# 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:** 128
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2019, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2541 "2019-09-01T00:08:55Z")
I assume it would be “salaried or hourly employees,” in that context. ---
**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:** [September 1, 2019, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2542 "2019-09-01T00:13:34Z")
> [@](#): > > Sen. Bernie Sanders announced late Friday that he plans to eliminate billions in medical debt, hinting at a proposal the 2020 presidential Democratic candidate’s campaign has yet to release in full. > > The plan, which the Sanders campaign says would cancel $81 billion in existing past-due medical debt and make changes to the 2005 bankruptcy bill, is not expected to be released in its entirety for another month. The proposal – which is still in the works, separate from the senator’s “Medicare for All” plan and meant to address debt under the current system – does not explicitly state how Sanders will eliminate medical debt, but says, “under this plan, the federal government will negotiate and pay off past-due medical bills in collection that have been reported to credit agencies.” > > Sanders’ announcement came during a health care-focused town hall in Florence, South Carolina, in response to a question from an audience member on how he would address the issue. The campaign was still developing details of the plan when Sanders hinted at its release Friday night, but released an outline Saturday after the Vermont senator was asked about the issue directly. > > A woman at the town hall stood up and asked, “Is there anything in your plan that would actually work for people that are drowning right now for their medical debt?” > > “We’re looking at that right now,” Sanders responded. “In another piece of legislation that we’re going to be offering we will eliminate medical debt in this country. I mean, just stop and think for a second. Why should people be placed in financial duress? For what crime did you commit? You got a serious illness? That is not what this country should be about.” > > Sanders campaign manager Faiz Shakir told CNN on Friday that “Sen. Sanders had previously asked us to pull together a plan to finally end the crisis of medical debt, and when asked directly about it tonight he was honest and candid in previewing his thinking on this important matter.” > > The one-page overview cites medical debt as “the leading cause of consumer bankruptcy,” and states: “We are sick and tired of seeing 530,000 Americans declare bankruptcy each year because they cannot pay off the outrageous cost of a medical emergency or a hospital stay.” Such a big declaration before a plan has been formulated :smack: ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2019, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2543 "2019-09-01T01:36:56Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Nonsense. You can’t measure it precisely to an arbitrary degree, but you can get rough measurements from polling (like antipathy to socialism or wanting to ban private insurance) and add that to common sense. If I saw you somewhere, I might not be able to state your exact height to the inch, but I would probably be able to tell if you were kind of short, kind of average, or kind of tall. > > People who say you can’t really tell who is electable just happen to always be the ones who support candidates that other people with a pragmatic, commonsense approach judge as less electable. It’s motivated reasoning. Nate Silver says that electability polling, including general election polls early in the primary, have pretty much zero correlation with actual general election results. So it’s a guess. This early, a wild guess. If you still think you (the general you, not you in particular) can “trust” your own judgement about something like electability after 2016, then you’re out to lunch. Once again, until Nate Silver has a model making predictions based on polling data, it’s all a guess. This early, a wild guess. ---
**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:** [September 1, 2019, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2544 "2019-09-01T02:24:01Z")
National head to head polls are worthless at this point. And there are many streams of evidence that are far from worthless. Not about any specific candidate as that depends on specific campaigns that have yet to occur, but as to what sort of candidate specific key demographics in specific key states are likely to or not to vote for. It is of course still speculation but discussion based on that data is not the same as wild guesses. Asking who can best beat Trump as the key question is very sensible advice. Deciding who that person is can be informed by evidence even if no one knows for sure and there is room to come to different conclusions about it. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2019, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2545 "2019-09-01T04:35:19Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Nate Silver says that electability polling, including general election polls early in the primary, have pretty much zero correlation with actual general election results. > > So it’s a guess. This early, a wild guess. If you still think you (the general you, not you in particular) can “trust” your own judgement about something like electability after 2016, then you’re out to lunch. > > Once again, until Nate Silver has a model making predictions based on polling data, it’s all a guess. This early, a wild guess. So if I say Amy Klobuchar is more electable than her fellow DFLer Ilhan Omar, that’s just a “wild guess”? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2019, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2546 "2019-09-01T11:37:30Z")
If the election were held today, Biden might be the most electable of the Democrats. But the election won’t be held today. Between now and election day there is much danger that Biden will show signs of unacceptable aging: illness, injury, decreased mental acuity — actuarial tables even show that an average man of his age has more than 5% chance of _death_ between now and election day. Even if Biden retains his health and mental acuity, the Lie Machine will seize on any stumble or gaffe as proof of unacceptable aging. But we shouldn’t wait _until_ excessive aging is apparent and then change horses mid-stream. The Democratic organization isn’t competent to pull off such a late switch. I’m not speaking with an anti-Biden bias, BTW. In 2016, when Biden was a much(_) younger man (and as you can verify by searching my old SDMB posts), I was begging the DNC to seize control and replace Hillary with Joe. (_ - For you young’uns, 70 years old, 75, 80 years old may all seem about the same. I doubt you’ll feel quite that way when you’re in your 70’s.) Elizabeth Warren is _more than a decade younger_ (gender-adjusted) than Biden. _ **Elizabeth Warren for President!** _ ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2019, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2547 "2019-09-01T15:28:10Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > So if I say Amy Klobuchar is more electable than her fellow DFLer Ilhan Omar, that’s just a “wild guess”? :dubious: As Omar fails to meet the NBC requirement and therefore simply cannot be president, your example is invalid. ---
