2020 Democratic Nominee

[bad_teammate 13132]

52 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

...the Berners have prematurely made the fallacious leap, without evidence, that corporate America is paying the hoarse to espouse those views anonymously on Twitter to sabotage Bernie.

You are making things up to conspiracy theorize about.

No one is saying this.

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I don’t agree with my boss politically but that doesn’t mean I’m going to stop selling my labor to him.  I am still going to speak out online to promote my values.  Doing it anonymously protects me from my boss holding it against me.   That has value that can be destroyed by doxxing dissidents.

Is that what HW is doing?

In what way is he a "dissident"?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Is that what HW is doing?

In what way is he a "dissident"?

 I don’t know HW.  

My point was to illustrate the cost and consequences of doxxing people simply because their tweet was broadcast on cable news and you disagreed with them politically.  

It’s Trumpy AF. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

My point was to illustrate the cost and consequences of doxxing people simply because their tweet was broadcast on cable news and you disagreed with them politically. 

Sure, but Bernie didn't dox him and neither did his campaign.

[F250 28680]

9 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I don’t agree with my boss politically but that doesn’t mean I’m going to stop selling my labor to him.  I am still going to speak out online to promote my values.  Doing it anonymously protects me from my boss holding it against me.

Basically you would get fired for fucking off online all day during work hours.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

11 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Sure, but Bernie didn't dox him and neither did his campaign.

Okay, now show me where they’re condemning the practice? 

This is the bullshit people hate with Bernie and his campaign.  They take no accountability and demonstrate no moral leadership when their supporters cross a line to advance Bernie’s political campaign.  It’s a war for the Berners.  You’re either on their side or an enemy.  It’s not surprising though when your strategy is political revolution.

5 minutes ago, F250 said:

Basically you would get fired for fucking off online all day during work hours.

Let’s not muddy the waters here. 

Edited August 15, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[bad_teammate 13132]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Okay, now show me where they’re condemning the practice? 

16 hours ago

Quote

This is the bullshit people hate with Bernie and his campaign.  They take no accountability and demonstrate no moral leadership when their supporters cross a line to advance Bernie’s political campaign.

lol ok

Reality doesn't matter, Conspiracy Hugo is on a roll!!

 

 

 

[Bruh Man 3160]

Warren needs to win Iowa or she's done. The electability avalanche will crush her if she doesn't start with a win. I think her team knows that which is why she's spending a lot of resources there. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

13 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Warren needs to win Iowa or she's done. The electability avalanche will crush her if she doesn't start with a win. I think her team knows that which is why she's spending a lot of resources there. 

If she finishes second to Biden, why wouldn't it just narrow the race to the two of them going forward? 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

13 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

16 hours ago

Well that's better than nothing but it looks like she's covering her ass after she put up a signal that could be easily misinterpreted to dox the guy.  

[Js1 85095]

2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

If she finishes second to Biden, why wouldn't it just narrow the race to the two of them going forward? 

Yeah 2nd in Iowa would be good for her. Especially if it’s a less than 5 point win for Biden. She should be able to gain momentum for New Hampshire since it’s her backyard. 

If anyone needs to win Iowa, it’s Joe. A loss would cripple him in terms of eLeCtAbiLiTy

[Bruh Man 3160]

3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

If she finishes second to Biden, why wouldn't it just narrow the race to the two of them going forward? 

If Biden wins Iowa, he'll win New Hampshire & South Carolina too and that 2nd place finish in Iowa will mean nothing. People are itching for a reason to jump on the Warren train but they want to see her win first. 

NYT had an article about it today. 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

If she finishes second to Biden, why wouldn't it just narrow the race to the two of them going forward? 

If Biden wins Iowa, it's all but over.  Warren's perceived weakness is proving she's electable among black voters.  Beating Biden and winning lily white Iowa destroys that perception and it would likely cause a fracturing of Biden's base, the black vote.  If Warren doesn't win Iowa, her battle is much tougher.

[Bruh Man 3160]

1 minute ago, Js1 said:

Yeah 2nd in Iowa would be good for her. Especially if it’s a less than 5 point win for Biden. She should be able to gain momentum for New Hampshire since it’s her backyard. 

