View Poll Results: Would you prefer a Democratic primary without Biden and Sanders?
I would have preferred it if neither one ran. 64 76.19%
I prefer what's actually happened, with both of them running. 20 23.81%
Voters: 84. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-25-2019, 03:26 PM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,631

Democrats, would you have preferred a primary without Biden and Sanders?


Here's the hypothetical. Back in December of last year, both Biden and Sanders announce that they are not going to run for POTUS. They both say something to the effect that they are making way for the younger generation, and that while they will continue to work hard to advocate for the things they support, they won't endorse any particular candidate until after the primary is over.

Would you have preferred this situation, so that in a sense all of the candidates would be "new blood" and the two frontrunners wouldn't be setting up a seeming contest between the party insider and the self identified socialist while sucking up the oxygen from all the other candidates? On the one hand we wouldn't have to worry about this potentially turning into a contest of the party insider vs. the outsider and how Sanders is getting cheated. On the other hand instead of the 20 or so serious contenders we currently have the number might be 30 or 40 had both Biden and Sanders announced that they were not running. Which would you have preferred? There is no option for just one of them to sit out, it's either both or neither. It also shouldn't need to be said, but Clinton is also not running in either scenario.
  #2  
Old 04-25-2019, 03:28 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 11,894
They should run. I'd prefer Sanders, because he's divisive, but I'd rather they were both there and allow for a wide range of belief systems for voters to choose from.
  #3  
Old 04-25-2019, 03:49 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,243
My hope was that Bernie wouldn't run, but would find some rising young progressive (Stacy Abrams?) and endorse her early. So, not quite the scenario you propose.

I like Bernie, so I voted for the status quo. I see "neither" is already ahead 4-1. I will be interested in seeing this result; Bernie and Biden supporters collectively make up about half the Democratic electorate, but I'm guessing "neither" will do better than you would predict based on that fact.
  #4  
Old 04-25-2019, 03:57 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,776
I see no reason to object to them running. If we collectively decide we want someone else, well, we can do that.
  #5  
Old 04-25-2019, 04:05 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 5,660
I don't think that a lot of candidates are staying out just because Biden and Sanders are in.

All thinkg considered, I would prefer that Sanders not run. Hopefully everyone has learned their lesson regarding launching a protest vote, but I'm still a bit concerned about a Bernie or bust contingent forming, that decides to take its ball and go home if he doesn't win the nomination, particularly if the vote is close or there is a brokered convention.


Also it may be ageist of me, but I would like to nominate a Democrat that could serve a full 8 year term, and I'm not sure that either of these men are up to it. Come 2028, Biden will be 86 and Sanders 88. Being president is not an easy job (unless, like the current one you don't care) and past history has shown that it ages a person, so there is cause for concern.
  #6  
Old 04-25-2019, 05:16 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,575
If just one had run, I think Bernie has the better claim that he deserves to be in the race. He ran last time and did well, and clearly still has a good deal of support. I'm not fond of him and I wish he hadn't run, but them's the facts.

Biden, at best, is the right man for a different time, but largely out of step for this one. (I've been extremely critical of Biden in other threads, so I'll just leave it at that in this one.) He's only in this race because he was an affable sort as Obama's veep, and that isn't much of a credential, IMHO.
  #7  
Old 04-25-2019, 05:28 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW.
Posts: 11,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
If just one had run, I think Bernie has the better claim that he deserves to be in the race. He ran last time and did well, and clearly still has a good deal of support. I'm not fond of him and I wish he hadn't run, but them's the facts.

