Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 05-16-2019, 01:56 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,729
A better question to ask is whether black voters would have turned out more for Bernie Sanders, as opposed to Hillary Clinton?

And what's with that last sentence? One could be forgiven for wondering whether or not that was a dig at black voters.
  #202  
Old 05-16-2019, 01:58 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
I mean... apparently you're right, but I legit do not get it. This guy has a consistent record furthering the war on drugs and mass incarceration and still defends his abysmal crime bill. He was good friends with a bunch of old-school racists. His record on desegregation and busing is pretty awful as well. Then there was the whole Anita Hill thing, although that was more "shitty sexism" than "shitty racism".

So I don't get it. I legitimately do not get why black people would support him over... Basically anyone else. His record on racial justice is among the worst among the Democratic contenders (maybe Buttigeig's is worse, hard to gauge). I have to wonder - how persistent will that be?
Maybe because people sometimes show that they've changed.

Re: Crime Bill, I'd just point out (again) that Bernie Sanders voted for that bill, too. And the rest of the field was probably too young to have an opinion at the time.

Last edited by asahi; 05-16-2019 at 01:59 PM.
  #203  
Old 05-16-2019, 02:11 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,271
Why shouldn't it be acceptable to "slap" at black voters? After all, it is true that, if they had turned out in 2016 like they did in 2012 or 2008, Clinton would have won. Why shouldn't we all be furious at them?

SPOILER:
Because it would be completely stupid and counterproductive to scapegoat a group of voters who are overwhelmingly on your side.


My actual point is that I'm sick of the double standard on this board, exemplified by Carnal's post which I was replying to, where black voters (among other moderate Democratic voting blocs) are regarded as paragons of sensible pragmatism. But it's considered perfectly OK to bully and insult young people and progressives and blame them for the 2016 loss, even though the data shows the exact opposite.
  #204  
Old 05-16-2019, 02:17 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,271
Why, here's a great example from just a few days ago:

Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi, in the 2020 primary thread
Well then those outspoken progressives are probably morons, because we've seen how stabbing themselves in the eye with a pencil has turned out. I say good - they can just stay home, sit down, and shut up.
Would anyone here think it was a wise strategy to invite black voters to "stay home, sit down, and shut up" in the 2020 election?

Last edited by Thing Fish; 05-16-2019 at 02:20 PM.
  #205  
Old 05-16-2019, 02:54 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,271
I mean, I get that that small group of black voters who didn't bother to turn out for Clinton, unlike their leftist counterparts, were probably, like, off living their lives and not trolling you on Facebook bragging about their stupid decision. Still, that doesn't mean you get to demonize a large segment of your party's base.
  #206  
Old 05-16-2019, 04:10 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,477
Not sure what that has to do with what I said but your cite sys the opposite of your link text. It shows black voter turnout at 59.6% & millenial turnout at 50.8%. Oh, but it was an increase for the millennials? Let's break out the participation trophies.
  #207  
Old 05-17-2019, 05:27 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Why shouldn't it be acceptable to "slap" at black voters? After all, it is true that, if they had turned out in 2016 like they did in 2012 or 2008, Clinton would have won. Why shouldn't we all be furious at them?

SPOILER:
Because it would be completely stupid and counterproductive to scapegoat a group of voters who are overwhelmingly on your side.


My actual point is that I'm sick of the double standard on this board, exemplified by Carnal's post which I was replying to, where black voters (among other moderate Democratic voting blocs) are regarded as paragons of sensible pragmatism. But it's considered perfectly OK to bully and insult young people and progressives and blame them for the 2016 loss, even though the data shows the exact opposite.
I don't think people are blaming all progressives, just the stereotypical "Bernie Bros." How many of those are in existence? I have no idea. But the ones who scream "Rigged" at the tops of their lungs, throw chairs at political caucuses, and then go out and vote for Jill Stein, or worse, Trump out of spite because they didn't get their way, yeah, they can stay home and note vote.

To your point, yes, I agree that black voters or any voters who stay home during elections is frustrating. And I agree it's a double-standard to hold one group accountable and not others. Also worth pointing out that staying home and not voting was just as destructive in 2014 and 2010 as it was in 2016, and in some ways more so because it set the stage for Republican obstructionism, which is what hobbled the Obama presidency and prevented the presidency of Hillary Clinton.

Last edited by asahi; 05-17-2019 at 05:29 AM.
  #208  
Old 05-17-2019, 12:44 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,477
I was responding to someone who said:
Quote:
Biden needs to not be the nominee. I'm already seeing rumbling along the lines of "if Biden is the nominee, I'm staying home", and I absolutely understand why - Biden is an utterly shitty candidate.
So I wasn't using some double standard, I was addressing what I read.

Last edited by CarnalK; 05-17-2019 at 12:45 PM.
  #209  
Old 05-17-2019, 02:29 PM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,155
I think Biden is not a good candidate too but consider the alternative.
  #210  
Old 05-17-2019, 06:43 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,878
Any democrat is better than trump, but I really hope it isn't Biden.

Biden recently said after Trump leaves office that the GOP will want to engage in bipartisanship. Not only is this statement hopelessly and inexcusably naive from someone who has no excuse to not know better, its the same false pablum he said in 2012.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...any-trump.html

I hope to fucking god that someone this oblivious and naive isn't our next democratic president. He makes Obama look like a political sage if he believes this stuff.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 05-17-2019 at 06:44 PM.
  #211  
Old 05-17-2019, 06:46 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I don't think people are blaming all progressives, just the stereotypical "Bernie Bros." How many of those are in existence? I have no idea. But the ones who scream "Rigged" at the tops of their lungs, throw chairs at political caucuses, and then go out and vote for Jill Stein, or worse, Trump out of spite because they didn't get their way, yeah, they can stay home and note vote.

