# Hee-haw, y'all. The 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 12, 2018, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415 "2018-11-12T17:52:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 120
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2019, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2381 "2019-08-15T14:19:47Z")
So I watched Bernie’s interview with Joe Rogan and it was very interesting - I’ve always been a fan of the way Sanders communicates, and I think he talks just as well during an interview as a debate - he is very good at speaking with conviction and authority without sounding pompous. But one thing struck me. He’s always talking about income inequality and the 1% and how horrible it is that they hoard wealth and get away with not paying their share in taxes, but I feel like for most Americans this concept is nothing more than an abstraction. In this country I don’t feel that people really run with the notion of class warfare and the 1% isn’t something to be hated but to be aspired to. I have this theory that on a visceral and maybe even subconscious level, people hate taxes so much that they actually admire ANYONE who can get away with cheating the tax system, no matter how rich that person is. Taxes are like cancer. Nobody wants to think about them, nobody wants to deal with them, and if someone beats them, that person is admired. Sanders talks a lot about the tax cheating of the Billionaiahs. What he’s not doing enough, in my opinion, is DIRECTLY STATING that it’s unfair that regular people are getting shafted on THEIR income taxes. He needs to be hammering home the individual voter’s personal, skewed relationship to the taxes. Every time he talks about the 1% hoarding all the money and not paying their taxes, EVERY time, he ALSO needs to be saying “and meanwhile YOU are getting screwed and YOU’re forking over YOUR hard-earned wages to the IRS.” Everyone fucking hates paying taxes. They suck. They’re like Satan. The way Sanders has been talking about taxes, he’s merely saying “the big companies are working with Satan.” That’s not enough. He needs to be saying “Satan is jamming his pitchfork right up YOUR ASS and I am the guy who is going to pull it out.” I mean literally if he talked in that language, if he got as vulgar about it as Trump gets about everything that pisses him off, it would connect with people. Vulgarity is an asset right now. If Sanders was to ramp up the message that _he is going to relieve the income tax burden on individual middle class people_ by making huge corporations pay their share, he could really get somewhere. But he needs to stay focused on that concept of “THEY are the ones who are sticking that pitchfork in YOUR ass and I’M the guy who is gonna pull it out.” ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2019, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2382 "2019-08-15T14:43:35Z")
> [@Lamoral](#): > > But one thing struck me. He’s always talking about income inequality and the 1% and how horrible it is that they hoard wealth and get away with not paying their share in taxes, but I feel like for most Americans this concept is nothing more than an abstraction. I think this is one place where Warren really has the rhetorical advantage. She’s got her 2% wealth tax proposal, but she pairs that with the programs it would pay for which would make a difference in people’s lives. And that makes it a lot more concrete. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2019, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2383 "2019-08-15T14:53:44Z")
> [@Lamoral](#): > > So I watched Bernie’s interview with Joe Rogan and it was very interesting - I’ve always been a fan of the way Sanders communicates, and I think he talks just as well during an interview as a debate - he is very good at speaking with conviction and authority without sounding pompous. But one thing struck me. He’s always talking about income inequality and the 1% and how horrible it is that they hoard wealth and get away with not paying their share in taxes, but I feel like for most Americans this concept is nothing more than an abstraction. In this country I don’t feel that people really run with the notion of class warfare and the 1% isn’t something to be hated but to be aspired to. > > I have this theory that on a visceral and maybe even subconscious level, people hate taxes so much that they actually admire ANYONE who can get away with cheating the tax system, no matter how rich that person is. Taxes are like cancer. Nobody wants to think about them, nobody wants to deal with them, and if someone beats them, that person is admired. > > Sanders talks a lot about the tax cheating of the Billionaiahs. What he’s not doing enough, in my opinion, is DIRECTLY STATING that it’s unfair that regular people are getting shafted on THEIR income taxes. He needs to be hammering home the individual voter’s personal, skewed relationship to the taxes. Every time he talks about the 1% hoarding all the money and not paying their taxes, EVERY time, he ALSO needs to be saying “and meanwhile YOU are getting screwed and YOU’re forking over YOUR hard-earned wages to the IRS.” Everyone fucking hates paying taxes. They suck. They’re like Satan. The way Sanders has been talking about taxes, he’s merely saying “the big companies are working with Satan.” That’s not enough. He needs to be saying “Satan is jamming his pitchfork right up YOUR ASS and I am the guy who is going to pull it out.” I mean literally if he talked in that language, if he got as vulgar about it as Trump gets about everything that pisses him off, it would connect with people. Vulgarity is an asset right now. > > If Sanders was to ramp up the message that _he is going to relieve the income tax burden on individual middle class people_ by making huge corporations pay their share, he could really get somewhere. But he needs to stay focused on that concept of “THEY are the ones who are sticking that pitchfork in YOUR ass and I’M the guy who is gonna pull it out.” Using the tax law to one’s benefit is not cheating. ---