Biden, at best, is the right man for a different time, but largely out of step for this one. (I've been extremely critical of Biden in other threads, so I'll just leave it at that in this one.) He's only in this race because he was an affable sort as Obama's veep, and that isn't much of a credential, IMHO.
I don't look at it as "deserves" to be in the race. They can do as they wish. Hell, Hillary could run if she wants (although I'd strongly prefer that she doesn't.) It's a fair system (i.e., not rigged) and someone will come out on top. I don't have a favorite yet, but it's unlikely to be Biden or Sanders. (goes without saying, anyone in the field who gets the nomination will have my full support)
  #8  
Old 04-25-2019, 06:12 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,158
I'm glad that Sanders, Biden and Warren are all running. If just one or two were running they might "suck up all the oxygen" but if they suck up each others' oxygen, a lower-tier candidate has a chance to shine. Does this make sense?

There was a GOP Presidential candidates' debate in early August 2015. Are we going to have a Democratic debate soon?
  #9  
Old 04-25-2019, 06:45 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 21,139
Not a Democrat but I think the more people that run the better, so far as beating Trump goes.

If there's a good horse race between, for example, Booty-judge and Biden because they both look like real and decent people then that gets people invested in the election. People like a story. And if the big election story is which of the two major Democratic names got to go ahead into the main election, then the main election is just a tag-on tale and the story has already been decided.

You just need to make the Democratic primaries the bigger story. Don't even act like the competition against Trump is a real one. Look at people like they're stupid if they even suggest that Trump is a real contender against anyone other than Hillary.

Granted, there's the chance that they all just drag each other down into the muck, but I feel like the Dems will realize that they need to avoid that.
  #10  
Old 04-25-2019, 06:54 PM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 20,886
I am not keen on Sanders' age. He seems pretty spry for his age but still...

Biden I worry will lock-up the DNC ala Clinton. Although, given what a shit show that was last time I expect they'd be more circumspect this time around.

Biden is also older than I'd prefer.
__________________
"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
  #11  
Old 04-25-2019, 06:58 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
There was a GOP Presidential candidates' debate in early August 2015. Are we going to have a Democratic debate soon?
June 26 and 27. The plan is to host debates on two separate nights while the field is ginormous. They aren't following GOP's tiered model on the same night from 2016. Instead, candidates for two separate debate night will be randomly selected for which night from those that meet the qualifications to be included.

There's a total of 12 currently planned debates. They are close to monthly. There's a planned November or December debate so one of those months will be the first without a debate. Then there's a January debate, and a January or February debate, and two more February debates as we roll into actual primaries/caucuses.

The current schedule only runs through April. There may be more if needed after April. The front loading of this cycle's schedule has close to 2/3 of delegates awarded by March 17th, though. Things may be wrapping up before additional debates need to be added at the back end.
  #12  
Old 04-25-2019, 07:40 PM
Fair Rarity's Avatar
Fair Rarity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,115
I will vote for either of them (ANY of them) in the general, but I don't want either of them to get the nom for myriad reasons. I wished they both sat it out and the best I can hope for now is their cranky-old-man-ness intensifies towards each other and they take each other out.
  #13  
Old 04-25-2019, 07:48 PM
Locrian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 4,145
Would I prefer if Biden didn't run, hell no.

Would I prefer if Bernie didn't run? Hell, yes.

New blood is great and all, but the Dems should all sit down now and say, "Okay. 10 of you have to drop out now!" I think that many nominees already only makes Dems look much more confusing to GOPers, having too many ideas and standpoints in comparison to the "Keep out all migrants/Screw the poor" Republicans who only want to discriminate.
  #14  
Old 04-25-2019, 10:56 PM
Covfefe's Avatar
Covfefe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,261
55% of me didn't want either (respectively) to run, 45% of me was okay with it. At this point, I'm not happy about Biden being in the race due to his personal baggage and I'm now split down the middle on Sanders because the other candidate who is generally considered progressive, Warren, isn't a realistic option IMO.
  #15  
Old 04-25-2019, 11:09 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 21,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locrian View Post
Would I prefer if Biden didn't run, hell no.

Would I prefer if Bernie didn't run? Hell, yes.

