Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #2701  
Old 10-18-2019, 04:10 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,441
What do the PUMAs have to do with this thread? This thread is about Democrats. The PUMAs are and always were Republicans, marching to the tune of Rush Limbaugh.
  #2702  
Old 10-21-2019, 10:33 AM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 23,822
Apparently, Buttigieg is hiring his political team based upon if they have earned Mark Zuckerberg's endorsement:

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/a...g-in-rare-move

Quote:
Facebook Inc. chief executive officer Mark Zuckerberg has privately recommended several potential hires to Pete Buttigieg’s presidential campaign, a rare example of direct political involvement from one of tech’s most powerful executives.

Earlier this year, Zuckerberg sent multiple emails to Mike Schmuhl, Buttigieg’s campaign manager, with names of individuals that he might consider hiring, campaign spokesman Chris Meagher confirmed. Priscilla Chan, Zuckerberg’s wife, also sent multiple emails to Schmuhl with staff recommendations. Ultimately, two of the people recommended were hired.
Given my antipathy for Facebook, this does not bode well for me voting for Pete
  #2703  
Old 10-21-2019, 12:42 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,963
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
LOL, Hillary with zero fucks left to give:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/hillar...a=twitter_page
Please note: Neither Stein nor Gabbard need be allied with or cooperating with Russia in order to qualify as "Russian assets" in this context. And of course Russia doesn't expect either to become President; they just want to weaken the Democratic candidate and therefore increase the chance that their puppet gets re-elected.
  #2704  
Old 10-21-2019, 02:27 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,753
I’ve pointed it out in the Gabbard thread, “asset” is not the same as “agent” and many are confused about that.

Clearly the Russian machine continues to try to mess with our process and to develop assets in that goal. There is reasonable evidence that they are in fact doing what they can to give Gabbard as much amplification as their machinations can make possible. They’d be satisfied with just getting her message (which is mostly the same as theirs) on the debate stage like it is. And they will do what they can to have third party candidate running who can poach a percent or so from a D candidate. That shouldn’t be a controversial position.
  #2705  
Old 10-21-2019, 05:31 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Why are the progressives always the boogeypersons in these scenarios? You don't think moderates would be inclined to stay home if Biden gets a plurality but doesn't win the nomination? Have you forgotten that 25% of Hillary Clinton's 2008 primary voters defected to McCain after not getting their way?
OK, Hillary got 19M votes in the primaries. 25% of that is 4.75M. Add those to Obama's vote share, and subtract them from McCain's, and you're saying that absent this, Obama would have won 57.4% of the two-party vote share.

Just saying this seems improbable, given that no Dem has managed that feat since LBJ.
  #2706  
Old 11-01-2019, 05:45 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,217
Beto folds.
  #2707  
Old 11-01-2019, 08:33 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
Damn, the primary just got 60% less funny.
  #2708  
Old 11-02-2019, 11:38 AM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 23,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
To this point:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/u...n-ukraine.html

Biden Faces Conflict of Interest Questions That Are Being Promoted by Trump and Allies

Quote:
But the renewed scrutiny of Hunter Biden’s experience in Ukraine has also been fanned by allies of Mr. Trump. They have been eager to publicize and even encourage the investigation, as well as other Ukrainian inquiries that serve Mr. Trump’s political ends, underscoring the Trump campaign’s concern about the electoral threat from the former vice president’s presidential campaign.

The Trump team’s efforts to draw attention to the Bidens’ work in Ukraine, which is already yielding coverage in conservative media, has been led partly by Rudolph W. Giuliani, who served as a lawyer for Mr. Trump in the investigation by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III. Mr. Giuliani’s involvement raises questions about whether Mr. Trump is endorsing an effort to push a foreign government to proceed with a case that could hurt a political opponent at home.

