2020 Democratic Nominee

[Dnaguy 11,920]

8 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

On of Lis Smith’s former paramours
has some.....words for Pete.

 

 

He hates almost as much as Amy does.

 

Bill de Blasio is a sanctimonious asshat.

every accusation is an admission.

Bills just angry that Pete out flanked him and married a man and it eats at Bill.

I mean he thought that marrying a black woman was the pinnacle of progressiveness and then they went and made gay marriage legal. 

[HenryJames 66,038]

There is no one worse than Trump. No one. 

Bernie Bros are fucktards, but they’re philosopher fucking kings compared to Trump supporters. 

You dipshits who didn’t vote for Hillary thinking how bad could Trump be. Well you’ve fucking seen it. He’s the worst in history, and you want to give him four more fucking years because someone was mean to you on the internet?

 

[bad_teammate 13,192]

Team Pete going to go out flaming. That's OK, though.

[mchookem 16,322]

i have no idea what that even means lol

 

[bad_teammate 13,192]

Nina Turner is a loud black woman surrogate for Sanders and one of Pete's white guys wants Sanders to "muzzle" her.

Team Pete is going to go very nasty at Bernie because it's desperation mode.

And that's OK. Let's get battle-hardened.

[MaybeACoordinator 8,349]

2 hours ago, troph said:

Guaranteed more people will hold their nose and vote for Bernie than the Bernie bros that held their nose and sat out or said screw it I’m pulling the lever for trump.
 

Very few Bernie bros pulled the lever for Trump. The people who voted Sanders in primaries and Trump in the general almost universally fall into two camps -- Republicans who wanted the easiest candidate for Trump to defeat, or people who responded to Trump's lies about draining the swamp and helping the little guy. Hillary didn't even bother to lie to the working class. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

 

7 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Fuck around and find out.

Iowa and Nevada aren't primaries.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

4 hours ago, BrickHorn said:

I’m exhausted by Dems bitching and moaning that other people won’t vote for [insert candidate name here].  Just vote for the Dem candidate.  If everyone follows that simple rule, we’ll be fine.  There’s no need to panic over some meta mind-reading exercise.  

Would have been fan-fucking-tastic if they had taken their own advice and turned out for Hillary in 2016.  Then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

4 hours ago, GSU&UT said:

Am I taking crazy pills? Isn't this what "Bernie Bros' were constantly lectured about since Trump won because they didn't show up to vote for Hillary?

Oh, now you get it?

Where the fuck were you four years ago?

[tx 3 putt 76,873]

Can Bernie get enough young voters to the polls to make a difference ?

[RayDog 682]

55 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Very few Bernie bros pulled the lever for Trump. The people who voted Sanders in primaries and Trump in the general almost universally fall into two camps -- Republicans who wanted the easiest candidate for Trump to defeat, or people who responded to Trump's lies about draining the swamp and helping the little guy. Hillary didn't even bother to lie to the working class. 

The number of voters in WI, MI, and PA who voted for Bernie in the primary in 2016 and Trump in the General exceeded the vote differential in each state. Those bastards better vote for Bernie this time.

[Dropout 355]

6 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Oh, now you get it?

Where the fuck were you four years ago?

How the fuck you know where he was?

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

4 hours ago, F250 said:

The Tío Bernie thing is catching on. Normally when a white person gets that designation it means they are part of the tribe and an attack on Tío is an attack on the tribe. It's pretty impressive to see how Bernie pulled this off while even Castro and pandering Beto couldn't, authenticity matters.

 

Yeah, ok.  Let's see how that works out.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

18 minutes ago, Dropout said:

How the fuck you know where he was?

I don't, that's why I'm asking.  And by the way, it's a metaphor you dumb fuck.

Edited February 23, 2020 by Fudge Nuggets

[MaybeACoordinator 8,349]

6 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Yeah, ok.  Let's see how that works out.

Quote

Sanders is buoyed by strong support from young and Hispanic voters. The Vermont lawmaker has a 9-point edge over Warren among voters under the age of 45 (31 percent to 22 percent) and has a 16-point lead among Hispanics, who make up a substantial proportion of the primary electorate in California.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/484109-sanders-has-8-point-lead-in-california-primary-poll

[Dropout 355]

1 minute ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

It's a dumbass metaphor you dumb fuck.