New blood is great and all, but the Dems should all sit down now and say, "Okay. 10 of you have to drop out now!" I think that many nominees already only makes Dems look much more confusing to GOPers, having too many ideas and standpoints in comparison to the "Keep out all migrants/Screw the poor" Republicans who only want to discriminate.
On that note, one thing that I wish the DNC would do is set up the primary race track to have two stages:

Stage 1 - People vote for who to get rid of. Highest vote count is out of the race. Stage 1 continues until there are only three people in the race.

Stage 2 - Regular rules.

Who thinks that Trump would have gotten through a stage 1?

Last edited by Sage Rat; 04-25-2019 at 11:09 PM.
  #16  
Old 04-25-2019, 11:16 PM
Qin Shi Huangdi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
On that note, one thing that I wish the DNC would do is set up the primary race track to have two stages:

Stage 1 - People vote for who to get rid of. Highest vote count is out of the race. Stage 1 continues until there are only three people in the race.

Stage 2 - Regular rules.

Who thinks that Trump would have gotten through a stage 1?
Having an eliminatory stage 1 gets rid of high risk, high return candidates and leaves you only with milquetoast, inoffensive low risk, low return ones.
__________________
Clinton/Schweitzer '16
  #17  
Old 04-25-2019, 11:42 PM
Qin Shi Huangdi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,092
To answer the question, since a significant proportion if not a majority of the Democratic electorate wants Biden and/or Bernie as one of their top 2-3 choices it's logical to me they both should be in the race. Certainly, their candidacies make more sense than those of say Beto O'Rourke, Kirsten Gillibrand, John Hickenlooper, Eric Swalwell, and many others.
__________________
Clinton/Schweitzer '16
  #18  
Old 04-26-2019, 02:12 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,474
I like Biden and always have. I think he complicates things more than a bit. But, if he made a one term vow, I would support him more fully.
  #19  
Old 04-26-2019, 02:24 AM
Locrian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 4,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
I like Biden and always have. I think he complicates things more than a bit. But, if he made a one term vow, I would support him more fully.
I see what you mean, but saying it's only for a term also could make Dems look weak. Plus, I'm guessing it will take about 11 terms of Dem executive branch to straighten out this mess.

Right now I'm for a Biden/Buttigieg ticket.

Last edited by Locrian; 04-26-2019 at 02:25 AM.
  #20  
Old 04-26-2019, 04:20 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locrian View Post
I see what you mean, but saying it's only for a term also could make Dems look weak. Plus, I'm guessing it will take about 11 terms of Dem executive branch to straighten out this mess.

Right now I'm for a Biden/Buttigieg ticket.
I'm worried about electability above all else, and Biden is likely the best chance to make Trump one term, and he's a genuinely good guy.

I thought of the B/B ticket too, but a two white guy ticket looks (and frankly is) bad. Love Buttigieg on every level, but he's got plenty of time. One term of Biden to Make America Normal Again, and give Buttigieg a high profile position. If I knew Buttigieg could win, I'd be fine with Biden staying out.

And to directly answer the OP, I'd be happier without Sanders anywhere near this thing.
  #21  
Old 04-26-2019, 08:24 AM
carnivorousplant is offline
KB not found. Press any key
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Central Arkansas
Posts: 58,467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
I'm worried about electability above all else, and Biden is likely the best chance to make Trump one term, and he's a genuinely good guy.
This.
  #22  
Old 04-26-2019, 08:29 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,269
Neither one is necessarily my top candidate, but I don't understand why that fact would necessarily lead me (or anyone of a like mind) to conclude that they shouldn't run. The goal of a primary is to have candidates compete to see who can best represent the cross section of the country. I'm one part of that cross-section, as is everyone else. It's arrogant and self-absorbed to suggest someone shouldn't run, unless they are patently harmful candidates like Donald Trump or Ted Cruz. Using that metric, the candidate who comes closest to "shouldn't run" status is Tulsi Gabbard, who I once had a higher opinion of until I realized that she has had some kooky opinions. But hell, if it comes down to her and Trump, she still wins - I think.

