid the candidatesí screaming and arguing, despite speaking the third-most in the field. She barely registered in the long discussion of US relationships with dictatorial regimes, and while Mike Bloomberg got many minutes to defend his record in New York City, Klobuchar didnít get a similar opportunity to lay out her record...her final moment in the South Carolina debate was her telling the audience, ďIĎd say the biggest misconception is that Iím boring, because Iím not.Ē If you have to tell people youíre not boring, youíre losing.
http://www.startribune.com/not-her-n...ate/568038481/

Quote:
She fought back, hiding rage behind a smile, but she was clearly rattled...She came off as temperamentally ill-suited to take on Trump or serve as president. Sheís a legislator out of her league...seemed desperate and less-prepared at times.
https://nypost.com/2019/09/13/the-wi...cratic-debate/

Quote:
Being all the way at the end of the row can be tough and she couldnít work her way into the discussion all night long. She can stay in, but why?

Arrow: Down
But who gives a shit? She crapped out, never even hitting 6% in the national polls. She's fine for Minnesota, I don't see her doing much elsewhere. If she's on the ticket, so be it, but I don't see how she could help a guy who already does well in the industrial Midwest. The most exciting thing she did over the course of her whole campaign was to drop out and endorse another candidate.

But, hey, if you want this win this one, I'll concede that it's my opinion that she sucked on the debate stage. And that apparently other people hold the opinion that she did absolutely great up there.
  #3934  
Old 03-08-2020, 04:36 AM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 3,425
My observations:

When she had a hard time getting a word in edgewise through the crosstalk of the other candidates, she adopted a pleading posture and bleated out pathetically, "come on!!"

She also had a habit of going WAY over her time. "Thank you Senator---" "blah blah blah" "Thank you ---" "blah blah my grandpa worked in a mine, blah blah" ---"THANK YOU, SENATOR" --"and that's why I'm going to BEAT DONALD TRUMP!" Yes, most of the candidates did this to some degree. To Biden's credit, he recognized when his time was coming to an end and would say, "well, my time is about to be up, so that's it." That's one of the few things I liked about him. Klobuchar was the worst offender though.

She always had a half-smirk on her face. Something about her expression gave me vibes of "this whole thing is kind of a lark for me, I'm in over my head, it's actually kind of ridiculous that I'm in this situation - oh well, I might as well smile."

I can hear it already: "Misogynist! You tell women, 'you ought to smile', then when they do smile, that's somehow wrong too." To which I have two words: Lincoln Chaffee. Remember him? I doubt it. He had a very, very brief run in the 2016 Democratic Primary. Mr. Chaffee, God love him, suffered from exactly the same goofy smile; I observed it and remarked on it then (though I hadn't joined this board yet); and as far as I know, he is not a woman. It's a goofy, annoying habit - end of story.

Klobuchar reminded me of another person from that primary - on the other side - John Kasich. Same kind of "plain folks", "aw shucks", "just a nice fella trying to help everyone get along" shtick. Well, it's not enough to power through an election.
  #3935  
Old 03-09-2020, 11:38 AM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,106
On Klobuchar in the debates, she had some really, really good debates and some bad ones. But she had more good debates than bad. People were really discussing how well she was doing in late 2019. And then she hit it out of the park before New Hampshire, which is why she got 20% there. However, after NH she had 2 poor debates.
  #3936  
Old 03-09-2020, 04:18 PM
Sicks Ate is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: KS, US
Posts: 7,122
So, something just crossed my mind after reading about the lockdown in Italy...

What if the rest of the primaries can't take place because either Trump declares a similar lockdown out of spite, or heaven forbid one is actually necessary?
  #3937  
Old 03-09-2020, 04:21 PM
jsc1953 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 11,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sicks Ate View Post
So, something just crossed my mind after reading about the lockdown in Italy...