Mr. Giuliani has discussed the Burisma investigation, and its intersection with the Bidens, with the ousted Ukrainian prosecutor general and the current prosecutor. He met with the current prosecutor multiple times in New York this year. The current prosecutor general later told associates that, during one of the meetings, Mr. Giuliani called Mr. Trump excitedly to brief him on his findings, according to people familiar with the conversations.

Mr. Giuliani declined to comment on any such phone call with Mr. Trump, but acknowledged that he has discussed the matter with the president on multiple occasions. Mr. Trump, in turn, recently suggested he would like Attorney General William P. Barr to look into the material gathered by the Ukrainian prosecutors — echoing repeated calls from Mr. Giuliani for the Justice Department to investigate the Bidens’ Ukrainian work and other connections between Ukraine and the United States.
This is why Barr couldn't answer Harris's question about if Dotard ever asked for his political opponents to be investigated - because he had done so, and will do so again.
May 2nd, 9:28am. Really, it's all there, except for Trump's direct involvement, which was occurring at this time, but no evidence until the whistleblower report 4+ months later.

Last edited by JohnT; 11-02-2019 at 11:39 AM.
  #2709  
Old Today, 01:11 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,217
Deval Patrick is looking to announce his bid for president as early as this week.
  #2710  
Old Today, 09:33 AM
jsc1953 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 10,716
The analysts on PBS Newshour last night gave a pithy explanation as to why we're getting late entrants like Bloomberg: "Biden can't win the nomination, and Warren can't win the general."

That doesn't address the dozen other candidates already in the race, who are waving their arms and yelling "what am I...chopped liver?"
  #2711  
Old Today, 11:02 AM
Boycott is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 246
For those who didn't catch it, Biden did a live town hall on CNN last night and you know he had a good night when the only negative his opponents have to say after the event is he was given a longer event than the others.
  #2712  
Old Today, 01:46 PM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsc1953 View Post
The analysts on PBS Newshour last night gave a pithy explanation as to why we're getting late entrants like Bloomberg: "Biden can't win the nomination, and Warren can't win the general."

That doesn't address the dozen other candidates already in the race, who are waving their arms and yelling "what am I...chopped liver?"
I think Mayor Pete would have a very good chance against Trump if he wins the nomination. I'm not so sure about Biden being able to win the general. The problem with Biden is that Trump would use the Ukraine issue to paint Biden as hiding something, the same way he did against Clinton with the e-mails. It will probably resonate with just enough people in the swing states to make a difference. These are the voters who the saying "if there's smoke there's fire" doesn't matter. Even if it's just smoke, that's enough for them. As far as Warren goes, the question is does she pick up more voters on the left than she would lose in the center in the swing states. I don't think the upper midwest swing states have enough far left types to make up the difference, even if they all come out on election day. Given all that, I think that as things stand right now Mayor Pete is the way to go.
  #2713  
Old Today, 01:55 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,217
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
I think Mayor Pete would have a very good chance against Trump if he wins the nomination. I'm not so sure about Biden being able to win the general. The problem with Biden is that Trump would use the Ukraine issue to paint Biden as hiding something, the same way he did against Clinton with the e-mails. It will probably resonate with just enough people in the swing states to make a difference. These are the voters who the saying "if there's smoke there's fire" doesn't matter. Even if it's just smoke, that's enough for them. As far as Warren goes, the question is does she pick up more voters on the left than she would lose in the center in the swing states. I don't think the upper midwest swing states have enough far left types to make up the difference, even if they all come out on election day. Given all that, I think that as things stand right now Mayor Pete is the way to go.
My concern is that Pete will simply be that "fag" candidate inside the union halls that we need to win across the Industrial Midwest. The blue collar trades and unskilleds aren't always know for being the most enlightened fellas around. I say this as someone who spent the past couple decades hanging out in union halls, and have plenty of friends and family members who are still there. It was an exhausting slog trying them to get out for Hillary, mostly impossible at the end of the day, and I fear it would be the same with Pete.