**Author:** ![Thing\_Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@Thing\_Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thing_Fish)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2019, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2384 "2019-08-15T15:19:27Z")
As a Bernie supporter I agree with this criticism. I wish he would do a better job of explaining how his policies would concretely improve the lives of ordinary Americans. Warren (or her speechwriters) does a better job of this, but I still feel Bernie is much better at connecting to voters overall than she is. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2019, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2385 "2019-08-15T16:52:13Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Using the tax law to one’s benefit is not cheating. Manipulating the laws, and the enforcement of them, is. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2386 "2019-08-16T03:51:21Z")
A reasonable opinion piece on [Politico](https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/08/15/the-one-thing-elizabeth-warren-needs-to-do-to-win-227624) today worth a read - The short version of the thesis is that Warren will need to make some headway into Black voter support to get the nom and doing such may be best served by breaking slightly with the white progressive party line towards a few more centrist positions. > [@](#): > > … if Warren were to win a respectable slice of the black vote in South Carolina, she would prove to white liberals skeptical of her electability that she has support among a constituency without which no Democrat can win a nomination, or the presidency. > > In polls, Warren trails Biden in South Carolina by dozens of points. What’s more, about half of the state’s black Democrats say they support Biden, while Warren is practically tied for the lead among the state’s white Democrats. > > And African American Democrats are, as Tom Edsall pointed out in a much-discussed column in the New York Times, on average, more centrist than white Democrats. The party’s “more moderate wing, which is pressing bread-and-butter concerns like jobs, taxes and a less totalizing vision of health care reform, is majority nonwhite, with almost half of its support coming from African-American and Hispanic voters,” he wrote. > > So it would make sense for Warren to draw some distinctions between herself and her party’s most liberal voters, in order to make her candidacy more appealing—or at least acceptable—to the elements of her party that do not fully embrace the canon. And there’s a long history of winning presidential candidates doing this without alienating their most loyal supporters. … What think you? Is the way for her to make that headway to more fully articulate support for issues of racial justice, or to highlight some of her beliefs that break with progressive orthodoxy and are more centrist (even while maintaining her wanting to implement major system changes)? Or does she just ignore it as an issue? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2387 "2019-08-16T13:34:19Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > The short version of the thesis is that Warren will need to make some headway into Black voter support to get the nom and doing such may be best served by breaking slightly with the white progressive party line towards a few more centrist positions. > What think you? > > Is the way for her to make that headway to more fully articulate support for issues of racial justice, or to highlight some of her beliefs that break with progressive orthodoxy and are more centrist (even while maintaining her wanting to implement major system changes)? Or does she just ignore it as an issue? My main thought is that SC is the fourth state to hold its primary or caucus, following Iowa, NH, and Nevada, and is almost immediately followed by Super Tuesday. Not to say it isn’t important, but SC is far from make-or-break, given the calendar. Warren has already been doing a very good job of “articulat[ing] support for issues of racial justice,” and she’s gotten props for this from a number of African-American commentators. That doesn’t make much of a difference in what has until recently been a crowded field, but I think this will help her a great deal once it sinks in that it’s effectively become a two-person race between her and Biden. So IMHO she just needs to keep doing what she’s been doing. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2388 "2019-08-16T14:23:51Z")
It will never become a two person race. Sanders is in it until the convention and will pick up delegates on the way. Biden is weaker than Clinton was for primary purposes. He may be stronger than her for general purposes if he can force the progressives to take a chill pill. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2389 "2019-08-16T14:38:09Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > It will never become a two person race. Sanders is in it until the convention and will pick up delegates on the way. Notice the word “effectively” before “become a two-person race.” ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2390 "2019-08-16T15:34:01Z")