What if the rest of the primaries can't take place because either Trump declares a similar lockdown out of spite, or heaven forbid one is actually necessary?
Well, for starters - I doubt the president has any authority over elections since they're run by the states; even more so for a party primary. But taking your hypothetical at face value: I'd bet the DNC would declare Biden the nominee....which is probably not what Trump would prefer.
  #3938  
Old 03-09-2020, 04:33 PM
Leaper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In my own little world...
Posts: 12,851
(Also, depending on the details of the Italian quarantine, such a “lockdown” here would not necessarily prevent people from voting at a local polling place to begin with.)
  #3939  
Old 03-09-2020, 11:52 PM
RioRico is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 3,193
This POTUS directs the US Public Health Service to ban all assemblages of more than ten people, including schools, meetings, polling places, and government offices, and directs troops (in sub-squad-size groups) to enforce the ban with lethal force as needed. Classes and confabs can go online but voting and vote-counting will have to wait till the end of the crisis, maybe around year 2029. Have patience, hey?
  #3940  
Old 03-09-2020, 11:55 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 17,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sicks Ate View Post
So, something just crossed my mind after reading about the lockdown in Italy...

What if the rest of the primaries can't take place because either Trump declares a similar lockdown out of spite, or heaven forbid one is actually necessary?
If Trump were to really do that, he'd do it near Election Day. Mucking up the (D) primaries doesn't really help him in any way longterm.
  #3941  
Old 03-18-2020, 10:59 AM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 24,685
Hearing rumors that Bernie is suspending his campaign. Axios has reported that Bernie has suspended his campaign ads on Facebook, a common indicator that the campaign is stopping.

Quote:
Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign currently has no active Facebook ads, the morning after another disappointing finish in a series of primary contests.

Why it matters: A pause in digital advertising spend on Facebook has been a good indicator that candidates are dropping out of the 2020 race before. Pete Buttigieg and Michael Bloomberg made their Facebook ads inactive hours before they suspended their campaigns.
  #3942  
Old 03-18-2020, 12:37 PM
Nonsuch is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Posts: 5,900
Sanders campaign denies it is suspending.
  #3943  
Old 03-18-2020, 12:49 PM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 24,685
Bernie Sanders has never mattered so little to so many people since 2014. He should just quit.

Last edited by JohnT; 03-18-2020 at 12:51 PM.
  #3944  
Old 03-18-2020, 01:13 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,988
A lot of people are calling on Sanders to stop his campaign, but this may not be just about him. If progressives are told he is no longer campaigning, will they still bother to vote for progressive House and Senate candidates in the primary? Look what happened in Illinois's 3rd District.
  #3945  
Old 03-18-2020, 01:53 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
A lot of people are calling on Sanders to stop his campaign, but this may not be just about him. If progressives are told he is no longer campaigning, will they still bother to vote for progressive House and Senate candidates in the primary? Look what happened in Illinois's 3rd District.
Yes, look what happened. Biden crushed Sanders in Illinois and Sanders' favorite in the 3rd still won. Sanders can't give similar support without being a candidate?

I don't know offhand the general dates of the down ticket primaries but Florida's is in frigging August. He can't hold on til then regardless.
  #3946  
Old 03-18-2020, 05:56 PM
Gyrate is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,626
This is just the break that the Tulsi Gabbard campaign has been waiting for!
  #3947  
Old 03-19-2020, 01:07 PM
jsc1953 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 11,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
This is just the break that the Tulsi Gabbard campaign has been waiting for!
Tulsi Gabbard just dropped out, and endorsed Biden. Shocking, I know.
  #3948  
Old 03-19-2020, 05:27 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
It really was shocking! I fully expected her to do what Hillary Clinton predicted: run as a third party spoiler. I almost wonder if she did this to spite Hillary, make her look paranoid (which, if true, makes Hillary a heroine). And then to endorse Biden instead of Bernie? Weird.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #3949  
Old 03-19-2020, 05:58 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
It really was shocking! I fully expected her to do what Hillary Clinton predicted: run as a third party spoiler. I almost wonder if she did this to spite Hillary, make her look paranoid (which, if true, makes Hillary a heroine). And then to endorse Biden instead of Bernie? Weird.
Definitely. I couldn't have been more surprised. It was as stunning as it would have been if Trump had said something truthful during today's pandemic press-conference.
  #3950  
Old 03-19-2020, 07:23 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
Ha, right.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
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 07:47 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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 © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017