If anyone needs to win Iowa, it’s Joe. A loss would cripple him in terms of eLeCtAbiLiTy

The northeast isn't really falling head over heels for Warren. She's down double digits in NH. A second place finish in Iowa will do little for her there. 

[BradInATX 9208]

If Biden wins Iowa, it's all but over.  Warren's perceived weakness is proving she's electable among black voters.  Beating Biden and winning lily white Iowa destroys that perception and it would likely cause a fracturing of Biden's base, the black vote.  If Warren doesn't win Iowa, her battle is much tougher.

Wait, so winning lily white Iowa would destroy the perception that she's weak with black voters?

[6th Street 6356]

2 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

If Biden wins Iowa, it's all but over.  Warren's perceived weakness is proving she's electable among black voters.  Beating Biden and winning lily white Iowa destroys that perception and it would likely cause a fracturing of Biden's base, the black vote.  If Warren doesn't win Iowa, her battle is much tougher.

Wait, so winning lily white Iowa would destroy the perception that she's weak with black voters?

Yeah that didn't make much sense to me either. Warren needs to not finish in 4th or 5th place in South Carolina where she's far behind.

[Js1 85095]

8 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

The northeast isn't really falling head over heels for Warren. She's down double digits in NH. A second place finish in Iowa will do little for her there. 

There’s high quality polling that she’s running tied for 2nd or close to it in NH. Right behind Bernie and not that far behind Joe. 

Edited August 15, 2019 by Js1

[Mojo Hand 4580]

10 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

If Biden wins Iowa, it's all but over.  Warren's perceived weakness is proving she's electable among black voters.  Beating Biden and winning lily white Iowa destroys that perception and it would likely cause a fracturing of Biden's base, the black vote.  If Warren doesn't win Iowa, her battle is much tougher.

 

11 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

If Biden wins Iowa, he'll win New Hampshire & South Carolina too and that 2nd place finish in Iowa will mean nothing. People are itching for a reason to jump on the Warren train but they want to see her win first. 

NYT had an article about it today. 

 

That analysis doesn't make sense to me in a race with so many contenders.   Harris, Sanders, and Buttigieg will all have significant support still by Iowa.   You're telling me that Warren beating all three of them wouldn't show, or at least improve the perception, that she's the strongest alternative to Biden for their supporters?  I don't buy it.

Edited August 15, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[BradInATX 9208]

Yeah that didn't make much sense to me either. Warren needs to not finish in 4th or 5th place in South Carolina where she's far behind.

[David Dennison 18652]

We're going to be stuck with grandpa Biden, aren't we?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

If Biden wins Iowa, it's all but over.  Warren's perceived weakness is proving she's electable among black voters.  Beating Biden and winning lily white Iowa destroys that perception and it would likely cause a fracturing of Biden's base, the black vote.  If Warren doesn't win Iowa, her battle is much tougher.

Wait, so winning lily white Iowa would destroy the perception that she's weak with black voters?

The data indicates the bulk of black voters value perceived electability over everything else.  They want the candidate that can for sure beat Trump.  If Biden can't beat Warren in white boy farm country, what leads anyone to believe he's the best option to defeat Trump?  This phenomenon occurred in 2008 with Hillary and Obama.  The black vote was with Hillary until Iowa because she was considered most electable.  Once Obama won Iowa the black vote went to him almost over night.  The black voting block is extremely risk-averse and powerful when it comes to choosing candidates, and for good reason. 

[BradInATX 9208]

The data indicates the bulk of black voters value perceived electability over everything else.  They want the candidate that can for sure beat Trump.  If Biden can't beat Warren in white boy farm country, what leads anyone to believe he's the best option to defeat Trump?  This phenomenon occurred in 2008 with Hillary and Obama.  The black vote was with Hillary until Iowa because she was considered most electable.  Once Obama won Iowa the black vote went to him almost over night.  The black voting block is extremely risk-averse and powerful when it comes to choosing candidates, and for good reason. 

I feel like there might be other reasons why blacks rallied behind Obama..