Yes, it won’t effectively be a two person race if someone with over 15% of delegates is preventing anyone from gaining a majority. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2391 "2019-08-16T16:06:47Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Yes, it won’t effectively be a two person race if someone with over 15% of delegates is preventing anyone from gaining a majority. He won’t necessarily have 15% of the delegates. For example, the current Iowa polling average on Real Clear has him at about 12% there. If that was the caucus result, he would get zero delegates as there is a 15% threshold for being awarded any. At current polling, only Biden and Warren would get delegates. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Don\_Guy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/that_don_guy/32/538_2.png) [@That\_Don\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Don_Guy)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2392 "2019-08-16T17:55:52Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > He won’t necessarily have 15% of the delegates. For example, the current Iowa polling average on Real Clear has him at about 12% there. If that was the caucus result, he would get zero delegates as there is a 15% threshold for being awarded any. At current polling, only Biden and Warren would get delegates. That assumes he ends up below 15% in every district - and remember that about 2/3 of the delegates (it depends on how many “bonus” delegates states get for late or “multi-state” primaries/caucuses) are at district level. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2393 "2019-08-16T17:56:51Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > It will never become a two person race. Sanders is in it until the convention and will pick up delegates on the way. It had ceased to be a two person race long before he recognized it the \*last \*time, too. We know the results. It’s still early (for half of the field), and what looks like data is still mostly noise, so I’ll just say ISTM there is less than a 50% chance of the nominee being Biden, Warren, Sanders, or Harris. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2394 "2019-08-16T18:04:53Z")
> [@That\_Don\_Guy](#): > > That assumes he ends up below 15% in every district - and remember that about 2/3 of the delegates (it depends on how many “bonus” delegates states get for late or “multi-state” primaries/caucuses) are at district level. Yes, he may pick up delegates at the district level but my main point is that just because he’s polling at around 15% nationally or in some states doesn’t at all mean he’s going to be collecting 15% of the delegates. He has to actually win over 15% somewhere to get any. (to avoid further nitpicks: excepting the likely rare races where nobody gets 15%) ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2395 "2019-08-16T18:54:05Z")
I understand I was just giving a ballpark number of how many delegates he may end up with. Even if he has half that he could deny Biden a coronation, meaning it is most definitely not a two person race, as the various hacks will come out of the woodwork. Sanders’ performance will be key in this contest even if he has no chance of taking the whole thing. ---
**Author:** ![Boycott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boycott/32/6741_2.png) [@Boycott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boycott)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2396 "2019-08-16T18:57:51Z")
Interesting article in the NYT about the Biden and Obama relationship. Carries a few of the same old stories about how the selection of Biden by the Obama campaign was a tactical move led by David Axelrod and a few others. But there are some new points made I hadn’t heard before. The pair of them have been pictured hanging out together since leaving office so it’s pretty obvious the discussion of 2020 happened. According to the article Obama is quoted as telling Biden “you don’t have to do this Joe, you really don’t” earlier in the year (Biden got in at the end of April). Since then Obama has been in contact with him and the campaign. Whether it’s out of just personal affection is the interesting bit for me. Because I reckon Obama must feel pretty awkward about how this is panning out. On one hand Biden’s his buddy and loyal ally so you want him to do well. A criticism on him for his vice presidency is treated as an attack on Obama for his presidency. And considering Trump is in a personal vendetta to rip up everything Obama did because he might feel his legacy hinges on Biden. On the other hand he might be thinking what a lot of Biden critics are saying - Biden’s served his time and should pass the torch. That he may be leading in the polls but to win the election against Trump, democrats have to turn out and you can’t risk voter apathy as 2016 showed. It’s a conundrum that reaches an underlying point - Biden may be the best candidate to beat Trump but is he the best candidate to be President? They are two different things. The former is driven out of partly fear (when you hate the president more than you like your candidate) and partly a self fulfilling prophecy (all the polls say most people think that way so I should too). The latter is assuming others can beat Trump too (and polls also show a few others can). So in that case why should we settle? Why not choose the best campaign platform, the best campaigner, the best debater? Does Biden tick these boxes? He seems to tick the first one but the other two…at this point absolutely not. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2019, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2397 "2019-08-16T21:38:41Z")