Last edited by asahi; 04-26-2019 at 08:30 AM.
  #23  
Old 04-26-2019, 08:41 AM
BrotherCadfael is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vermont
Posts: 10,178
Putting on my pure political analysis hat and setting all partisanship aside, it seems to me that Biden is the candidate with the best chance of beating Trump. Aside from him, the twenty-one (at last count) candidates are gambles at best. Among that group, you have Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren (the vanguard of youth!), another couple so far to the left who not only won't play in Peoria, but will seriously piss off Peoria, some kids who might be serious players in another ten years, and several nonentities running for the exercise.



Last time around, the Republicans had seventeen candidates, most of whom were equally iffy. Because of the splintering of the primary electorate we wound up with Trump by process of elimination. Let us hope this is not the script for the Democrats this time around.



While I am a Republican, I am not a 'uge fan of the current incumbent. I'd love to have a serious candidate on the Democratic side to at least consider come Election Day.
  #24  
Old 04-26-2019, 08:47 AM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW.
Posts: 11,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrotherCadfael View Post
Putting on my pure political analysis hat and setting all partisanship aside, it seems to me that Biden is the candidate with the best chance of beating Trump. Aside from him, the twenty-one (at last count) candidates are gambles at best. Among that group, you have Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren (the vanguard of youth!), another couple so far to the left who not only won't play in Peoria, but will seriously piss off Peoria, some kids who might be serious players in another ten years, and several nonentities running for the exercise.



Last time around, the Republicans had seventeen candidates, most of whom were equally iffy. Because of the splintering of the primary electorate we wound up with Trump by process of elimination. Let us hope this is not the script for the Democrats this time around.



While I am a Republican, I am not a 'uge fan of the current incumbent. I'd love to have a serious candidate on the Democratic side to at least consider come Election Day.
Thanks for this. I assume (and hope and pray) that there are a fair number of decent Republicans left in the country. Based on your stated views, do you have any sense how many people like you 1) exist, and 2) would vote for someone like Biden over Trump in 2020?
  #25  
Old 04-26-2019, 09:30 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,776
Or, for that matter, would vote for one of the other candidates over Trump in 2020. If Biden is the best chance for beating Trump, then I'm all in for him, but I don't think that's a given.
  #26  
Old 04-26-2019, 10:42 AM
BrotherCadfael is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vermont
Posts: 10,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
Thanks for this. I assume (and hope and pray) that there are a fair number of decent Republicans left in the country. Based on your stated views, do you have any sense how many people like you 1) exist, and 2) would vote for someone like Biden over Trump in 2020?
I suppose it depends on whether Joe decides to appease the louder part of the primary electorate and tries to move to the left of Bernie. Unfortunately, not an impossible scenario.
  #27  
Old 04-26-2019, 11:31 AM
Lightray's Avatar
Lightray is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: St. Louis MO
Posts: 6,017
Since we're watching the current nitwit descend into senile dementia before our very eyes, I'd prefer it if the fossils would realize that their time is long gone and fade away into the K-T boundary with the rest of their kind. Alas, that is not to be and if they're called upon I'll vote for the doddering Democrats. But from the 2018 election it's obvious that the old guard is on its way out in the Democratic Party, so I'm curious to see how this plays out. I think Bernie is relying on a youth vote that may be moving on from him. And Biden certainly will have issues getting the youth vote.
  #28  
Old 04-26-2019, 12:18 PM
Icarus's Avatar
Icarus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In front of my PC, y tu?
Posts: 5,064
While I voted that they both should be in the race now, I think a risk we take in assessing their chances is that the primary electorate is not the general electorate. As we saw the last time, when it came right down to it, the party professionals tipped the scales in favor of Hillary. With one result being a lot of angry Bernie fans who reputedly voted Trump in the general. I could see the same thing happening in a Biden vs. Bernie showdown. The party professionals, not just the voters, are very influential in the outcome of the primaries (super delegates, anyone?).

