2020 Democratic Nominee

[Js1 85109]

Thank u, next.

[GSU&UT 1798]

Whoever the nominee is, I really could do without all this bipartisan BS. The GOP party is gone, quit trying to work with them.

[David Dennison 18656]

1 hour ago, Fozzz said:

This is good.

 

No one cares.

[Js1 85109]

CNN (Registered Voters, so meh):

Bernie +6 (50-44)
Biden +6 (51-45)
Pete +3 (47-44)
Harris +4 (49-45)
Warren -1 (47-48)
Beto +10 (52-42)
 

Beto gets like 60% with women.  Fucking horny suburban moms

[bad_teammate 13132]

The GOP might be gone, it might not, whatever. Why should we care? It's not our business. We need to win and enact our policies. And if we don't win, we need to work harder, canvas more, volunteer more, make more phonebank calls, put in more voter registration hours, put in more get-out-the-vote hours, and win.

[Fozzz 152]

I care, David.

[Fozzz 152]

Hell yes.  Thanks, Joe.

 

 

[bad_teammate 13132]

Tulsi 'bout to get that Meathead Bounce

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Ringing endorsement 

[Bama Chick 28596]

“BuT bEto nEedS TO bE oN tV moRE!”

[henrygandorf 29176]

28 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

“BuT bEto nEedS TO bE oN tV moRE!”
 

millennial capitalization stylez aside, i do think beto needs to be on tv more (this doesn't count and you know it). 

he's not the national brand he could be right now.  i'd like to see more.

[Celery Man 20886]

I think he either doesn’t have his shit together or they were purposefully ducking the limelight a bit to strategize his message and workshop his stump.

[Bama Chick 28596]

I wasn’t referring to CNN using his picture as being on TV.

I was pointing out his numbers in this instance don’t appear to be suffering from the perception of his lack of TV appearances.

He was on Sharpton’s show and that Chris guy on MSNBC within the last week.

And he’s been on interviewed on a ton of local stations in every city he’s been campaigning in - which always gets dismissed despite the fact that surveys show more people consume news from local newscasts than from cable.



Really the good news here is that the top six Democrats are outperforming Trump head to head and Warren is only one point behind him.

For the group of voters only motivated by “Trump must be defeated! Nothing else matters! Electability above all else!” this should show them there are a number of candidates who fit that bill that aren’t named Joe Biden.

[henrygandorf 29176]

in general, the more younger (under ~50, sorry bernie/liz) strong minds and personalities we have on the democratic side the better, and those people need to be trotted out as much as possible, so that the public narrative becomes "this is the future, these are smart, strong leaders and the future is bright because of them."

 

[henrygandorf 29176]

2 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

I wasn’t referring to CNN using his picture as being on TV.

I was pointing out his numbers in this instance don’t appear to be suffering from the perception of his lack of TV appearances.

He was on Sharpton’s show and that Chris guy on MSNBC within the last week.

And he’s been on interviewed on a ton of local stations in every city he’s been campaigning in - which always gets dismissed despite the fact that surveys show more people consume news from local newscasts than from cable.

all that is good, but i consume a lot through youtube videos (unfortunately) and the local stuff is harder to find, and largely exists on their own websites.

there's plenty of time before iowa.

[bad_teammate 13132]

Hang on... is the chakra alignment lady ... awesome?

 

[Patrick Bateman 3903]

18 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Hang on... is the chakra alignment lady ... awesome?

 

She's not wrong in her major thesis...

 

[atomheartbevo 89429]

9 hours ago, Fozzz said:

Hell yes.  Thanks, Joe.

 

 

He’s a Moon landing truther and Alex Jones fan.   Not a ringing endorsement.  

[bad_teammate 13132]

She also looks fantastic for 66. And is from Houston.

Hmmm.... New #3 maybe lol

[Patrick Bateman 3903]

Hmmm.....

 

[Celery Man 20886]

Michael Bennet from Colorado is running, apparently.  So, I will take this opportunity to post the video of him tearing Ted Cruz a new asshole

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

Oh god we certainly don’t need another candidate but that rant is one of my all time favorite political dressing downs of all time.

The way he says “The Junior Senator from Texas” with such contempt; it’s like he’s calling him a craven shithead fuckface in code.

[bad_teammate 13132]

You, a genius pundit: "Being an older white man is a huge problem."

Me, a stupid idiot, looking at US Presidents poster on a US History classroom wall: "What?"

[BradInATX 9208]

11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

You, a genius pundit: "Being an older white man is a huge problem."

Me, a stupid idiot, looking at US Presidents poster on a US History classroom wall: "What?"

So you're a big fan of our government as it has operated, and you're a big status quo guy?

Look at you, the big ol' Centrist,

Edited May 3, 2019 by BradInATX

[bad_teammate 13132]

Nate was talking about it in terms of being a problem electorally.

I think anyone saying, "too old and white is a problem at the ballot box" is full of crap.

[BradInATX 9208]

Nate was talking about it in terms of being a problem electorally. I think anyone saying, "too old and white is a problem at the ballot box" is full of crap. 

 

 Fair enough.

 

I'd prefer baby boomers and older just go away already though. I think I'm not in the minority.

 

 

 

 

[Zonahorn 8079]

59 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

 Fair enough.

 

I'd prefer baby boomers and older just go away already though. I think I'm not in the minority.

 

 

 

 

You are not.

[TexArcher 37508]

Might be interesting to rank our top choices at this early stage, then again when it's primary time?

 

Mine now:

1. Buttigieg

2. Beto   (pretty much 1a/1b with Pete)

3. Kamala

[bad_teammate 13132]

1. Sanders

2. Warren

3. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

...