Fify 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

Just now, MaybeACoordinator said:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/484109-sanders-has-8-point-lead-in-california-primary-poll

A group that typically has a shitty turnout rate.  Like I said, let's see how that turns out come November.

[MaybeACoordinator 8,349]

2 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

A group that typically has a shitty turnout rate.  Like I said, let's see how that turns out come November.

Quote

WASHINGTON

California Latinos turned out to vote in big numbers in November’s midterm elections, helping Democrats flip seven House seats and raising expectations for the role they may play in 2020.

Data obtained by McClatchy show that the proportion of Latinos voting in the seven California congressional districts that Democrats targeted last year rose to levels normally seen in presidential elections.

Democratic leaders point to President Donald Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric and the party’s own get-out-the-vote operation for spurring the heavy turnout.

“It started with the Trump effect. There was incredible frustration and anger with the Trump administration’s policies and rhetoric among the Latino community,” said Matt Barreto, co-founder of the liberal national polling and research firm Latino Decisions.

“But it takes organizing to turn that anger into votes,” he said, crediting the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and other Latino-focused groups such as Mi Familia Vota, Unidos and Voto Latino.

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article225181845.html

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

Just now, MaybeACoordinator said:

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article225181845.html

Good for them.  CA was going D no matter what.  Tell me about WI, AZ, MI, PA.

[Dropout 355]

3 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

A group that typically has a shitty turnout rate.  Like I said, let's see how that turns out come November.

I’m young and Latino guey. It look like we ain’t gonna turnout? Not really a question. Just fucking blew out Nevada. Give Texas the best chance of turning blue in... forever. 

Log off and stop embarrassing yourself.

[RayDog 682]

I looked up the Sanders to Trump swing vote in 2016 for anyone who forgot. As I said they better vote the right way this time around.

Sanders -> Trump voters…
WI: 51k
MI: 47k
PA: 116k

Trump win margin…
WI: 22k
MI: 10k
PA: 44k

https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-trump-2016-election-654320

[MaybeACoordinator 8,349]

Just now, Fudge Nuggets said:

Good for them.  CA was going D no matter what.  Tell me about WI, AZ, MI, PA.

Move the goalposts much?

Except for Arizona, those are not states I'd be seeking out Mexican food in, and even Arizona is a little shaky for my tastes. On the other hand, it might be a state in which and energized Latino electorate might carry the day. 

Sanders's main goal in the Rust Belt states is to energize the union types and maximize black turnout in the cities. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

3 minutes ago, Dropout said:

Give Texas the best chance of turning blue in... forever. 

We have been hearing that for 20 years now.  Fucking do it already.

[Dropout 355]

Just now, Fudge Nuggets said:

We have been hearing that for 20 years now.  Fucking do it already.

We finally got the right guy to appeal to the demographic you dumb fuck. Not a metaphor.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

2 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Move the goalposts much?

Except for Arizona, those are not states I'd be seeking out Mexican food in, and even Arizona is a little shaky for my tastes. On the other hand, it might be a state in which and energized Latino electorate might carry the day. 

Sanders's main goal in the Rust Belt states is to energize the union types and maximize black turnout in the cities. 

I didn't move shit.  Show me where a large Latino turnout in CA means fuck all for the rest of the country.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,189]

1 minute ago, Dropout said:

We finally got the right guy to appeal to the demographic you dumb fuck. Not a metaphor.

Ok, millenial.

[Dropout 355]

1 minute ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Ok, millenial.

Appreciate the compliment 

[Celery Man 20,933]

Maybe Chris Matthews will retire.

[Dropout 355]

2 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

Maybe Chris Matthews will retire.

Could def pull a few off Surly to fill his spot.

Edited February 23, 2020 by Dropout

[MaybeACoordinator 8,349]

8 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I didn't move shit.  Show me where a large Latino turnout in CA means fuck all for the rest of the country.

Show me where anyone is strategizing about the key to the Rust Belt being the Hispanic vote.

You moved the goalposts when you introduced Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin into a sub-thread about Hispanics feeling the Bern. A big Hispanic turnout in California could mean something similar in Texas, Arizona, Florida, maybe Georgia too. But it's not like Bernie's entire national campaign is only appealing to Hispanics.  