To your point, yes, I agree that black voters or any voters who stay home during elections is frustrating. And I agree it's a double-standard to hold one group accountable and not others. Also worth pointing out that staying home and not voting was just as destructive in 2014 and 2010 as it was in 2016, and in some ways more so because it set the stage for Republican obstructionism, which is what hobbled the Obama presidency and prevented the presidency of Hillary Clinton.
What % of progressives are 'bernie bros'. I spent some time volunteering for Bernies campaign, and even among them most of them said they'd vote for Hillary if Bernie lost (some did not).

I'd wager its 5-10% of Bernie's supporters in 2016 who are bernie bros. And the whole 'bros' thing implies they are only motivated by misogyny. That may be part of it, but several of the Bernie bros I met were women.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #212  
Old 05-17-2019, 07:36 PM
choie is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Like me it never sleeps.
Posts: 4,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Any democrat is better than trump, but I really hope it isn't Biden.

Biden recently said after Trump leaves office that the GOP will want to engage in bipartisanship. Not only is this statement hopelessly and inexcusably naive from someone who has no excuse to not know better, its the same false pablum he said in 2012.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...any-trump.html

I hope to fucking god that someone this oblivious and naive isn't our next democratic president. He makes Obama look like a political sage if he believes this stuff.
So what's your ideal plan, do you think? That the Dem nominee should go around and proclaim "every Republican politician in Congress is a malign, corrupt shitbag; they're hopeless, just give them up, I am never going to work with them because they're fucked. And the voters too, those assholes who voted for Trump in '16 even though they went Obama in '12. We don't want their rednecked, sister-fucking, mouth-drooling kind in our party. Fuck 'em, we can't trust them. No, my friends--and by friends, I mean everyone who has always only voted Democratic--trust me, we're going to be at war with the Republican Congresspeople in 2020 when I get into power. In fact, thanks to my magic crystal ball, I can tell you right now--a year-and-a-half before the election--that the Senate is gonna buck the odds and turn almost completely blue. So fuck Mitch McConnell right in his turtle-esque maw, because we don't need him or indeed any Republican votes. Y'know what, I'm not even gonna accept any of their votes. With the 65 Democrats in the Senate we're sure to get because of my MagicFairyDust, no one can stop us from doing ANYTHING! So who needs to listen to a single thing anyone who isn't One Of Us has to say? It's a year-and-a-half away from election! We can absolutely ignore 50% of the country! SCORCHED EARTH STARTING NOW."

Yeah. Super. This will totally NOT prove every alt.right deep-state-believing freak correct, and they totally won't use this as a specific talking point to rally every single Republican, right-leaning Independent, and not a few conservative Obama/Trump Democrats into shoving and mauling their way into the voting booths next year to pull the lever for Trump.

Give a thought beyond the (admittedly justified) contempt that these quisling Republicans have earned under Obama and Trump. Think beyond revenge and punishment and everything we'd love to revel in.

Biden is not a stupid or naïve man, however you want to think him. Consider that maaaaybe the idea is to give the not-invisible number of Republicans or anti-Hillary Dems who voted Trump and are capable of shame a teensy lane into which they can cross back and justify their changeover to their other red state pals? A hint of grace so they don't worry that they'll be the enemy of Mr. or Ms. Blue President 2020?

We can do SCORCHED EARTH when we actually have a chance in hell of regaining the Senate with a considerable majority, which--unless I'm greatly mistaken (and I would love to be)--is nigh impossible given the Republican seats that are up for grabs. It's only nine or so Republicans, isn't it? And most are in blood-red states?

Psychologically speaking, these people have egos. Even for sane people (unlike Trump), it is often very very difficult to admit we're wrong. And these voters and politicians were so, so drastically wrong, in thinking Trump wouldn't be a catastrophe and a disgrace. Instead, they double-down instead of acknowledging they should've fought harder against Trump, against McConnell, against the psychos in the alt.right and Trump's racist base. The Anyone-But-Clinton people still refuse to admit they should've held their nose and compromised. That's the tragic flaw of human nature.

Biden and, I hope, other smart candidates, will preach left-of-center and progressive ideas while also carving out a "I'm reasonable" path to allow every possible vote we can get from the non-true-blue side exit the side of psychosis and authoritarianism and walk cautiously through the gateway back to a semblance of being willing to listen and, maybe even cooperate.

Without that gateway WE. ARE. FUCKED.

Last edited by choie; 05-17-2019 at 07:39 PM.
  #213  
Old 05-17-2019, 07:47 PM
choie is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Like me it never sleeps.
Posts: 4,776
And just to be clear, I don't think the ruby-red alt-right racist wall-building freaks are gettable by Biden or anyone else saying "We're willing to talk across the aisle. People will want to return to normalcy." Those ruby-red alt-right racist wall-building freaks are GONE. We will never get them back to "sanity," because I don't think they were ever on very close speaking terms to "sanity" in the first place.

But the middle? The wafflers? They exist. They screwed up big time in 2016 and have tried to pretend they didn't, but deep down they absolutely know they did. We wouldn't be getting so many leaks that embarrass Trump and Barr and other Republicans if there weren't conservatives who regret what they did. They're afraid to show their faces because they're afraid, many utter cowards. But they exist and I think they want a sort of social amnesty.

As long as they're gettable, I want them, and as long as they didn't personally kill anyone, if they're wiling to vote to get Trump out of office, I'm willing to grant them that social amnesty. The smart Democrats want them. We need them. We brush them aside at our peril. The world's peril.

Last edited by choie; 05-17-2019 at 07:50 PM.
  #214  
Old 05-17-2019, 08:10 PM
2ManyTacos is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Any democrat is better than trump, but I really hope it isn't Biden.