22. Biden

[Hank Kingsley 20697]

1. Buttigieg

2. Warren

3. Sanders

4. Beto

5. Kamala 

 

 

 

 

 

[Js1 85109]

Warren

Harris

Beto/Pete

..

Booker 

…

Sanders

..…………………………….

Biden

..……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………....……………………………..

De Blasio apparently

 

Not interested: Klobuchar, Castro, Gillibrand, Tulsi (lol go away) 

Edited May 3, 2019 by Js1

[BradInATX 9208]

As of now the only three I'd consider voting for in the primary are Beto, Pete, or Kamala.

 

Will likely choose from that group based on who has the delegates and momentum to beat Biden and/or Sanders.

[bad_teammate 13132]

The long list of 0% makes me smile every time

 

[David Dennison 18656]

1. Pete

2. Warren

3. Kamala

4. Bernie

[Hank Scorpio 17723]

Making sure to save everyone's list. That way we know who to start with when Bernie begins the purges. 

[Bama Chick 28596]

1 - Beto
2 - Warren
3 - Harris
4 - Pete

The rest - all a big crowd of meh but if they somehow catch fire, I’ll be open to reevaluating.

Would vote for if they’re the nominee but very unenthusiastically - Sanders, Biden, Gillibrand

lolno - Tulsi

[BradInATX 9208]

13 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The long list of 0% makes me smile every time

 

There's some really interesting detailed findings in the actual report: http://echeloninsights.com/wp-content/uploads/AprilOmnibus_2019DemPrimary.pdf

- Pete jumps way up when the poll is limited to verified 2016 or 2018 primary voters. Beto has a huge drop.

- Pete is still unknown to a ton of people, so he's got a lot of upside.

- "Able to beat Trump" is only 4th on the list of reasons they'll choose their candidate (7%). Experience is #1, policy #2

- Biden's support is driven by those who cite "Experience" as their reason for picking. Bernie, Beto, and Harris are driven by Policy. Pete is driven by "Young". LOL.

- Sanders leads Biden in favorable rating, despite trailing him in the poll

- 59% of voters want a candidate along the same idealogical lines of Obama. 17% want more liberal, 12% want more conservative. 

 

So a lot of the grumbling done by the more liberal posters is supported ("people just want to go back to status quo pre-Trump"), and some of it is not ("anyone else is voting on beating Trump, not policy").

Edited May 3, 2019 by BradInATX

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

1. Warren

2. Pete/Beto

3. Harris 

I like what some of the other candidates bring to the table even though they have little chance.  I like Inslee being the climate change candidate, Yang’s forward thinking ideas, Moulton’s focus on national security, Bennett’s plainspoken truths about the corruption of the federal government and yes, I even like Bernie’s revolutionary energy.  

[Bama Chick 28596]

Cramping calves everywhere.

[EuroHorn 3204]

Yea, no way trump wins this one...

[Bama Chick 28596]

I’m sure that’s some of it but let’s be real, every female candidate except Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris are pretty meh.

And both Warren and Harris are polling pretty similarly with women and men.

And it’s Friday evening and I’m tired so I won’t even bother to go on my usual rant about the shitty media coverage women candidates get in comparison to men.

[TexArcher 37508]

1 hour ago, Bama Chick said:

Cramping calves everywhere.
 

A quick lookup shows Trump lost women 41-54 to Hillary in 2016.  So every male candidate polls at least 7 points better while the two female candidates above poll more or less the same as Hillary did.  That's kind of amazing.

[bad_teammate 13132]

 

[mchookem 16212]

gotdamn talk about really hating women 

[BradInATX 9208]

56 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

A quick lookup shows Trump lost women 41-54 to Hillary in 2016.  So every male candidate polls at least 7 points better while the two female candidates above poll more or less the same as Hillary did.  That's kind of amazing.

Yeah that's pretty crazy. I feel like women have a harder time shaking the "coastal elite, technocrat" label with many, especially uneducated whites. I doubt that our uneducated white swing voters in the rust belt even know those words in my quotes, but they just know they don't like them. Harris polling below Pete and Beto who both are still gaining name recognition is a little odd, since none of her, Pete or Beto have really done anything substantial to move the needle yet.

I'd be interested to see how Klobuchar polls with that same group, being from a middle-America purple state. But she's not really polling high enough for them to run those numbers on, I guess.

Edited May 4, 2019 by BradInATX

[bad_teammate 13132]

The dog Twitter accounts make me want to die.

ROOF ROOF IM A HECKIN GOOD DOGGO AND AM WANTING CLIMATE CHANGE FIXED AWOOOO!

If anyone over 15 is running those accounts they need to be strapped to a rocket and shot into the sun.

[Pescado_Rojo 19331]

19 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

1. Warren

2. Pete/Beto

3. Harris 

I like what some of the other candidates bring to the table even though they have little chance.  I like Inslee being the climate change candidate, Yang’s forward thinking ideas, Moulton’s focus on national security, Bennett’s plainspoken truths about the corruption of the federal government and yes, I even like Bernie’s revolutionary energy.  

That's about where I'm at

[6th Street 6357]

1. Biden - the Obama year's were great, run it back 

Edited May 4, 2019 by 6th Street

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

[FondrenRoad 4378]

48 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Why did Gillibrand vote against Mattis? Mattis was pretty good. Probably why he isn't in office anymore, and Trump outsourced the Defense Department to Boeing. 

Do Acting Secretaries get their names on the historic list of office holders?  Shanahan has actually done the job longer than Mattis did. 

Edited May 4, 2019 by FondrenRoad