Curiously to me, it seems that is not the same on the GOP side? If it was, I would have expected them to find a way to squash Trump along the way. But that's a discussion for another day.

Anywho, all that I stated seems to suggest that we would be better off if neither were in the race, and that we would focus our attention on fresh blood. But realistically, I want someone who fills the "electable" bill too, and they are the only ones I see at the moment who check that box. For anyone else, it would be an uphill climb. We gotta bring a gun to this knife fight.
  #29  
Old 04-26-2019, 01:44 PM
Qin Shi Huangdi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
I'm worried about electability above all else, and Biden is likely the best chance to make Trump one term, and he's a genuinely good guy.

I thought of the B/B ticket too, but a two white guy ticket looks (and frankly is) bad. Love Buttigieg on every level, but he's got plenty of time. One term of Biden to Make America Normal Again, and give Buttigieg a high profile position. If I knew Buttigieg could win, I'd be fine with Biden staying out.

And to directly answer the OP, I'd be happier without Sanders anywhere near this thing.
Why should the goal be to "Make American Normal Again"? The "normal" isn't working and trying to simply restore the America of November 7th 2016 gets you a more competent and consistent version of Trump come 2024 or 2028. Buttigieg probably needs some sort of a national high level position given Indiana has an effective ceiling aspiring Democrats due to its strongly Republican nature.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrotherCadfael View Post
Putting on my pure political analysis hat and setting all partisanship aside, it seems to me that Biden is the candidate with the best chance of beating Trump. Aside from him, the twenty-one (at last count) candidates are gambles at best. Among that group, you have Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren (the vanguard of youth!), another couple so far to the left who not only won't play in Peoria, but will seriously piss off Peoria, some kids who might be serious players in another ten years, and several nonentities running for the exercise.



Last time around, the Republicans had seventeen candidates, most of whom were equally iffy. Because of the splintering of the primary electorate we wound up with Trump by process of elimination. Let us hope this is not the script for the Democrats this time around.



While I am a Republican, I am not a 'uge fan of the current incumbent. I'd love to have a serious candidate on the Democratic side to at least consider come Election Day.
As I keep saying, Democrats have no obligation to nominate people they think might best appeal to Republicans especially when the effect will be to keep the Democratic Party as centrist as possible and prevent it from embracing any sort of genuinely reformist agenda.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightray View Post
I think Bernie is relying on a youth vote that may be moving on from him.
There's no evidence to suggest that the youth vote is "moving on" from Bernie except in the sense that there's more candidates in the race but under 35s remain disproportionately Sanders supporters.
__________________
Clinton/Schweitzer '16
  #30  
Old 04-26-2019, 02:02 PM
carnivorousplant is offline
KB not found. Press any key
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Central Arkansas
Posts: 58,467
I think a two White guy ticket is required to take votes away from Trump.
  #31  
Old 04-26-2019, 02:05 PM
Qin Shi Huangdi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by carnivorousplant View Post
I think a two White guy ticket is required to take votes away from Trump.
VP selection doesn't matter all that much (unless its a Palin tier pick) and plenty of women and/or POC candidates have appeal among 2016 Trump voters, not least of which was Obama himself. By this reasoning, Buttigieg being gay might be a bigger turnoff than a white woman or a heterosexual nonwhite man.
__________________
Clinton/Schweitzer '16
  #32  
Old 04-26-2019, 02:33 PM
carnivorousplant is offline
KB not found. Press any key
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Central Arkansas
Posts: 58,467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qin Shi Huangdi View Post
...plenty of women and/or POC candidates have appeal among 2016 Trump voters, not least of which was Obama himself...
I thought we were speaking of people who voted for Trump, usually attacked as being racist and misogynists.
  #33  
Old 04-26-2019, 02:46 PM
Qin Shi Huangdi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by carnivorousplant View Post
I thought we were speaking of people who voted for Trump, usually attacked as being racist and misogynists.
Most Trump voters were/are lifelong Republicans, but a small and decisive proportion of them were Obama voters which enabled Trump to swing key Rust Belt states.
__________________
Clinton/Schweitzer '16
  #34  
Old 04-26-2019, 03:16 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 21,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qin Shi Huangdi View Post
Most Trump voters were/are lifelong Republicans, but a small and decisive proportion of them were Obama voters which enabled Trump to swing key Rust Belt states.
The map of House wins is the same map as of Trump wins. That strongly implies that the Trump win was because everyone voted a straight party line. Which further implies that people who are swing voters didn't bother to vote in the 2016 election, because they had the good taste to not choose between two crooks.

