This is the group stage matches up for our Democratic Primary World Cup. Everyone is invited to vote in the poll. Feel free to add comments about why you chose one of these candidates over the other one.
I’ve combined these into one massive poll. Please vote for one candidate in each pair, or else you will effectively cancel your other vote.
Booker/Inslee and Harris/Gillibrand were the only matchups this round that I had any trouble with. I ended up going with Booker, because I think he’s more electable, and Harris, because based on my limited understanding I think she’s better on the issues, but I could be persuaded otherwise on both.
Thanks for combining them into one poll! Great job.
As of right now, it looks like two people don’t have any opinion on Biden vs. Gabbard, every race has at least one person without an opinion, and I’m not the only one pulling for the dark horse - - - - - - - - - -.
I’m voting Dotted Line for president!
Well, I went through that surprisingly quickly, and resisted the temptation to only vote for dashed lines.
Tulsi over Joe. Those two are probably the most suited by temperament and experience to being Commander-in-Chief. Tulsi isn’t likely to support frivolous foreign engagements, whereas Joe is. Tulsi, easily. [I see I’m the first to make that choice. Well, I’m still right.]
Beto over John Delaney. Yeah, I’ll go for the punk rocker over the banker. They’re both nice guys, they’re both too corporate, but Beto seems very sensitive to race & immigration issues.
Bernie over Amy. Yeah, should’ve signed onto Medicare for All, Amy.
Inslee over Booker. Environmentalist beats whatever kind of corrupt corporate tool Booker is.
Bullock over Buttigieg. Governor beats mayor. Also, while neither of them could get through the actual primary, Bullock probably really would win over some moderates and swing voters in a general.
That said, Yang over Hicklooper. Governor beats salesman; but as ridiculous as Yang is, I still picked him over Hickenlooper. Vision counts for something, and apparently Hick’s been insulting the “socialist” wing. Drop out, John.
Gillibrand over Harris. This may be an unpopular choice. [Oh, look, I am the first to make this choice, too.] But I think Gillibrand is a more sympathetic figure than Harris. Ymmv.
Warren over Castro. Warren over everybody, let’s be serious.
When you take Yang over Hickenlooper because “vision”, I don’t think I like your version of “be serious”.
Yangand I really don’t want Yang to be President; I don’t trust himhas a vision. Hickenlooper doesn’t seem to.
I have never agreed with Jefferson once
We have fought on like seventy-five different fronts
But when all is said and all is done
Jefferson has beliefs, Burr has none
As good as reason as any to pick between two people who have next to zero shot at getting the nomination.
Biden over Gabbard. Not that I loved Biden more–he’s awfully old, for one thing–but that I loved Gabbard less. I believe in gay rights and don’t think much of her record on a bunch of other things. Easy choice.
O’Rourke over Delaney. O’Rourke isn’t high on my list, but I have a hard time taking Delaney all that seriously.
Klobuchar over Sanders. Another easy choice. I like Klobuchar a lot and see very little positive about Sanders–his age is only a small part of it.
Booker over Inslee. This one’s close–I like Inslee better than I thought I would at first–but Booker by a nose.
Buttigieg over Bullock. Like 'em both, like Buttigieg more.
Hickenlooper over Yang. Yang might have possibilities, but he desperately needs some political and governmental experience first.
Harris over Gillibrand. Gillibrand has a lot going for her, but her campaign has just stalled out completely. Harris is a strong candidate IMO anyway.
Castro over Warren. There are some definitive positives about Warren–certainly she’s smart and knowledgeable about economics–but I do believe she cannot beat Trump.
The hardest of these to me was Pete Buttigieg v. Steve Bullock. I like Buttigieg’s stage presence and want to see him do well enough to have a good launch for Senate or such. Bullock though I think would make a better president, if only he had a realistic path. I went with Buttigieg but with not much certainty.
Next toughest is the O’Rourke v Delaney match up. I honestly know about nothing about Delaney and am slightly more negative than positive on O’Rourke. But I still went with O’Rourke … hopefully also to go back and run for Senate, where he will highly likely lose but where he’ll help turnout for down ticket races that might not all lose.
Booker v Inslee is another hard one. Inslee’s highlighting practical approaches for climate change and relevant experiences are strong items but Booker is a powerful speaker if he gets a good soapbox and has the unify message that I think would play well against Trump.
Yang and Gabbard are both ones in my most actively dislike column and ones that could, in my mind, cause even more harm than Trump is causing. Beliefs that are potentially harmful to issues of equity and inequality are not better than less strongly held beliefs or even none. Hickenlooper’s assessment of socialism as a losing campaign approach and not one that will help actually achieve progressive goals is IMHO valid and supported by the polling evidence we have. If there was no Biden he’d be getting press time. But there is Biden. And Biden is still a default choice until someone earns the spot instead by their own merits.
Harris, Warren, and Klobucher are all easy wins in their match ups.
I voted just now and see that, with a single exception, my choice is in the lead right now in this poll!
The one exception is Beto vs Somebody_I_never_heard_of. I voted against Beto.
For what it’s worth, I’m a fan of this poll style.
I like this better, Pleonast, and I gladly participated. Nice work!
Let’s not confuse vision with hallucination
No, it isn’t. How about you use the same reasons you would pick between any two candidates? Why would you decide for hopeless candidates that vision overrides untrustworthy and ridiculous? (foolsguinea’s own assessment of Yang)
I like this line.
Neither Yang nor Hick are good candidates, but I rated Yang more highly, against my own default standards, because Hickenlooper was just heard picking on the left of the party instead of trying to pick them up. Saying even Yang is better is due to my assessment of how awful some of these state-level pols like Hick are.
Also, Yang wants to give me money. Hickenlooper wants to sell me pot.
Even though I think he’s wrong on some issues, I think Yang is interesting to listen to. I think he’s spot on in terms of understanding some of the problems facing the labor force, though not sure if I agree with the solution (universal income). He will probably do better in the campaign than even some veteran politicos. Perhaps he might become the Ron Paul of the Democratic primary - no chance in hell of winning but develops a committed, almost cultish following.
I actually think that UBI is a good idea (though one that probably won’t be politically feasible for a while). And Yang just might be the best spokesman for it. But being a good spokesman for a good idea is not the same thing as being a good politician.