[David Dennison 18652]

Just now, BradInATX said:

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The data indicates the bulk of black voters value perceived electability over everything else.  They want the candidate that can for sure beat Trump.  If Biden can't beat Warren in white boy farm country, what leads anyone to believe he's the best option to defeat Trump?  This phenomenon occurred in 2008 with Hillary and Obama.  The black vote was with Hillary until Iowa because she was considered most electable.  Once Obama won Iowa the black vote went to him almost over night.  The black voting block is extremely risk-averse and powerful when it comes to choosing candidates, and for good reason. 

I feel like there might be other reasons why blacks rallied behind Obama..

[6th Street 6356]

6 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

We're going to be stuck with grandpa Biden, aren't we?

Best house in a bad neighborhood

[Bruh Man 3160]

10 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

 

That analysis doesn't make sense to me in a race with so many contenders.   Harris, Sanders, and Buttigieg will all have significant support still by Iowa.   You're telling me that Warren beating all three of them wouldn't show, or at least improve the perception, that she's the strongest alternative to Biden for their supporters?  I don't buy it.

Sanders' people will not abandon him after one state. They are loyal to that man. Biden leads as the "second choice" for Harris and Pete's voters so he'd gain the most from an Iowa win. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

4 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

I feel like there might be other reasons why blacks rallied behind Obama..

Which is why I don't think a Warren victory in Iowa completely sinks Biden.  It will hurt his perceived chances against Trump though and that's really the only thing holding his campaign together. 

[Patrick Bateman 3903]

Super Tuesday is only 3 days after the South Carolina primary.  I think Warren would like to take Iowa which would give her a full month of momentum ahead of Super Tuesday but a close 2nd in Iowa and close 2nd in New Hampshire would be fine for Warren as long as the gap is closing and she wins some states on Super Tuesday like Minny, Colorado or Virginia, and Mass of course.  Eventually she'll need to break through and beat Biden somewhere but a close 2nd in Iowa shouldn't create panic.  A lot will depend on who's still in the race as well.  A lot of folks will drop out after Iowa/NH.  Warren in 2nd in a lot of preferred candidate polls.

 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

5 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Sanders' people will not abandon him after one state. They are loyal to that man. Biden leads as the "second choice" for Harris and Pete's voters so he'd gain the most from an Iowa win. 

No, Warren has overtaken Biden as the second-choice candidate for both Harris and Buttigieg:

https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/

And she has much more upside to grow on that by Iowa than Biden, IMO. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

45 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Well that's better than nothing but it looks like she's covering her ass after she put up a signal that could be easily misinterpreted to dox the guy.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

I can't compete with the goalpost gif.  You got me. 

[Bruh Man 3160]

5 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

No, Warren has overtaken Biden as the second-choice candidate for both Harris and Buttigieg:

https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/

And she has much more upside to grow on that by Iowa than Biden, IMO. 

Morning consult are online-based only. WaPo/ABC News have an A+ rating from 538. Here's what they showed last month. 

8. (ASK IF LEANED DEMOCRAT AND PREFER/LEAN TOWARD CANDIDATE) After [NAMED CANDIDATE],
who would your second choice be? Which candidate would you lean toward as your second
choice?
 -- 7/1/19 ---
 Reg
 All voters
Joe Biden 23 20
Bernie Sanders 18 18
Elizabeth Warren 15 18
Kamala Harris 14 17
Pete Buttigieg 5 6
Beto O'Rourke 4 3
Cory Booker 3 3
Julian Castro 2 2
Andrew Yang 2 2
Amy Klobuchar 1 2
Bill de Blasio 1 *
Michael Bennet 1 *
John Delaney * *
Tulsi Gabbard * *
John Hickenlooper * *
Tim Ryan * *
Eric Swalwell * *
Kirsten Gillibrand * 0
Marianne Williamson * 0
Steve Bullock 0 0
Jay Inslee 0 0
Seth Moulton 0 0
Other 1 1
None of these 3 3
Would not vote 0 0
No opinion 6 5

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

This would help explain why everyone is freaking. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

3 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Morning consult are online-based only. WaPo/ABC News have an A+ rating from 538. Here's what they showed last month. 