Biden recently said after Trump leaves office that the GOP will want to engage in bipartisanship. Not only is this statement hopelessly and inexcusably naive from someone who has no excuse to not know better, its the same false pablum he said in 2012.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...any-trump.html

I hope to fucking god that someone this oblivious and naive isn't our next democratic president. He makes Obama look like a political sage if he believes this stuff.
Yeah, basically this.

The fact that the Democratic Party would experience 4 years of President Trump and respond with ho-hum kumbaya politics-supporter Joe Biden is...very, very bad and disconcerting. Every time the man says stuff like that I just want to tear my hair out.
  #215  
Old 05-18-2019, 12:09 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by choie View Post
And just to be clear, I don't think the ruby-red alt-right racist wall-building freaks are gettable by Biden or anyone else saying "We're willing to talk across the aisle. People will want to return to normalcy." Those ruby-red alt-right racist wall-building freaks are GONE. We will never get them back to "sanity," because I don't think they were ever on very close speaking terms to "sanity" in the first place.

But the middle? The wafflers? They exist. They screwed up big time in 2016 and have tried to pretend they didn't, but deep down they absolutely know they did. We wouldn't be getting so many leaks that embarrass Trump and Barr and other Republicans if there weren't conservatives who regret what they did. They're afraid to show their faces because they're afraid, many utter cowards. But they exist and I think they want a sort of social amnesty.

As long as they're gettable, I want them, and as long as they didn't personally kill anyone, if they're wiling to vote to get Trump out of office, I'm willing to grant them that social amnesty. The smart Democrats want them. We need them. We brush them aside at our peril. The world's peril.
Absolutely correct. You're talking about my Uncle G and Cousin D. They are who I'm gauging my vote on in 2020. I've mentioned them in other threads, but I'll introduce them again: one's a retired railworker/union member, the other is currently a utility worker/union member. Both live in metro Detroit, one sat out 2016 because he hated both candidates, the other voted for Trump. Both voted for Obama. One's a young Boomer, one's a Millennial.

Biden, with his "I'm reasonable" messaging, has the most-likely path of winning their (and by extension, other blue collar, union, Industrial Midwest, white, non-college-educated) votes.

These people-- and make no mistake, these are the households that we need to win back in 2020-- sit in their union halls and man caves and tree blinds and local watering holes and make fun of candidates that are scorching the earth and focusing on guns and free college and poo-pooing Fox News. Uncle G and Cousin D are looking for a candidate to actually get some shit done. Which is why Biden's message of "I'm reasonable, and so are many Republicans" is so effective with a shit-ton of voters right now.

Biden might not be saying the things that the hard-core left wants to hear from a Dem candidate, but he's saying the things voters like Uncle G and Cousin D want to hear, and that's why he's very quickly becoming my guy in this horse race. Winning over these voters is more important than picking a candidate that has the most progressive environmental plan or health plan or gun plan or abortion plan or immigration plan.

It seems to me that everyone who says Biden sucks a fat donkey sack is already planning on crawling over hot glass to vote for a Democrat in November 2020. But Biden's really speaking to the people Hillary took for granted in 2016, and that's what matters to me, even if he's not the most exciting or hip or ideologically-perfect candidate.
  #216  
Old 05-18-2019, 02:24 AM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by choie View Post
So what's your ideal plan, do you think? That the Dem nominee should go around and proclaim "every Republican politician in Congress is a malign, corrupt shitbag; they're hopeless, just give them up, I am never going to work with them because they're fucked. And the voters too, those assholes who voted for Trump in '16 even though they went Obama in '12. We don't want their rednecked, sister-fucking, mouth-drooling kind in our party. Fuck 'em, we can't trust them. No, my friends--and by friends, I mean everyone who has always only voted Democratic--trust me, we're going to be at war with the Republican Congresspeople in 2020 when I get into power. In fact, thanks to my magic crystal ball, I can tell you right now--a year-and-a-half before the election--that the Senate is gonna buck the odds and turn almost completely blue. So fuck Mitch McConnell right in his turtle-esque maw, because we don't need him or indeed any Republican votes. Y'know what, I'm not even gonna accept any of their votes. With the 65 Democrats in the Senate we're sure to get because of my MagicFairyDust, no one can stop us from doing ANYTHING! So who needs to listen to a single thing anyone who isn't One Of Us has to say? It's a year-and-a-half away from election! We can absolutely ignore 50% of the country! SCORCHED EARTH STARTING NOW."
...is this seriously the best you can imagine?

How about something like this?

Quote:
I love town halls. I’ve done more than 70 since January, and I’m glad to have a television audience be a part of them. Fox News has invited me to do a town hall, but I’m turning them down—here’s why...

Fox News is a hate-for-profit racket that gives a megaphone to racists and conspiracists—it’s designed to turn us against each other, risking life and death consequences, to provide cover for the corruption that’s rotting our government and hollowing out our middle class.

Hate-for-profit works only if there’s profit, so Fox News balances a mix of bigotry, racism, and outright lies with enough legit journalism to make the claim to advertisers that it’s a reputable news outlet. It’s all about dragging in ad money—big ad money.

But Fox News is struggling as more and more advertisers pull out of their hate-filled space. A Democratic town hall gives the Fox News sales team a way to tell potential sponsors it's safe to buy ads on Fox—no harm to their brand or reputation (spoiler: It’s not).

Here’s one place we can fight back: I won’t ask millions of Democratic primary voters to tune into an outlet that profits from racism and hate in order to see our candidates—especially when Fox will make even more money adding our valuable audience to their ratings numbers.

I’m running a campaign to reach all Americans. I take questions from the press and voters everywhere I go. I’ve already held town halls in 17 states and Puerto Rico—including WV, OH, GA, UT, TN, TX, CO, MS & AL.