**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:** [September 1, 2019, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2548 "2019-09-01T15:57:38Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > As Omar fails to meet the NBC requirement and therefore simply cannot be president, your example is invalid. The point being made is very clear. Look one can argue over which is more important to general election electability, exciting the young progressive portion of the base, or appealing to those with views more towards the middle (inclusive of many Black, Hispanic, suburban, and winnable non-college educated white voters), or something else, and each side can find evidence to support their positions. But neither is just a wild guess. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2019, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2549 "2019-09-01T16:44:28Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > TRUMP will get them to the polls in droves. There is no chance this will be an apathetic electorate like 2000 or 2016. Your argument is of dubious merit in an average cycle and is completely beside the point now. Oh wait, you keep saying all sorts of leading Dem candidates aren’t electable. Now I guess you’re saying they are? Or only if the candidate is on your preferred list? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2019, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2550 "2019-09-01T18:37:55Z")
Yes, of course Joe Biden’s wife is saying that he’s the most electable. She would say that even if she didn’t actually believe it. She’s his wife. And the point that we need to consider electability is of course reasonable. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2019, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2551 "2019-09-01T22:01:11Z")
[Biden’s take on electability:](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/30/biden-responds-gaffes-criticism-what-is-it-that-i-said-wrong/) > [@](#): > > BIDEN: I think there’s other people in the race who can beat Trump. > > CAPEHART: Who? > > BIDEN: Well, I think almost anybody. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2019, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2552 "2019-09-01T23:22:35Z")
A potted turnip _can_ beat Trump. The question isn’t who can; it’s who has the best chance. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2019, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2553 "2019-09-01T23:29:32Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > [Biden’s take on electability:](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/30/biden-responds-gaffes-criticism-what-is-it-that-i-said-wrong/) Nice cite. worth reading. And how many other Candidates would say the same? Joe isnt even saying he has the best chance, but he hints at it. How many other candidate could resit the chance to attack some other dem? But not Joe. He attacks trump- quite savagely. And quite rightly. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2019, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2554 "2019-09-02T00:57:50Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > [Biden’s take on electability:](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/30/biden-responds-gaffes-criticism-what-is-it-that-i-said-wrong/) Well, this is \ ***CAPEHART** : I’ve said on television several times that President Trump is a racist with a white supremacist policy agenda. Am I wrong? **BIDEN** : No. Now, I’m, you know, there’s two things. One, are you a racist because you really believe it and you hate African Americans, etc., and others? Or you are a charlatan and you don’t care much about it, but you know you can appeal to people. So I’m not gonna make the judgment whether his policies are racist. And so that’s why I’ve refused to get into the issue of whether or not he personally is a racist. He is promoting policies that are racist policies, he is in fact …\* So, he says he is not going to say, and then he says it. Others put their feet in their mouths, he trips over his tongue. And this is the most electable candidate. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2019, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2555 "2019-09-02T04:03:22Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > Well, this is > > \ ***CAPEHART** : I’ve said on television several times that President Trump is a racist with a white supremacist policy agenda. Am I wrong? > **BIDEN** : No. > > Now, I’m, you know, there’s two things. One, are you a racist because you really believe it and you hate African Americans, etc., and others? Or you are a charlatan and you don’t care much about it, but you know you can appeal to people. So I’m not gonna make the judgment whether his policies are racist. And so that’s why I’ve refused to get into the issue of whether or not he personally is a racist. He is promoting policies that are racist policies, he is in fact …\* > > So, he says he is not going to say, and then he says it. Others put their feet in their mouths, he trips over his tongue. > > And this is the most electable candidate. No, he\* didnt \*say it. You quoted out of context. And he’s likely right. trunp personally might not be a racist, but he is certainly pandering to the racist vote. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2019, 10:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2556 "2019-09-02T10:30:32Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > A potted turnip _can_ beat Trump. The question isn’t who can; it’s who has the best chance. Sorry, but I’m going to include downstream outcomes in the equation. Say Biden has a 75% chance of beating Trump, and Zaphod\* has a 70% chance of beating Trump. They both have plans to address global warming that are arguably serious enough, but they obviously have to pass Congress. But Biden will keep the filibuster, and Zaphod is already urging the Senate to get rid of it if he wins. Let’s say there’s a 20% chance\*\* of averting global hellscape if Zaphod’s elected, and about 0% chance if Biden’s elected. I’m gonna give up 5% chance of beating Trump for a 14% chance that we don’t fry the planet - I owe that much to my son who could quite possibly be around to ring in the 22nd century. - I’m tossing Zaphod in here to keep it hypothetical. We can argue about just what the likelihood is that a given candidate will beat Trump, but that’s not the point. My point is that at least for some of us, it isn’t 100% about beating Trump. There are good reasons to include the differential aftermaths of winning in the equation. \*\* Pick your number. I figure it’s fairly low - even 20% is optimistic, I figure - because it’s dependent on winning the Senate AND getting rid of the filibuster AND passing legislation that’s big enough to do the job AND successfully implementing it AND its producing technologies that the developing world can adopt with costs in the same ballpark as conventional power. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2019, 11:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2557 "2019-09-02T11:26:26Z")
[A few words from former DLC Democrat Ed Kilgore](http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/08/are-the-electability-fears-about-elizabeth-warren-overblown.html): > [@](#): > > Well, I’ll put my cards on the table as someone with a relatively “centrist” background … I’m not crazy about all of Warren’s “plans” … for example, her Global New Deal trade proposal strikes me as unserious. But what she has that Democrats desperately need is a plan to govern, without which “electability” is a bit barren. Warren has thought deeply and realistically about implementing her agenda, even as Biden has pretended he can bring back bipartisanship and Sanders has pretended he can overwhelm both parties with some imaginary “political revolution.” So that’s an estimable quality for her. > > I understand that beating Trump is Job One. But there needs to be a Job Two and Three, or something like Trump could return. And: > [@](#): > > Above all, in the end, this is likely to be a base-mobilization contest more than a fight over 10,000 blue collar dudes in Wisconsin. So a unified, energetic party gives you more than you risk. ---
**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:** [September 2, 2019, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2558 "2019-09-02T12:48:54Z")
Yes it does also matter whether or not one thinks that candidate A or B is more likely to actually result in accomplishing anything, no matter what they actually say they have a plan for. For many that is a point in Biden’s favor over Warren. I’ll decline debating whether eliminating the filibuster is a good idea but I will note that a president’s urging is not of very much much impact … hell Trump’s urged it multiple times and had zero impact even with his toady Moscow Mitch. Obama also encouraged changes and did not get it. A Senate rule change is _not_ something that a president delivers, even with partisan Senate majority to work with. As to base mobilization. Let’s grant for the argument the mobilizing the base above and beyond how the removal of Trump and his fascist authoritarian hateful administration mobilizes the base in and off itself is more important to do than winning over any potentially swingable voters (both Obama -Trump and Romney-Clinton voters, who clearly are not just 10,000 Blue collar dudes in Wisconsin, more like [north of 9 million or so](http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/just-how-many-obama-2012-trump-2016-voters-were-there/) vote-switchers, disproportionately concentrated in must-win states and districts). “The base” is a varied crowd, not just a handful of young mostly white progressives scatter across the country. They are not in fact the majority of the base of the party. The base is also Black women and men. The base is also center Left Boomers and center Left highly educated whites in suburbs. “The Base” is not all of one mind and while all of “the base” agree that Trump must go, they disagree on much else, and certainly do not all sign on to the same progressive agenda that excites you and that excites a scattered number of voters not especially concentrated in the must-win states. I’d point out that every vote flipped is worth twice every vote that does not stay home but I would nevertheless agree with obvious that getting Democratic voters out on Election Day is critical. What is not clear is that pandering to the _self-declared_ “base” that are loud in your social media bubble is an effective way to deliver that, it is not clear whether that sort of candidate is someone who delivers more unity or instead more divisiveness, more enthused or more turned off, within the actual varied elements of the Democratic base. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2019, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2559 "2019-09-02T14:16:33Z")
Sure, beating Trump isn’t the only issue. You want someone who will do good things with that victory. But it’s still a pretty important issue, so it makes sense for the candidate who’s the most electable (or at least, perceived as such) to emphasize that as a selling point. ---
**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:** [September 2, 2019, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415/2560 "2019-09-02T17:32:03Z")
More on that dismissal of those “10,000 blue collar dudes in Wisconsin” … Wisconsin was lost by a 24,000 vote margin (12,000 voting the other way would have done it). Pennsylvania by 45,000; Michigan by 11,000. A few tens of thousands of votes going the other way in those states is of much more potential impact than another million young progressives coming out in California and New York. Yes, I want as little chance of Trump winning again as possible. But I also want to have the win be an overwhelmingly large one. I want a national _repudiation_ of him, a _rejection_ of his politics of othering and hate. He’ll get that floor of thirtysomething percent no matter what. I want that to be _all_ he gets. I want _everyone_ other than that to vote against him. I want a Democratic candidate all of the middle can vote for. Warren might end up being that candidate. It is too early for me to decide for sure she is not. But a candidate who panders to the young progressive base by dismissing any need to appeal to the middle, including those tens of thousands in Wisconsin, would increase the gamble of losing it all and virtually eliminate any chance of achieving that national repudiation. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415.md?page=127) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hee-haw-yall-the-2020-democratic-presidential-primary/824415.md?page=129)