Democratic World Cup, Semi Finals

This is the semi finals of the single-elimination 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 poll. Please vote for one candidate in each pair, or else you will effectively cancel your other vote.

Easy choices. Looking forward to a Warren-Harris final.

Warren is an economic nightmare never seen before in the US, but less likely to be involved so heavily in the wars like BushObamaTrump. She’ll get the nod over Biden.

Harris is too authoritarian and warmongering. Don’t know much about Klobuchar but Harris is by far the worst contestant in the primary.

Oh, yes, the horror of stopping people from stealing. Though you’re right that it’s never before been seen in the US, only in those countries that’re doing a lot better than us.

I like Warren better than Biden, but I’m still not convinced about her electability. And Harris is doing a much better job of making a name for herself than Klobuchar, so I’m betting that she’ll do better in the general, too.

Not even a contest. Easily two of my most preferred potential presidents, Biden and Klobuchar, against opponents that I either don’t care for (Harris) or actively don’t want to be President (Warren).

Chronos’ sentiments are same as mine. My heart said “Warren” but my finger clicked “Biden” for electability.

Biden is old and boring. I don’t think old and boring brings people out to vote.

Seems nice… :dubious:

Hmmm, not a good sign.

That’s from February 2019. Did something change since then? If not, that’s baked into the numbers (on a national level, not this poll). I’ve seen people defend that behavior.

Assuming that people actually research things before having an opinion… :dubious:

Which countries are doing a lot better than “us”?

If that’s the best Warren can do to try to make her economic program seem sane, she will have some problems in the campaign.

Old news, as Heffalump and Roo pointed out.

Not what I’d regard as ideal boss behavior, but it’s the sort of thing that when a man does it, nobody thinks it’s a big deal. So I’m not going to give a nontrivial amount of weight to it.

Most of Europe.

Yeah, the inherent sexism in that attack earlier this year was astonishing. A man gets labelled a ‘strong leader’ or ‘stern but fair and goal-oriented’. A woman exhibiting the same traits gets somehow lessened by them.

WRT ‘electability,’ I think it’s all backwards. Biden’s fan club are largely older Democrats who will vote next November, regardless of who the nominee is (barring an outlandish choice like Tulsi Gabbard). The real question is, which potential nominee is likely to pull in Dem voters who are less certain to vote?

The lesson of 2018 is that if both sides massively turn out, our side is way bigger, and we win. The most electable candidate is the candidate that will help us realize a massive Dem turnout. And I don’t see Biden being that candidate. He’ll get all the (ETA: [del]people[/del] Dems) like me who will show up on November 3 of next year, almost regardless of nominee, unless they’re dead or lying comatose on a hospital bed. But that isn’t enough.

We are discussing the Executive role. Being a bad manager is relatively disqualifying. The job of the President is to run things smoothly and effectively, not to spend 90% of his time playing political games or shouting the correct political message to your ears from the top of the White House dome.

I mean, certainly, that position I just stated is an exaggeration. Congress is a big committee and a committee is just a blob of useless goo without someone pushing it in some direction. But it isn’t the majority of the job and, realistically, most of the political component is done by the Cabinet. The President’s political might and political ability is also an important factor, but the day-to-day of it is the Cabinet and their immediate underlings.

A high turnover of the Cabinet is destabilizing of the government. It reduces consistency of mission from month to month, and just as people are getting oriented the right way, the rug gets pulled out from under them. A Cabinet that is full of people who are unhappy with their work and stressed out by an insane boss do poor work.

Ultimately, someone has to run the government. So regardless of whether you think it’s mostly politics at the Presidential end and running things at the Cabinet end, or vice versa, the “running things” component is always going to be in a worse state when the boss just isn’t a very effective leader.

And that’s neither boy nor girl thing, it’s a matter of what are the actual hiring criteria and who actually matches that criteria. This is an interview process for a job, not a popularity contest. If Klobuchar can’t even run a couple of aides, without making it into a farce, I don’t see greatness for her as the leader of the Free World.

It’s one of those neverending debates -

  1. Try to find a candidate who will get the less engaged and less likely to vote of your tent, young and Hispanic voters on the Dem side mostly (with the related but very different bit of maximizing a group that does come out but came out special for Obama, Black voters) - or -

  2. Try to find one who gets the voters who actually vote but who swing (Romney-Clinton and more so Obama-Trump voters?

And narrowing the question to electoral efficiency, specific to in the key states that swing a close election, that allowed Trump to eke out an electoral win despite a 2 point popular vote loss, PA, MI, WI. Which is more likely to be the key issue in those states? Winning by a bigger margin in NY or CA doesn’t really matter; losing by less in TN doesn’t matter. Winning by even a hair in those states matters lots.

What are the net migration statistics between the US and the countries in Europe you didn’t name?

Best estimates here.

Numbers hard to be too sure about though. But net emigration is increasing even if still outpaced by immigration.