I'm sure that there are a few people who switched, but it's not a significant number. Of those that did, I would expect the difference to be financial, not whether one person was male or female, gay or straight, etc.
  #35  
Old 04-26-2019, 03:39 PM
Fretful Porpentine is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Bohemia. A seacoast.
Posts: 6,420
No, I think any candidates who want to run should run, and the public can sort out which one they want. But if I were going to arbitrarily get rid of a couple of candidates, I'd pick Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang, who strike me as the ones most likely to turn into my nightmare scenario where an unqualified or kooky candidate ends up with the nomination in more or less the same way Trump did*. (Marianne Williamson, I think, would also fall into this general category, but I'm less worried about her because she doesn't seem to have the weirdly rabid fanbase.) Biden and Bernie are both normal, conventionally qualified candidates with reasonably broad-based appeal. They can stay.

* Yes, I realize Tulsi Gabbard is, by some measures, more conventionally-qualified than Pete Buttigieg, but in the unlikely event that Mayor Pete ends up as the nominee, I'm not too worried about him turning into Democratic Trump, and I think it will be evidence that he actually IS that politically talented and probably deserves the nomination.
__________________
Live merrily, and trust to good verses.
-- Robert Herrick
  #36  
Old 04-26-2019, 06:29 PM
Icarus's Avatar
Icarus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In front of my PC, y tu?
Posts: 5,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrotherCadfael View Post
Putting on my pure political analysis hat and setting all partisanship aside, ....{snip}..... another couple so far to the left who not only won't play in Peoria, but will seriously piss off Peoria
Couldn't help yourself, could you?
  #37  
Old 04-26-2019, 07:56 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
You mean he's STILL here?
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 25,754
In my dream world, I would love to see Biden run hard through Christmas, then announce before Iowa doctors had found a health problem, and that he was withdrawing, but he would campaign against Donald Trump with every bit of strength he had for as long as he could.

Then from January to November, he makes numerous appearances in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania (and also Ohio, Indiana, West Virginia, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, etc.) and uses every trick an old-time politician knows to get the crowds and/or big donors on his side, wholeheartedly endorses the Democratic nominee and introduces him/her at campaign stops right up to Election Day.

And then I hope Joe Biden announces his health problem is in remission and that he lives a long and healthy life and dies in his sleep with his family around him.

Same scenario for Bernie, except substitute college campuses. In fact, I'd like to see a series of Biden/Bernie rallies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the University of Michigan, Penn State, etc.
  #38  
Old 04-27-2019, 12:21 AM
Whack-a-Mole's Avatar
Whack-a-Mole is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 20,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qin Shi Huangdi View Post
Having an eliminatory stage 1 gets rid of high risk, high return candidates and leaves you only with milquetoast, inoffensive low risk, low return ones.
Interesting...

Curious if you think the primaries should simply be vote for who you like or if game theory should be applied to avoid milquetoast candidates?
__________________
"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
  #39  
Old 04-27-2019, 07:29 AM
dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,037
Everyone on here known my opinion of Sanders and I wish like hell he would have stayed out. I’m slightly optimistic that he won’t have the same cult at 2016. The Daily Kos comment section and the Bernie subreddit made me ill in 2016, Karl Rove couldn’t have written harsher things about Hillary than the diehard Bernie supporters. I hope like hell people have leaned that you can’t cast protest votes in Madison, Ann Arbor, or State College.