[mchookem 16,322]

30 minutes ago, RayDog said:

I looked up the Sanders to Trump swing vote in 2016 for anyone who forgot. As I said they better vote the right way this time around.

Sanders -> Trump voters…
WI: 51k
MI: 47k
PA: 116k

Trump win margin…
WI: 22k
MI: 10k
PA: 44k

https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-trump-2016-election-654320

wtf i thought that claim was bullshit.

well. fuck.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

Sanders' message comes from FDR Democrats. We trusted them to win WWII and prosper after the Great Depression. Those policies were abandoned in the late 1970's to experiment with an offshoot of libertarianism. That was a mistake we need to correct. This is the pendulum backing away from hard-right austerity policies that decimated the working class and undercut the middle class. It is about raising all boats, not just the super-yachts. It is about hope. 

“The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.” ― Franklin D. Roosevelt

That is not a difficult message because most Americans understand the system in place and agree it needs some fine tuning. 

There is no such thing as pure capitalism as an economic policy. We have a mixed economy - with capitalism intertwined with socialistic policies. We are governed under a representative democracy. Any adjustment in our laws will be democratic through elected officials. Not authoritarianism. The word socialism became a scare word in the 40's as the Cold War began. Our Allies - the Western democracies - fully embraced social democracy and did not have the same fear of a word.

Socialism is not Communism. The Cold War was against Soviet and Chinese Communism, not socialism. If we were fighting socialism, we would need to attack our own government and every government in Western Europe.

Soviet Communism was a threat, for many reasons. We fought that good fight and we won. The Soviets evolved from Soviet Communism to Russian authoritarianism ruled by oligarchs. Russia and the US are actively undermining each other and have been for some time. We have brave souls on that frontline. That fight intensifies with Sanders. 

I think it also important for older voters to understand Eisenhower, Nixon and Ford (as Republicans), as well as Truman, JFK, and LBJ, were all FDR New Deal Presidents. Eisenhower embraced FDR policies:

Eisenhower favored a more moderate course, one that he called Modern Republicanism, which preserved individual freedom and the market economy yet insured that government would provide necessary assistance to workers who had lost their jobs or to the ill or aged, who through no fault of their own, could not provide for themselves. He intended to lead the country "down the middle of the road between the unfettered power of concentrated wealth . . . and the unbridled power of statism or partisan interests." As President, Eisenhower thought that government should provide some additional benefits to the American people. https://millercenter.org/president/eisenhower/domestic-affairs

Our economy has become unbalanced and requires attention because of the move away from New Deal economic policy. The working and middle classes were strengths in our economic dominance. If we lose them, we lose American economic power. And more importantly, the poor have been neglected and damaged by the move away from the New Deal policies.

We can do better - for all of us. 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Jesus fucking christ this thread.

Someone knock me the fuck out and wake me up on November 3rd please.

These next eight months are gonna SUCK.

[bad_teammate 13,192]

Oh it's only going to get dumber.

This is the "Beto will make you cum until your calves cramp" lady.

[bad_teammate 13,192]

I'm sorry, Pete, but you don't have it.

[ClubWhatever 12,120]

Of course Obama’s delivery would be better, since at the time he probably had 10 more years’ practice giving stump speeches. But it’s not that much better.  Pete’s is not shoddy, dime store.  A guy who’s only been a Midwestern mayor would not be getting these primary votes otherwise. 

[bad_teammate 13,192]

Pete Boone

[bad_teammate 13,192]

It's going to be ok, Fudge.

[StruggleBus 3,922]

6 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

We have been hearing that for 20 years now.  Fucking do it already.

It’s going to be at least another 20 years before it’s a legitimate possibility 

[atomheartbevo 89,629]

18 minutes ago, StruggleBus said:

It’s going to be at least another 20 years before it’s a legitimate possibility 

Ok boomer.  

[Mapache 1,117]

"Vote Blue, no matter who" ...that's my mantra. Warren is my choice but I'll vote for Bernie in a heartbeat if he's the nominee. 

[heso 2,786]

12 hours ago, troph said:

Agreed we have to vote for Bernie, but we got trump because they sat out last time around. No love lost for the bros, they are terribly in the way of Sanders. Self described insulting assholes, screaming for the sport of it, willing to hurt people for a laugh, don’t like them, don’t need them, they are a major liability and will only further polarize discourse. But yes vote for the dem no matter what.