It's one thing to wear a campaign shirt for a woman candidate around the guys, but no one's gonna want to be the first one to show up at the union hall in a shirt advertising a gay guy. You'd be asking for...well, a lot of ball busting. And that would be the end of that.

Last edited by Happy Lendervedder; Today at 01:58 PM.
  #2714  
Old Today, 02:00 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,416
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
I think Mayor Pete would have a very good chance against Trump if he wins the nomination. I'm not so sure about Biden being able to win the general. The problem with Biden is that Trump would use the Ukraine issue to paint Biden as hiding something, the same way he did against Clinton with the e-mails. ...
A openly gay guy wont play in Peoria in 2020. Maybe America will be ready in 2028, I hope so.

We havent seen the inside of pets skeleton closet yet, we dont knwo what dirt the GOP and Kremlin have on him.

All the polls say Biden will do the best vs Trump.
  #2715  
Old Today, 06:12 PM
Boycott is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 246
Now Pete is in the frontrunner tier he is facing real backlash. Up to recently he kind of got by against his rivals who treated his rising polls as a flash in the pan like Harris.

Well Iowa is less than 100 days away. He's here to stay.

And the common attack I am seeing on social media is not his poor appeal with black voters which needs to improve for him to have any chance in the South --- even if he wins Iowa. Iowa is overwhelmingly white.

The common attack I'm seeing is he is a poll tested candidate whose positions have changed with the wind. I think it's not a bad strategy to have shifted from trying to be progressive-left to vying for the Biden alternative spot...but the problem is authenticity. He's the guy on record supporting Medicare For All in 2018 but in 2019 attacks it. He's the guy who said in the early debate "no matter what we say the republicans will call us socialists" to saying Beto's gun comments will give the republicans campaign add fodder. He's the guy who says Biden represents going back to the old normal which is better than Trump of course but helped rise the fuel for a Trump like candidate to win. Yet his platform is pretty similar to Biden's. He's just got a face 40 years younger to sell it.

Experience wise South Bend is 15 times smaller than San Antonio were Julian "struggling to hold 1%" Castro was Mayor.

Pete's a great debater no doubt. He has the Bill Clinton trait of being the coolest man in the room even when everyone else is flaming. But now he is in the top tier expect this to be the focus in vetting Pete: what do you actually stand for?
  #2716  
Old Today, 07:04 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boycott View Post
The common attack I'm seeing is he is a poll tested candidate whose positions have changed with the wind. I think it's not a bad strategy to have shifted from trying to be progressive-left to vying for the Biden alternative spot...but the problem is authenticity. He's the guy on record supporting Medicare For All in 2018 but in 2019 attacks it. He's the guy who said in the early debate "no matter what we say the republicans will call us socialists" to saying Beto's gun comments will give the republicans campaign add fodder. He's the guy who says Biden represents going back to the old normal which is better than Trump of course but helped rise the fuel for a Trump like candidate to win. Yet his platform is pretty similar to Biden's. He's just got a face 40 years younger to sell it.
?
I've seen that tossed around. "Flip flopping " on your health care plan would be a lot more damning if the first comment wasn't from a media scrum from well before he started his Presidential campaign. Kinda bullshit, frankly, but I see Warren fanboys pretending it's a legit criticism.
  #2717  
Old Today, 07:18 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,416
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boycott View Post
...He's the guy on record supporting Medicare For All in 2018 but in 2019 attacks it. He's the guy who said in the early debate "no matter what we say the republicans will call us socialists" to saying Beto's gun comments will give the republicans campaign add fodder. ...

Pete's a great debater no doubt. He has the Bill Clinton trait of being the coolest man in the room even when everyone else is flaming. But now he is in the top tier expect this to be the focus in vetting Pete: what do you actually stand for?
I think, iirc Pete wanted REAL Medicare for All, not that overpriced travesty Sanders is calling MFA but which has no relation to it at all. But that's IIRC.

Pete is a great guy, but this is not his year, America isnt quite ready. MayorPete in 2028!
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 07:45 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 © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017