> **[15 Percent Is Not A Magic Number For Primary Delegates](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/15-percent-is-not-a-magic-number-for-primary-delegates/)** > > If you hear the phrase “delegate math” and remember 2016, you might have some nightmares. That’s because Republicans, who briefly kinda sorta looked like they m… A good discussion of how the delegate math would play out. Under 15% in a state generally means less than 5% of that state’s delegates. Overall polling 10 to 13% will likely mean a state or so over threshold but overall not too many states. Those who poll there are looking at 5% mostly. Not enough to be key. Unless Sanders’ fortunes shift dramatically he will be immaterial. Those below him as well. Maybe enough at 5% of delegate count would push into the second round in which supers vote too bit a clear plurality getter of popular vote and leader in the delegate count, be that Warren or Biden, would then be coronated. As to my question on Warren and Black voters my WAG is that there is less a need to pushback against any progressive positions than the same thing I need: to be more fully convinced of her ability to win and maybe help with the Senate too. I don’t think it is positions as much as personality and weathering an attack well. Either Biden or Warren would be great presidents. Not sure which one better other than the one who best helps win the Senate. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Don\_Guy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/that_don_guy/32/538_2.png) [@That\_Don\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Don_Guy)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2019, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2398 "2019-08-17T22:26:52Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Maybe enough at 5% of delegate count would push into the second round in which supers vote too bit a clear plurality getter of popular vote and leader in the delegate count, be that Warren or Biden, would then be coronated. I assume you mean, “in which supers vote too, but a clear plurality getter…”? I also assume that if it did get to a second ballot, the party bigwigs would gather the superdelegates together and coordinate their efforts for there to be a definite winner on the second ballot; if it gets past two ballots, they might as well nominate Trump. One thing I have not been able to figure out: at what point are a candidate’s pledged delegates released? The Republicans have state-by-state rules, but the only reference I have been able to find in either the Democrats’ national rules or in any of the state delegate selection plans is, “All delegates to the National Convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.” Oh, and if anyone is interested in the district-versus-statewide delegate breakdown, it depends on how many “bonus delegates” the state gets: [ul] [li]Without any bonus, 15/23 of the delegates are district delegates[/li][li]With the April primary bonus, 33/50[/li][li]With the May/June primary bonus, 2/3[/li][li]With the April “regional” bonus, 25/34[/li][li]With the May “regional” bonus, 27/40[/li][/ul]This ranges from 65.2% to 67.5% I _think_ the only “regional” primary is the six states on 4/28 (MD, DE, PA, NY, CT, RI) ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2019, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2399 "2019-08-17T22:59:29Z")
Yes “but”. Phone correction. > **[Superdelegate Rule Changes for the 2020 Democratic Nomination - 270toWin](https://www.270towin.com/content/superdelegate-rule-changes-for-the-2020-democratic-nomination)** > > The party hopes to avoid a repeat of 2016 controversy where many of these unpledged delegates gave early support to Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders > [@](#): > > All delegates become unpledged and superdelegates will also vote if the convention is contested (i.e., more than one ballot is needed to select a nominee). For those subsequent ballots, a majority of all 4,745 delegates (2,373) will be needed to secure the nomination. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2019, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2400 "2019-08-20T17:19:14Z")
I suppose this could be a new thread subject but I’ll throw it here: Re Black turnout, which segment dropped off in 2016? My understanding is that older moderate Black voters (who help supply the foundation of Biden’s support) came out fine. The drop off was in younger Black voters, who like the rest of the younger voting cohort weren’t excited by an establishment choice and did not see being a woman as so big of a thing. It can be argued that older Black voters are like many of us here, reliably going to vote against Trump no matter what, but that younger Black voters need more to get them off their asses. Do either Warren or Biden offer that something more? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415.md?page=119) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415.md?page=121)