Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee

used2b

By used2b
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 23.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bad_teammate

    3638

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    2212

  • Hank Kingsley

    1252

  • Js1

    1230

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Huckleberry
Huckleberry

No it doesn't, this is absurd selfishness on a grand scale. Nobody is getting punished. My wife and I paid off our student loans, and you know what I think about younger people or even those in our ge

henrygandorf
henrygandorf

i’ve really enjoyed the 900 posts from bt explaining how bernie people aren’t aggressive, obsessive, and very-online.  truly a learning experience. 

Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton

3rd or 4th thread but whos counting.  Name recognition and ability to collect money is most important to the Democratic Party. They aren't trying to win 2020, they are trying to rebuild and colle

Posted Images

Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted
She is getting a lot of positive press right now due to her solid debate/townhall performances. The twitter activist crowd seem to love her too. One of the most perplexing things about this race has been the hesitancy by many in the party to get behind her. They hate Bernie so much yet refuse to back the most competent person in the race. It's been frustrating to watch and has turned me off to this party even more. Establishment Dems would rather have a meek president than someone who would actually wield power. 
 
 
 


You realize she has a vagina, right?

When you remember that it’s not perplexing at all, unfortunately.

Go back and read the debate threads and look at the comments about her. Lots of people - men AND women - cannot deal with a woman wielding that kind of knowledge and power.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
406W30th

406W30th 1111

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Liz takes a question about a brokered convention and knocks it out of the park.

Love me some Liz but I don't agree that that's a good answer. It's whataboutism – "Yeah, I support a shitty, anti-democratic idea that allows the DNC to deny the will of the electorate but so did Bernie in 2016".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13196

Posted
Posted

It's not an answer that makes sense or is tenable, but it's all she's got at this point, so ... whatever.

We're in a very ugly part of the primary and we can't go Unity-Hunting right now. Now's now the time. It's like asking people to be over their grieving process as their father's heartbeat is in the process of stopping in the ER.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, 406W30th said:

Love me some Liz but I don't agree that that's a good answer. It's whataboutism – "Yeah, I support a shitty, anti-democratic idea that allows the DNC to deny the will of the electorate but so did Bernie in 2016".

 

It’s not the will of the electorate if someone expects the nomination with only 35% of the actual votes. In that scenario the will of the electorate would be 65% of voters don’t want the guy with 35% of the vote.

This is why we have “run-offs” and conventions in the first place.  It’s so one minority faction doesn’t overthrow the party/political system Third Reich style with only a fraction of support.

What’s irritating is it’s Bernie’s strategy to win the nomination without you know, trying to get over 50% of the votes like a normal person. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Walden Ponderer

Walden Ponderer 12639

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s not the will of the electorate if someone expects the nomination with only 35% of the actual votes. In that scenario the will of the electorate would be 65% of voters don’t want the guy with 35% of the vote.

Actually, that part's not right either. When somebody in a more-than-two race only has a plurality, you don't know what "the will of the electorate" is. It is utterly and completely undefined. Maybe they didn't vote for him the first time around, but it's not accurate to say 65% don't want him, any more than it's accurate to say 100% do want him. Without ranked voting, nobody knows how many "want him" or "don't want him".

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
406W30th

406W30th 1111

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s not the will of the electorate if someone expects the nomination with only 35% of the actual votes. In that scenario the will of the electorate would be 65% of voters don’t want the guy with 35% of the vote.

This is why we have “run-offs” and conventions in the first place.  It’s so one minority faction doesn’t overthrow the party/political system Third Reich style with only a fraction of support.

So you're perfectly fine with the superdelegates nominating someone like Bloomberg, with 20% of the vote over Bernie's 35% plurality? Got it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18860

Posted
Posted
Just now, 406W30th said:

So you're perfectly fine with the superdelegates nominating someone like Bloomberg, with 20% of the vote over Bernie's 35% plurality? Got it.

This is where negotiating for delegates won by other candidates becomes crucial. Bernie and Bloomberg (or Biden) are going to have to deal with other candidates for their delegates.

Fun!

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13196

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s not the will of the electorate if someone expects the nomination with only 35% of the actual votes. In that scenario the will of the electorate would be 65% of voters don’t want the guy with 35% of the vote.

This is why we have “run-offs” and conventions in the first place.  It’s so one minority faction doesn’t overthrow the party/political system Third Reich style with only a fraction of support.

What’s irritating is it’s Bernie’s strategy to win the nomination without you know, trying to get over 50% of the votes like a normal person. 

Toxic Liz supporters comparing a man who lost his family to the Holocaust to the Nazis that killed them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost of LL

Ghost of LL 15531

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

Actually, that part's not right either. When somebody in a more-than-two race only has a plurality, you don't know what "the will of the electorate" is. It is utterly and completely undefined. Maybe they didn't vote for him the first time around, but it's not accurate to say 65% don't want him, any more than it's accurate to say 100% do want him. Without ranked voting, nobody knows how many "want him" or "don't want him".

And the convention is the closest we can get to a ranked-choice voting system.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Walden Ponderer

Walden Ponderer 12639

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Ghost of LL said:

And the convention is the closest we can get to a ranked-choice voting system.

True. But it's a politically losing position for a leading candidate to admit that. If you want to sway "peel-off-able" delegates, you suggest that you are the clear "choice of the voters" with your plurality.

That's what makes this whole exercise in debating how many delegates can stand on the head of a pin hilarious -- none of the candidates are going to tell you what they really think. All of them are going to give the answer that they are supposed to give in their particular circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost of LL

Ghost of LL 15531

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

True. But it's a politically losing position for a leading candidate to admit that. If you want to sway "peel-off-able" delegates, you suggest that you are the clear "choice of the voters" with your plurality.