Where did this idea that the Bernie bro’s sat out and cost the dems the election? Where is the analysis that is the demographic that swung the election? I’ve never seen it. If it exists I’ll take it for what it’s worth but on the surface, I don’t buy it. 

Pa had 1.66 million primary voters in 2016. Clinton got 2.926 million votes. She underperformed Obama by 63k votes. Trump won by 44k votes, outperforming Romney by 290k votes. Going into Election Day her campaign wanted to carry a margin of 450k in the southeast pa counties. They left those counties with a margin of more than 475k. That alone should have won them the state. So where did she underperform and Trump excel? Literally every suburb in the state. The corridor from Scranton to Wilkes-Barre, Erie, Johnstown, south central Pa. areas that have been reliably blue for decades. She got crushed in those areas for a number of reasons: her assumption that she would win them all, Trump running an effective campaign of stoking fear in Islamist terrorism to convincing people the Mexicans were taking their jobs and bringing in drugs. Clinton stayed out of the state and ran ads that highlighted the offensive stuff Trump said. She should have ran ads about all the people that lost jobs when his businesses folded, highlighted all of the contractors that went out of business when he stiffed them on contracts.
 

Trump ran an effective campaign of lies. Clinton ran an ineffective, lazy, and presumptuous campaign because she and her team thought they had PA in the bag. 
 

Blaming the 2016 election on Bernie bro’s is lazy and disingenuous. It completely ignores the facts that Hillary was a terrible candidate that ran a bad campaign and Trump ran an effective campaign that stoked fear and boosted turnout. 
 

I don’t see tens of thousands of suburban and rural Bernie bros in pa swinging the election. 

[bad_teammate 13,192]

lol owned

 

[bad_teammate 13,192]

Just now, heso said:

Blaming the 2016 election on Bernie bro’s is lazy and disingenuous.

Of course it is, because the point of their analysis isn't to see the world accurately, it's to make themselves feel better. And not just that, but their interpretations of their own cherry-picked numbers are unsupported by data (or even reason).

Abandoning the people who cost Hillary the election was their campaign strategy.

Schumer:
“For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin.”

Who didn't show up for them? White non-college educated voters.

Oops

[Message Board User 12,395]

1 hour ago, Mapache said:

"Vote Blue, no matter who" ...that's my mantra. Warren is my choice but I'll vote for Bernie in a heartbeat if he's the nominee. 

What if I think Bernie's policies and proposals would be disastrous for the country? 

Am I still obligated to vote for him even if he's not Trump?

Personally, I give no fucks about the Bernie Bros - they are the other side of the crazy coin (the MAGAts being the other side).  It's his policies I have issues with.

Edited February 23, 2020 by Message Board User

[Bruh Man 3,160]

A lot of freaking out on the Sunday morning shows about down ballot Dems. Is there any proof that conservative Democratic and Independent voters that are uncomfortable with Bernie will go in the voter booth and vote House/Senate Dems out simply because Bernie is on top of the ticket or are they thinking that Bernie depresses them to not even show up to vote? 

Edited February 23, 2020 by Bruh Man

[mdmost 43,000]

Do you want Trump making the next Supreme Court pick or Bernie? It's a simple as that for me. Given why people on the right support Trump, a swing proof majority on the Supreme Court would do unspeakable damage over some theoretical proposals that would have to get highly watered down to pass. 

[David Dennison 18,851]

4 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

What if I think Bernie's policies and proposals would be disastrous for the country? 

Am I still obligated to vote for him even if he's not Trump?

Personally, I give no fucks about the Bernie Bros - they are the other side of the crazy coin (the MAGAts being the other side).  It's his policies I have issues with.

What policies would be disastrous for the country?

[bad_teammate 13,192]

5 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

What if I think Bernie's policies and proposals would be disastrous for the country? 

Do whatever you think is right, I guess.

[heso 2,786]

4 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

What if I think Bernie's policies and proposals would be disastrous for the country? 

Am I still obligated to vote for him even if he's not Trump?

Personally, I give no fucks about the Bernie Bros - they are the other side of the crazy coin (the MAGAts being the other side).  It's his policies I have issues with.

Can you elaborate on what policies will be disastrous for the country and how they will play out?