I also wish Biden had stayed out. We’re in for 18 months of creepy Uncle Joe memes, it’ll be just like the damn emails all over again. Plus, it’ll give fuel to the ‘rigged’ shit if it comes down to Biden vs Sanders as the last two standing.

Biden’s time was 2016 and it could have prevented the awful Bernie vs Hillary wars. Sanders not dropping out after the New York primary and his ‘take it to the convention’ attitude is what caused the Hillary loss and the election of the worst president of the modern era.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42
  #40  
Old 04-27-2019, 08:04 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,776
dalej42, the Daily Kos comments section and Reddit are going to be populated by the same professional trolls no matter who's running.
  #41  
Old 04-27-2019, 08:37 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,269
I think that as a progressive leader in the broad sense, Bernie Sanders is great. He's forcing this country to rethink how it thinks about its relationship with government and how we look at economics.

But the idea of Bernie as a president concerns me greatly. I fear he would be the stereotypical clumsy liberal who couldn't run a profitable lemonade stand.
  #42  
Old 04-27-2019, 08:59 AM
BrotherCadfael is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vermont
Posts: 10,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icarus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrotherCadfael
Putting on my pure political analysis hat and setting all partisanship aside, ....{snip}..... another couple so far to the left who not only won't play in Peoria, but will seriously piss off Peoria
Couldn't help yourself, could you?
It was indeed non-partisan political analysis, albeit not phrased quite as well as it could have been -- but then, I am an incurable wiseass. The statement: "two so far to the left as to alienate voters in much of the old Democratic working-class base", is somewhat more appropriate, but means essentially the same thing.
  #43  
Old 04-27-2019, 09:51 PM
Flyer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightray View Post
Since we're watching the current nitwit descend into senile dementia before our very eyes, I'd prefer it if the fossils would realize that their time is long gone and fade away into the K-T boundary with the rest of their kind. Alas, that is not to be and if they're called upon I'll vote for the doddering Democrats. But from the 2018 election it's obvious that the old guard is on its way out in the Democratic Party, so I'm curious to see how this plays out. I think Bernie is relying on a youth vote that may be moving on from him. And Biden certainly will have issues getting the youth vote.
Why would Biden worry about the youth vote when he's already got a significant percentage of the senior citizen vote?
  #44  
Old 04-27-2019, 10:12 PM
nearwildheaven is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 12,433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
I am not keen on Sanders' age. He seems pretty spry for his age but still...

Biden I worry will lock-up the DNC ala Clinton. Although, given what a shit show that was last time I expect they'd be more circumspect this time around.

Biden is also older than I'd prefer.
I came here to say essentially the same thing from start to finish. Plus, a lot can happen between now and then, and there is no guarantee that any of them will still be in the running by the time all this goes down.
  #45  
Old 04-28-2019, 12:35 AM
Qin Shi Huangdi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whack-a-Mole View Post
Interesting...

Curious if you think the primaries should simply be vote for who you like or if game theory should be applied to avoid milquetoast candidates?
I think generally voting for one's preferred candidate works in weeding out milquetoast candidates unless the other candidates are so corrupt, unpopular, insane, or otherwise unfit that a competent milquetoast one is preferable.
__________________
Clinton/Schweitzer '16
  #46  
Old 04-30-2019, 01:53 PM
Inigo Montoya's Avatar
Inigo Montoya is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 15,603
I like them both because they've got solid congressional chops and their knowledge of processes and personnel will be useful in rebuilding the government. But they're old white men, a demographic for leadership that is falling out of favor with the Democratic base. Sanders especially is too progressive for the office. We need progressives in congress where they can champion that agenda. The presidency needs to be occupied by someone, a moderate, who can garner support from both parties, and maybe sell progressive goals in conservative-pleasing terms.

I think them being in the race is too much of a distraction.
__________________
Y'all are just too damned serious. Lighten up.
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 06:36 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