I’ve done 57 media avails and 131 interviews, taking over 1,100 questions from press just since January. Fox News is welcome to come to my events just like any other outlet. But a Fox News town hall adds money to the hate-for-profit machine. To which I say: hard pass.
A firm rejection of Fox Propaganda without having to resort to the sort of stuff you invented. Said by Elizabeth Warren of course. Do you disagree with anything she said? Do you think the way she worded it was a mistake? Do you think she might drive away "the middle" or "the wafflers" with that statement?

Here's Warrens statement on how to protect the right to abortion. What's Biden's plan?

I'm not stumping for Warren. I have no skin in the game. And a year ago I was all-in for Biden. But now that nearly everyone has thrown their hat into the table we can see what each candidate brings to the table. And I hate to say it but Biden's an empty suit. No policy. Promises of bipartisanship with a party that has pledged to block them at very opportunity. He's the front runner because substance really doesn't matter any more. If he gets the nomination I would hope that everybody supports him and he gets Trump kicked out of office. But he really isn't the best of the candidates.
  #217  
Old 05-18-2019, 05:10 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,706
It's possible to both reject FoxNews and embrace the idea of bipartisan political action----yes, even with Republicans.

Biden is not my favorite but job one is to GET RID OF TRUMP. It's faster to get rid of him at the ballot box than with impeachment.*

If some other Democrat looks more likely to beat Trump, then I will support that Democrat, regardless of whether I feel personal adoration for that person or find that person's views to be identical to my own in every respect. Because personal adoration and 100% fidelity to my own views is not the point.

Beating the thing in the Oval Office is the point.



*(And at the moment, an impeachment vote would be an extremely valuable gift to him.)

Last edited by Sherrerd; 05-18-2019 at 05:11 PM.
  #218  
Old 05-18-2019, 05:36 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Biden recently said after Trump leaves office that the GOP will want to engage in bipartisanship.
I agree - I think that there won't be bipartisanship until one side has been completely and utterly discredited by 60%+ of the country. The GOP's problem (and our problem) is that they are the party of the rich and the corrupt; therefore there is no incentive to do anything other than to disrupt. The people have to send a clear message that they're onto what the GOP is doing.
  #219  
Old 05-18-2019, 05:43 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
It's possible to both reject FoxNews and embrace the idea of bipartisan political action----yes, even with Republicans.

Biden is not my favorite but job one is to GET RID OF TRUMP. It's faster to get rid of him at the ballot box than with impeachment.*

If some other Democrat looks more likely to beat Trump, then I will support that Democrat, regardless of whether I feel personal adoration for that person or find that person's views to be identical to my own in every respect. Because personal adoration and 100% fidelity to my own views is not the point.

Beating the thing in the Oval Office is the point.



*(And at the moment, an impeachment vote would be an extremely valuable gift to him.)
I will vote for Biden or any Democratic nominee because it's my civic duty to do so. But even if Biden wins a presidential election by a relatively healthy margin, like Obama did, he won't get much done if the Senate is still in GOP hands. At least he'll be able to write executive orders to undo all of Trump's EO's, but we won't have a functional legislature.

It's really up to people to 'get it'. Until they discredit the Republicans and make it clear that they're not going to tolerate their propaganda and their plutocratic policies, then Republicans will simply wage procedural warfare and wear Biden (or someone else) through obstruction. I think that's the only way out of here.
  #220  
Old 05-18-2019, 05:46 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,706
Biden not getting stuff done, as compared with Trump remaining free to loot, pillage, and destroy the country?

Not ideal, but I'll take it.
  #221  
Old 05-18-2019, 05:47 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by choie View Post
So what's your ideal plan, do you think? That the Dem nominee should go around and proclaim "every Republican politician in Congress is a malign, corrupt shitbag; they're hopeless, just give them up, I am never going to work with them because they're fucked. And the voters too, those assholes who voted for Trump in '16 even though they went Obama in '12. We don't want their rednecked, sister-fucking, mouth-drooling kind in our party. Fuck 'em, we can't trust them. No, my friends--and by friends, I mean everyone who has always only voted Democratic--trust me, we're going to be at war with the Republican Congresspeople in 2020 when I get into power. In fact, thanks to my magic crystal ball, I can tell you right now--a year-and-a-half before the election--that the Senate is gonna buck the odds and turn almost completely blue. So fuck Mitch McConnell right in his turtle-esque maw, because we don't need him or indeed any Republican votes. Y'know what, I'm not even gonna accept any of their votes. With the 65 Democrats in the Senate we're sure to get because of my MagicFairyDust, no one can stop us from doing ANYTHING! So who needs to listen to a single thing anyone who isn't One Of Us has to say? It's a year-and-a-half away from election! We can absolutely ignore 50% of the country! SCORCHED EARTH STARTING NOW."

Yeah. Super. This will totally NOT prove every alt.right deep-state-believing freak correct, and they totally won't use this as a specific talking point to rally every single Republican, right-leaning Independent, and not a few conservative Obama/Trump Democrats into shoving and mauling their way into the voting booths next year to pull the lever for Trump.

Give a thought beyond the (admittedly justified) contempt that these quisling Republicans have earned under Obama and Trump. Think beyond revenge and punishment and everything we'd love to revel in.

Biden is not a stupid or naïve man, however you want to think him. Consider that maaaaybe the idea is to give the not-invisible number of Republicans or anti-Hillary Dems who voted Trump and are capable of shame a teensy lane into which they can cross back and justify their changeover to their other red state pals? A hint of grace so they don't worry that they'll be the enemy of Mr. or Ms. Blue President 2020?

We can do SCORCHED EARTH when we actually have a chance in hell of regaining the Senate with a considerable majority, which--unless I'm greatly mistaken (and I would love to be)--is nigh impossible given the Republican seats that are up for grabs. It's only nine or so Republicans, isn't it? And most are in blood-red states?