That's what makes this whole exercise in debating how many delegates can stand on the head of a pin hilarious -- none of the candidates are going to tell you what they really think. All of them are going to give the answer that they are supposed to give in their particular circumstances.

When that question was asked at the debate, I actually turned to my wife and said "I don't know--which candidate has the plurality."  Because isn't that what it comes down to?

If Biden sweeps through Super Tuesday and in six days has more delegates than Bernie, we're going to hear a lot of peoples' tune change in a big fucking hurry.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

Actually, that part's not right either. When somebody in a more-than-two race only has a plurality, you don't know what "the will of the electorate" is. It is utterly and completely undefined. Maybe they didn't vote for him the first time around, but it's not accurate to say 65% don't want him, any more than it's accurate to say 100% do want him. Without ranked voting, nobody knows how many "want him" or "don't want him".

True and good point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13196

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

What do you think will happen if Bernie rolls in with 35% of the delegates?

It depends on what #2 has.

"But Bernie said superdelegates from states he won should go to him in 2016!" might feel like a righteous argument to make, but it's not a strong or convincing one and not one that will create anything but discord.

We're going to see how it plays out, but I just really don't think Democrats at large have an appetite for pretending someone who has a 5-point lead isn't the clear leader. I don't think centrist squishes have the balls for that fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13196

Posted
Posted

Something pretty massive to consider, too, is that Biden and Warren are both still untested regarding their #1 weaknesses heading into a general. The other candidates have kept their lips perfectly sealed on false claims of NA heritage and Hunter Biden. There has been pressure from the press (not much for Biden, slightly more for Warren) (Warren has faced a TON of pressure from NA groups, but no one cares about them really), but these debates have been nasty as hell on some of these candidates' weaknesses, but those two are third rails for fellow Democrats but will be gleefully exploited by Donald and the GOP.

This is going to have to be part of the consideration if we get into some kind of brokered convention conversation.

I just don't think we've got the stomach for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29191

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

What do you think will happen if Bernie rolls in with 35% of the delegates?

i'd feel comfortable if bernie ~ doubled up the 2nd place.  something like 37% to 19%.  that would be pretty clear.  If it shifts downwards to 30% to 23% to 19% then i think we're getting into some dicey conversations.  or if bernie gets over 40%, then it shouldn't really matter.  any argument after that is pretty disingenuous.

pete doesn't have a big number next to his name, but it's big enough to shift some overall percentages in the big picture.  will be interesting to see how that shakes out.  6 months ago, i would've told you his people would be a pretty even split a few directions.  now i'm not so sure.  similar with warren, though it doesn't seem like she'll actually be dropping out anytime soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

I think Bernie is going to do better than that.  And F Tom Steyer.  

I'm actually thinking the opposite now unless there's a ton of crossover GOP voters that can't be accounted for (e.g. operation chaos stuff). Bernie is doing a lot better in 2020 with black voters but the older more conservative group in South Cackalacky is Biden's absolute base. I cold easily see him winning by 15 points.

Edited by GSU&UT
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bruh Man

Bruh Man 3160

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

 


You realize she has a vagina, right?

When you remember that it’s not perplexing at all, unfortunately.

Go back and read the debate threads and look at the comments about her. Lots of people - men AND women - cannot deal with a woman wielding that kind of knowledge and power.

 

Oh ya for sure. A few days ago someone called her shrill in the debate thread so I know sexism is hurting her with voters. I was referring more to  the pols in the Democratic party. Many of them seem content riding this Biden train until the wheels fall off when they have a freaking DEMOCRAT prodigy right under their nose.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18860

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

It depends on what #2 has.

"But Bernie said superdelegates from states he won should go to him in 2016!" might feel like a righteous argument to make, but it's not a strong or convincing one and not one that will create anything but discord.

We're going to see how it plays out, but I just really don't think Democrats at large have an appetite for pretending someone who has a 5-point lead isn't the clear leader. I don't think centrist squishes have the balls for that fight.

It will be fun watching the Sanders camp haggle for delegates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FondrenRoad

FondrenRoad 4378

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Something pretty massive to consider, too, is that Biden and Warren are both still untested regarding their #1 weaknesses heading into a general. The other candidates have kept their lips perfectly sealed on false claims of NA heritage and Hunter Biden. There has been pressure from the press (not much for Biden, slightly more for Warren) (Warren has faced a TON of pressure from NA groups, but no one cares about them really), but these debates have been nasty as hell on some of these candidates' weaknesses, but those two are third rails for fellow Democrats but will be gleefully exploited by Donald and the GOP.

This is going to have to be part of the consideration if we get into some kind of brokered convention conversation.

I just don't think we've got the stomach for it.

In the unlikely event that Warren wins the nomination, NA groups will vocally support her and important NA people will shield her from the Fauxcahontas bullshit. Their alternative is Trump who is truly despised by Native Americans. 

Likewise, the Hunter Biden shit is over with. Trump will rage up his core voters with it, but he isnt going to be influencing potential new voters with it.  And JFC, nobody in the history of the US government has pulled more nepotistic bullshit than Trump. Senate said the gloves can come off for Trump. Dems need to return the favor. Start commissioning hackers and leaking Trump's pay for play schemes.  Him hiring his unqualified offspring for WH positions is low hanging fruit. 

The motherfucker is openly selling pardons and nobody really says shit about it. 

Edited by FondrenRoad
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aqua Buddha

Aqua Buddha 14598

Posted
Posted

Went to a Bloomberg event tonight.  (It was close and free and I knew they wouldn't ask for money.  They were even giving away free merch.)  Lots of Bern protesters and they were complete jackasses.  Why are you protesting someone in your own party?  Group of them were on the sidewalk screaming at people as they walked by.  One was wearing a pickle suit.

Great way to win friends and influence people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...