8. (ASK IF LEANED DEMOCRAT AND PREFER/LEAN TOWARD CANDIDATE) After [NAMED CANDIDATE],
who would your second choice be? Which candidate would you lean toward as your second
choice?
 -- 7/1/19 ---
 Reg
 All voters
Joe Biden 23 20
Bernie Sanders 18 18
Elizabeth Warren 15 18
Kamala Harris 14 17
Pete Buttigieg 5 6
Beto O'Rourke 4 3
Cory Booker 3 3
Julian Castro 2 2
Andrew Yang 2 2
Amy Klobuchar 1 2
Bill de Blasio 1 *
Michael Bennet 1 *
John Delaney * *
Tulsi Gabbard * *
John Hickenlooper * *
Tim Ryan * *
Eric Swalwell * *
Kirsten Gillibrand * 0
Marianne Williamson * 0
Steve Bullock 0 0
Jay Inslee 0 0
Seth Moulton 0 0
Other 1 1
None of these 3 3
Would not vote 0 0
No opinion 6 5

 

Am I missing something or does this not say anything about who the second choice is specifically for Harris and Buttigieg voters? 

And Morning Consult is a legit poll with a respectable B- from 538.   You make it sound like the drudge internet poll. 

[Js1 85095]

14 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This would help explain why everyone is freaking. 

Lol this is so swingy I barely believe it. Didn’t this have Pete in first not that long ago? 

[Bozo_Casanova 26277]

53 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

No, Warren has overtaken Biden as the second-choice candidate for both Harris and Buttigieg:

https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/

And she has much more upside to grow on that by Iowa than Biden, IMO. 

imgur

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

4 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Lol this is so swingy I barely believe it. Didn’t this have Pete in first not that long ago? 

Yeah, it has a low sample size (just under 700) but Pete was a real force not too long ago and Iowa is his demographic. 

Everyone is jumping to discredit it because Biden is so far behind but in my opinion, Biden is still too high. 

 

[Hank Kingsley 20678]

Over 40k "votes" in the Iowa State Fair kernel poll: 

 

[Hank Kingsley 20678]

8 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Lol this is so swingy I barely believe it. Didn’t this have Pete in first not that long ago? 

I believe that one random poll with Buttigieg at 25% or whatever was involved with Crooked Media. 

Here are the changes in latest poll from previous numbers. 

 

[tantric superman 4667]

My main man Booker is positioned right where he wants to be.

[Js1 85095]

15 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I believe that one random poll with Buttigieg at 25% or whatever was involved with Crooked Media. 

Here are the changes in latest poll from previous numbers. 

 

A 16 point swing is....questionable. That’s ridiculous af. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Just now, Js1 said:

A 16 point swing is....questionable. That’s ridiculous af. 

Well, it is over a 3 month period of time, and Warren has made some big gains in that time period. 

[Pig Bellmont 8691]

21 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I believe that one random poll with Buttigieg at 25% or whatever was involved with Crooked Media. 

I also think it was from June

[Hank Kingsley 20678]

Yeah it was a while ago.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

15 minutes ago, Js1 said:

A 16 point swing is....questionable. That’s ridiculous af. 

Yeah, but it can’t be completely off base. Warren invested the most organizational infrastructure in Iowa and she did it really early.  Since the last poll she’s had no major setbacks and she won both debates convincingly. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I can't compete with the goalpost gif.  You got me. 

Brie didn't call for HW to be doxxed and opposed it openly when it happened.

But that doesn't fit your narrative, so you shift the goalposts.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Beat that dead hoarse

[Js1 85095]

Is there an award for this? Incredible. 

 

[Message Board User 12389]

 

[Js1 85095]

He doesn’t hit 40 in high quality polling? That’s.....well, bad. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Top four Dems are basically statistically tied now too.  Bernie and Biden have to be getting at least two bonus points solely on name recognition alone.  

[Pancho 44457]

4 hours ago, BradInATX said:

4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The data indicates the bulk of black voters value perceived electability over everything else.  They want the candidate that can for sure beat Trump.  If Biden can't beat Warren in white boy farm country, what leads anyone to believe he's the best option to defeat Trump?  This phenomenon occurred in 2008 with Hillary and Obama.  The black vote was with Hillary until Iowa because she was considered most electable.  Once Obama won Iowa the black vote went to him almost over night.  The black voting block is extremely risk-averse and powerful when it comes to choosing candidates, and for good reason. 

Read more  

I feel like there might be other reasons why blacks rallied behind Obama..

No.