Psychologically speaking, these people have egos. Even for sane people (unlike Trump), it is often very very difficult to admit we're wrong. And these voters and politicians were so, so drastically wrong, in thinking Trump wouldn't be a catastrophe and a disgrace. Instead, they double-down instead of acknowledging they should've fought harder against Trump, against McConnell, against the psychos in the alt.right and Trump's racist base. The Anyone-But-Clinton people still refuse to admit they should've held their nose and compromised. That's the tragic flaw of human nature.

Biden and, I hope, other smart candidates, will preach left-of-center and progressive ideas while also carving out a "I'm reasonable" path to allow every possible vote we can get from the non-true-blue side exit the side of psychosis and authoritarianism and walk cautiously through the gateway back to a semblance of being willing to listen and, maybe even cooperate.

Without that gateway WE. ARE. FUCKED.
You're talking about republican voters, I'm talking about republican politicians. Not the same thing. There are sane and moderate republican voters. But the political party itself has been taken over by its base who do not believe in western values (multiculturalism, liberal democracy, free press, etc). Republican politicians are getting more radicalized because their base is getting more radicalized.

If Biden thinks republican politicians are going to work with a democrat in 2020, he is dangerously naive. We already have a president who is too emotionally and mentally inept to live in reality, and its not working out. Biden walking into a gunfight with a casserole dish will get his ass outsmarted at every turn.

We need a democratic president who knows the republican party will do everything they can to not only block the democrats agenda, but to screw up the country so people are not happy when a democrat is in charge. And we need a democrat willing to use every tool they have (executive powers, budget reconciliation, legislative maneuvers, etc) to get their agenda passed.

I'm, not opposed to Bidens policy agenda. If he wants to be a moderate democrat thats fine. A moderate democrat is vastly superior to a republican politician. Joe Manchin is vastly superior to a republican senator. But if Biden is utterly clueless about the reality of politicis in 2019, he is not qualified to be president. If a more progressive president was utterly oblivious to the reality of politics and the republican party they wouldn't be qualified either.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 05-18-2019 at 05:47 PM.
  #222  
Old 05-18-2019, 05:47 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ManyTacos View Post
Yeah, basically this.

The fact that the Democratic Party would experience 4 years of President Trump and respond with ho-hum kumbaya politics-supporter Joe Biden is...very, very bad and disconcerting. Every time the man says stuff like that I just want to tear my hair out.
Moreover, I see a fundamental weakness in his campaign that can be exploited. If Biden's main strength is his 'electability', then the strategy is clear: make him less electable. I think the strategy against Biden is the same one that was used against Hillary: drown him and his supporters in bad news.
  #223  
Old 05-18-2019, 07:42 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 20,931
I saw a good quote on Reddit that sums up Biden:

Quote:
Biden is a perfect candidate for someone who feels that the only thing wrong with America is that a terrible narcissist is President. Biden voters are fine with the status quo, but they’re upset that Trump is president.

Source: https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/co...n_it_comes_to/
__________________
"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
  #224  
Old 05-18-2019, 09:05 PM
Guest-starring: Id!'s Avatar
Guest-starring: Id! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
...It seems to me that everyone who says Biden sucks a fat donkey sack is already planning on crawling over hot glass to vote for a Democrat in November 2020. But Biden's really speaking to the people Hillary took for granted in 2016, and that's what matters to me, even if he's not the most exciting or hip or ideologically-perfect candidate.
In a unicorn world, I'd like a Mayor Pete/Beto (or Amy) ticket*, but to defeat Trump, Stuffed Suit Joe is our only chance. I cannot see any other dem candidate having even remotely any more success than JB particularly in WI/PA/MI (along with most deep red states). I'm hoping he's pushing the bipartisan thing with the full knowledge that that's the last thing he'll get, if in office, and that he's simply trying to reach out to the wafflers/indifferent/fence-sitters with this approach.

*Easily more than half the dem candidates I'd prefer to have in office than JB.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
If Biden's main strength is his 'electability', then the strategy is clear: make him less electable. I think the strategy against Biden is the same one that was used against Hillary: drown him and his supporters in bad news.
Wouldn't they use that strategy against any dem?
  #225  
Old 05-18-2019, 10:51 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest-starring: Id! View Post
Wouldn't they use that strategy against any dem?
...Biden's weakness is that beside "electability": there isn't much substance behind his campaign. Its a weakness shared by others, notably Mayor Pete, but not by all.

Quote:
but to defeat Trump, Stuffed Suit Joe is our only chance.
My biggest fear is that "our only chance" will replace "it's her time" as the worst-unofficial-election-slogan-of-all-time.
  #226  
Old 05-19-2019, 12:30 AM
Guest-starring: Id!'s Avatar
Guest-starring: Id! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...Biden's weakness is that beside "electability": there isn't much substance behind his campaign.
Already acknowledged with the Stuffed Suit Joe endearment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Its a weakness shared by others, notably Mayor Pete, but not by all.
Not sure I'd consider PG lacking in substance when, well, figured I'd let this second wiki paragraph concisely sum it up:

Quote:
Buttigieg's major policy positions include: abolition of the United States Electoral College, support for single-payer healthcare, labor unions, universal background checks for guns, protecting the environment by way of addressing climate change, a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, overturning the Citizens United ruling, and passing a federal law banning discrimination against LGBT people.
Seen several interviews of him (might have posted a PBS one here a ways back) and found him discussing many of the things from the quote above, and is in a different ball park than Biden, whose laziness at not getting down to any policy specifics is, indeed, disconcerting, and hopefully over the coming weeks he'll get really pressed on this, and soon have something more concrete than 'yeah I got ideas on healthcare but not right now'-like handwaving that needed to come to a grinding halt, like, a long time ago. One of the main reasons why, as previously stated, there are scads more dem candidates I'd rather see as executive-in-chief.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
My biggest fear is that "our only chance" will replace "it's her time" as the worst-unofficial-election-slogan-of-all-time.
Yeah, you're right - the phrase was a wee melodramatic and kinda pearl-clutch-y.
Something catchier, like, 'In like Joe Biden'. Snazzy him up a little.
  #227  
Old 05-19-2019, 12:38 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,953
How about "Back to the Future and Beyond!"

To be honest, I wouldn't mind Steve Bullock having a moment and catching some wind. A popular Democratic governor from a red state? Yes, please!

But I'm not holding my breath.

So for now I'm still all about Biden-Solis! or Biden-Warren! or Biden-Duckworth! or Biden-Yates!
  #228  
Old 05-19-2019, 12:39 AM
Guest-starring: Id!'s Avatar
Guest-starring: Id! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 3,929
How about - "I'm Still Standin"

Last edited by Guest-starring: Id!; 05-19-2019 at 12:40 AM.
  #229  
Old 05-19-2019, 05:02 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest-starring: Id! View Post
Wouldn't they use that strategy against any dem?
They would, but I'm comparing him to Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders, who arguably have more progressive bona fides. Biden's polling well because he's a household name and viewed as the great Dem hope. But what if he starts to look old and slow?
  #230  
Old 05-19-2019, 12:14 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest-starring: Id! View Post
I'm hoping he's pushing the bipartisan thing with the full knowledge that that's the last thing he'll get, if in office, and that he's simply trying to reach out to the wafflers/indifferent/fence-sitters with this approach.
If he is doing that, that is fine. Personally I don't know if Biden is really that competent a strategist. I'd be fine with a democratic president who openly talked about bipartisanship but then was ruthlessly efficient behind closed doors because they were smart enough to understand what is happening in reality. But I worry Biden would be Obama all over again. His administration will be him reaching out to the GOP for bipartisanship and him refusing to use his executive powers while the GOP uses every tool they have to gum up the legislature.

I believe Obama could've used recess appointments to appoint judges, he could've used his executive powers to stop prosecutions under DADT, etc.

Biden would probably appeal to high school educated whites in the midwest more than any other candidate (Bernie would be second). I just worry Biden is too naive despite his age and experience if he believes what he is saying. Also as mentioned he has no policies and is coasting on name recognition. Warren is coming out with very good policy ideas to make up for her lack of name recognition (so is Yang IMO, and I'm not sure if I'll support Warren or Yang in the election but it'll probably be one of them).
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #231  
Old 05-19-2019, 12:20 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
I believe Obama could've used recess appointments to appoint judges, he could've used his executive powers to stop prosecutions under DADT, etc.
Why in the world do you believe that?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NLRB_v._Noel_Canning
  #232  
Old 05-19-2019, 01:16 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Why in the world do you believe that?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NLRB_v._Noel_Canning
That case was decided six years into Obama's presidency and still allows recess appointments.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R42329.html

Quote:
President Obama made 32 recess appointments, all to full-time positions. During his presidency, President William J. Clinton made 139 recess appointments, 95 to full-time positions and 44 to part-time positions. President George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments, 99 to full-time positions and 72 to part-time positions.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #233  
Old 05-19-2019, 01:40 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,477
That's nice but denying Obama recess appointments was a bit of a story at the time. Guess you missed it but the gist is that the Republicans just didn't call official recesses.

Last edited by CarnalK; 05-19-2019 at 01:44 PM.
  #234  
Old 05-19-2019, 03:26 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
If he is doing that, that is fine. Personally I don't know if Biden is really that competent a strategist. I'd be fine with a democratic president who openly talked about bipartisanship but then was ruthlessly efficient behind closed doors because they were smart enough to understand what is happening in reality. But I worry Biden would be Obama all over again. His administration will be him reaching out to the GOP for bipartisanship and him refusing to use his executive powers while the GOP uses every tool they have to gum up the legislature.

I believe Obama could've used recess appointments to appoint judges, he could've used his executive powers to stop prosecutions under DADT, etc.

Biden would probably appeal to high school educated whites in the midwest more than any other candidate (Bernie would be second). I just worry Biden is too naive despite his age and experience if he believes what he is saying. Also as mentioned he has no policies and is coasting on name recognition. Warren is coming out with very good policy ideas to make up for her lack of name recognition (so is Yang IMO, and I'm not sure if I'll support Warren or Yang in the election but it'll probably be one of them).

As far as I remember, and I don't have the time or energy to look up old news stories on this right now, but I believe it was Biden that was discharged to the Capitol when some bill or other had to be pushed through or negotiated. So if anyone in this pool of candidates is fully aware of the challenges presented with these GOP Assholes AND has actually accomplished getting things pushed through, it's Biden.
  #235  
Old 05-19-2019, 05:17 PM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,155
GOT author George Martin endorsed Biden
  #236  
Old 05-19-2019, 06:22 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
As far as I remember, and I don't have the time or energy to look up old news stories on this right now, but I believe it was Biden that was discharged to the Capitol when some bill or other had to be pushed through or negotiated. So if anyone in this pool of candidates is fully aware of the challenges presented with these GOP Assholes AND has actually accomplished getting things pushed through, it's Biden.
This.

He dealt with The Party of No a lot. His optimism that a post Trump GOP may conclude that repositioning themselves into a group that is back to fighting for centrist voters, rather than doubled down on the base and the base alone, with some eagerness to show they can actually deliver in that manner, may not be completely pie in the sky.

Likely is, but it is effective campaign marketing in any case. If pie in the sky it is one less improbable to deliver on than things like Medicare for All and other campaign marketing items. Of the people running he has better odds of moving things in direction of these goals than most if not all the others.

Still hoping that we see some surge from Booker or Harris or even one of the governors before this is all done. And that any surge comes from their strengths moving them up rather than from tearing Biden down.
  #237  
Old 05-20-2019, 10:12 AM
RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,790
What's our objective here?

The obvious answer is "Beat Trump," but no, that's just a stepping-stone. The real objective of Democrats is to make America and the world a better place, with the definition of 'better' being a Democratic definition, of course.

So there are two steps here. The first step is having plans for making things better that can be turned into draft legislation. The second step is having plans for how you're going to turn that draft legislation into laws passed by Congress and signed by the President.

Whatever Biden has for his first step, his second step seems to be "elect me as President, and between my schmoozing ability and a GOP epiphany, we'll get the legislation through Congress."

In effect, it requires Mitch McConnell to cease being the Mitch that we've known all too well these past dozen years. I'm not ready to put much faith in that sort of plan, and that's my underlying problem with Biden.
  #238  
Old 05-20-2019, 11:22 AM
RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
As far as I remember, and I don't have the time or energy to look up old news stories on this right now, but I believe it was Biden that was discharged to the Capitol when some bill or other had to be pushed through or negotiated. So if anyone in this pool of candidates is fully aware of the challenges presented with these GOP Assholes AND has actually accomplished getting things pushed through, it's Biden.
But what did he accomplish?

Sure, he was the one in the middle of the discussions, but it's not like we didn't get to see how things turned out.
  #239  
Old 05-20-2019, 12:09 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 5,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
What's our objective here?

The obvious answer is "Beat Trump," but no, that's just a stepping-stone. The real objective of Democrats is to make America and the world a better place, with the definition of 'better' being a Democratic definition, of course.

So there are two steps here. The first step is having plans for making things better that can be turned into draft legislation. The second step is having plans for how you're going to turn that draft legislation into laws passed by Congress and signed by the President.

Whatever Biden has for his first step, his second step seems to be "elect me as President, and between my schmoozing ability and a GOP epiphany, we'll get the legislation through Congress."

In effect, it requires Mitch McConnell to cease being the Mitch that we've known all too well these past dozen years. I'm not ready to put much faith in that sort of plan, and that's my underlying problem with Biden.
And what is the strategy of the Pro-demonization candidate for getting legislation through a congress that is largely made up of Republicans and of Democrats from conservative states that are hanging on by their fingernails?

Last edited by Buck Godot; 05-20-2019 at 12:09 PM.
  #240  
Old 05-20-2019, 01:23 PM
RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Godot View Post
And what is the strategy of the Pro-demonization candidate for getting legislation through a congress that is largely made up of Republicans and of Democrats from conservative states that are hanging on by their fingernails?
How the hell should I know? I don't even know which candidate you're talking about.

At any rate, if one isn't honest with oneself about the nature of a problem, one isn't likely to be able to come up with a solution.
  #241  
Old 05-20-2019, 01:39 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
I mean... apparently you're right, but I legit do not get it. This guy has a consistent record furthering the war on drugs and mass incarceration and still defends his abysmal crime bill. He was good friends with a bunch of old-school racists. His record on desegregation and busing is pretty awful as well. Then there was the whole Anita Hill thing, although that was more "shitty sexism" than "shitty racism".

So I don't get it. I legitimately do not get why black people would support him over... Basically anyone else. His record on racial justice is among the worst among the Democratic contenders (maybe Buttigeig's is worse, hard to gauge). I have to wonder - how persistent will that be?
Biden wasnt "good friends with a bunch of old-school racists". Biden is the "go-to guy" on Capital Hill for eulogies. He dug deep, found a couple of half-way decent things the old racist Strom had done in his last days, made them to cornerstone of his eulogy, managed to sneak in that fact that Thurmond had done some bad crap , and did what he was expected to do- and did what every decent human being would do when asked to give a eulogy. This isnt a mark against Biden, it shows he is a decent human being. And people who trot that out are so damn desperate to find something, anything to use against him.

And yes, along with nearly every other congressman, he voted in those crime bills, because to NOT do so would have been seen as "weak on crime" . However, Biden has, after seeing how bad those bill were in practice, recanted (from your vox cite) :Biden has backtracked since the ’80s and ’90s. Before he left the Senate to become vice president, he pushed to pull back tougher prison sentences for crack cocaine — an effort that helped lead to a law that President Barack Obama signed in 2010. And he’s recently acknowledged his mistakes.

And the Crime bill did not create mass incarcerations, as over 92% of those behind bars are there for State crimes under state laws, not in Federal prisons. Not to mention the increase in incarceration started in 1973, two decades earlier.

and that bill included the : (wiki)Violence Against Women Act

Title IV, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), allocated $1.6 billion to help prevent and investigate violence against women. VAWA was renewed in 2000, 2005, and 2013. This includes:

The Safe Streets for Women Act, which increased federal penalties for repeat sex offenders and requires mandatory restitution for the medical and legal costs of sex crimes.
The Safe Homes for Women Act increased federal grants for battered women's shelters, created a National Domestic Violence Hotline, and required for restraining orders of one state to be enforced by the other states. It also added a rape shield law to the Federal Rules of Evidence


So, those complaints are 100% bullshit.

Last edited by DrDeth; 05-20-2019 at 01:40 PM.
  #242  
Old 05-20-2019, 01:48 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Maybe because people sometimes show that they've changed.

Re: Crime Bill, I'd just point out (again) that Bernie Sanders voted for that bill, too. And the rest of the field was probably too young to have an opinion at the time.
Yep. Pretty much every Dem voted for it, and a good number of Repubs, only a few voting Nay just because it was a Dem bill. The Black Congressional Caucus didnt rise up and vote against it en masse. Carol Moseley Braun voted yea, as did Cardiss Collins, Harold Ford Sr., and so forth.


The final vote in the senate was YEAs 95
NAYs 4
Not Voting1

So this is a damn stupid thing to hold against Biden.
  #243  
Old 05-20-2019, 04:58 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 5,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
How the hell should I know? I don't even know which candidate you're talking about.
Any one of them who believes that the Republicans can't be trusted and so no effort should be made to work with them. You pick.

I'm genuinely curious, because I entirely agree that you can propose anything you want but it doesn't mean squat unless it gets through congress and is signed by the president. I've heard a whole lot of great sounding proposals from the progressive wing of the Democratic party, but as yet no plan how any of it could realistically come to pass other than a hope that somehow a giant surge of public support for populist progressive ideals is going to wash over the country causing the Republicans to vanish in a puff of Brimstone.
  #244  
Old 05-20-2019, 05:32 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Yep. Pretty much every Dem voted for it, and a good number of Repubs, only a few voting Nay just because it was a Dem bill. The Black Congressional Caucus didnt rise up and vote against it en masse. Carol Moseley Braun voted yea, as did Cardiss Collins, Harold Ford Sr., and so forth.


The final vote in the senate was YEAs 95
NAYs 4
Not Voting1

So this is a damn stupid thing to hold against Biden.
Very stupid indeed; it was even dumber to hold it against Hillary Clinton who wasn't even serving in the Senate at that time. Many in the Black communities at the time actually supported getting tougher on repeat violent offenders because they were sick of the gang violence in their neighborhoods. They thought that, in tandem with other things, like gun control, after-school programs, job training, etc that this was part of a wholesale solution to some of the problems in the inner city. Unfortunately, nobody who signed that bill really understood the implications and unintended consequences of minimum mandatory sentencing, which actually started out as a result of 1980s court cases that resulted in federal sentencing guidelines that were intended to be less racist and treat all convicts the same. What we didn't understand at the time was that there are other elements of our society and the criminal justice system that still ultimately produce disparities in treatment.

Last edited by asahi; 05-20-2019 at 05:33 PM.
  #245  
Old 05-21-2019, 08:37 AM
RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Godot View Post
Any one of them who believes that the Republicans can't be trusted and so no effort should be made to work with them. You pick.
Gimme a list, with cites?

JFTR, there's a big difference between being willing to work with Republicans, and the matter of one's expectations about what might come of it. I personally would hope that any of the Democratic candidates would be willing to work with Republicans, but expecting Mitch McConnell to change much from the Mitch McConnell of the past dozen or so years is, quite frankly, delusional, and any legislative approach dependent on such a change - well, it's OK to try it, but it's not OK to rely on such an approach, because it's almost certainly doomed to failure.

Biden is giving every indication that he's planning to rely on such an approach.
So I think he would be a dangerous choice of nominee.
Quote:
I'm genuinely curious, because I entirely agree that you can propose anything you want but it doesn't mean squat unless it gets through congress and is signed by the president. I've heard a whole lot of great sounding proposals from the progressive wing of the Democratic party, but as yet no plan how any of it could realistically come to pass other than a hope that somehow a giant surge of public support for populist progressive ideals is going to wash over the country causing the Republicans to vanish in a puff of Brimstone.
Um, 50 Dems and killing the filibuster (which Biden's against). Then DC and (if it wants it) PR statehood, so that Dem legislation doesn't need every last Dem vote.

Now I agree that the odds are against getting to 50, but it's more like 2-1 against, rather than astronomically against, which are the odds of Mitch having some sort of epiphany, and being transformed into a reasonable leader who is willing to work with Dems on bills that would fulfill Democratic goals.

Also, ditching the filibuster and DC statehood are choices the Dems can make if they get to 50. It's fully within their control. And maybe if some of these Presidential candidates from states where there's a chance of beating a GOP incumbent in 2020, run for Senate instead of the Presidency, that would make the winning-the-Senate odds a bit shorter. (Progressives on Twitter have been harping on this A LOT.)

So yes, there's a realistic (if still uphill on the odds) alternative to the Biden pony plan.
  #246  
Old 05-21-2019, 05:44 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,271
Interesting that although Biden has jumped out to a commanding lead in the polls since he announced, he's not been racking up endorsements. He leads the 538 "endorsement primary", but almost all his endorsements came right around when he announced. Since then, he's picked up just two Congressmembers and Tom Daschle.

Nobody ELSE has gotten any significant endorsements lately, either.

It seems like the Democratic establishment is still on the fence about Biden; the voters (well, poll respondents) are giving them an opening to anoint him as the presumptive nominee, and they aren't, as of yet, jumping on it.

Last edited by Thing Fish; 05-21-2019 at 05:45 PM.
  #247  
Old 05-21-2019, 06:40 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,281
Once again, although I personally dislike Joe Biden, I have to confess that his numbers are impressive. He is the only Democrat running with net positive fav/unfav in this new Quinnipiac poll, even though the same respondents gave Trump only 38% approval. And Biden's fav/unfav with white non-college voters, although negative, is only -14. By comparison, Beto O'Rourke is -21, Kamala Harris is -24, Bernie Sanders is -30, and Elizabeth Warren is -34.
__________________
Some people on TV are nice to look at.
  #248  
Old 05-22-2019, 10:30 AM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,155
Iowa poll has Sanders and Biden both at 24%

https://news.yahoo.com/2020-election...170426885.html
  #249  
Old 05-22-2019, 06:40 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,281
__________________
Some people on TV are nice to look at.
  #250  
Old 05-22-2019, 06:59 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,608
Biden could even take Texas!

https://qz.com/1562532/beto-orourke-...2020-election/

Such close odds in deeply Republican Texas vouch for the excitement O’Rourke generated during his campaign against senator Ted Cruz last year. They’re also a sign of Trump’s sagging popularity. Even self-avowed socialist Bernie Sanders would give Trump a run for his money in the Lone Star state, based on the poll, which was conducted last month.

If the election were today: % for Democrat % for Trump
Beto O’Rourke 46 47
Joe Biden 46 47
Bernie Sanders 45 47
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 04:47 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