2020 Democratic Nominee

[bad_teammate 13192]

Paraphrase of a key point from Bernie's suspension speech...

"I ran for the presidency because I felt that as president I could accelerate and institutionalize a progressive agenda. That path may be slower now, but it will never stop and will spread across the world."

Final words:

"Please stay in this fight with me. Let us go forward together. The struggle continues."

My man.

[Dbeasy 15042]

It would be further left.
I asked you why the Democrats lost 1000+ seats and your response was to put the onus on voters, specifically "young people". The voters don't lose elections, candidates and parties do.
Why do you think the Democratic Party cannot turn out the voters who are most amenable to their supposed beliefs?
Why do young voters in South Korea turn out at 70% while ours turn out below 50%? Why are we below the OECD average? (I apologize for asking questions, Hank)
If it was just about the fecklessness of youth and their general rock'n'roll unreliability, we would see both a global and historical consistency to it, but we don't.
Young voters in the 2008 election (I apologize for looking into the past, henry):
In the last three general elections – 2004, 2006, and 2008 — young voters have given the Democratic Party a majority of their votes, and for all three cycles they have been the party’s most supportive age group. This year, 66% of those under age 30 voted for Barack Obama making the disparity between young voters and other age groups larger than in any presidential election since exit polling began in 1972.

Why did the Democrats lose young voters? (Oh, god a question AND historical numbers?! I'm so sorry Hank and henry!!)

They lost among all voters, but they REALLY lost among young voters.
18-44: -7 (Rep -2, Ind +10)
45-65+: -2 (Rep -1, Ind +3)
My answer?
We lost power because we gave voters nothing to be excited about or to care about.
The signature Democratic program of the last decade was an annual enrollment window into tiers of private healthcare purchases. And lots of moral scolding.
Obama had the personal charisma to sell the dogshit to young voters as if it weren't dogshit, but no one else did.

The Democratic Party has done poorly for one reason. They are way behind the Republicans in digital communications, social media, and digital warfare.

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Paraphrase of a key point from Bernie's suspension speech...

"I ran for the presidency because I felt that as president I could accelerate and institutionalize a progressive agenda. That path may be slower now, but it will never stop and will spread across the world."

Final words:

"Please stay in this fight with me. Let us go forward together. The struggle continues."

My man.

What did he say specifically about supporting Joe Biden?

[hobbes2702 13029]

15 hours ago, Loch Ness Monster said:

Pretty much where I am.

I held my nose and voted for Hillary but dementia Joe is too much. Fuck that.

Then you’re an unbelievable fucking moron. 

The amount of people that buy into these stupid right wing propaganda plays is staggering. 

[Dbeasy 15042]

Bernie was too nice of a candidate to run an actual insurgent campaign. He didn't hit hard, he didn't get nasty. He focused entirely on policy and theory. It's a classic example of a good guy doing things "the right way" but that not working.
I'm not saying he "should" have been nasty and hit hard. He is him and he is still the most influential and powerful ideological force in the party, so far be it for me or anyone else to say he's been ineffective. I'm just saying his electoral chances would've been different if, during debates and in advertizing, he had actually hit Biden very hard. But that's not Bernie's personality, there was a fundamental disconnect between the need for an insurgent candidate to actually wield a flamethrower and Bernie's unwillingness to do so.

Nope. His policies are far left and he failed over and over to help large swaths of the country understand why his policies make the most sense.

[SubliminalHorn 6786]

Honestly emotional watching Bernie’s speech. He has worked hard for the country and you can tell this is a painful moment for him. That being said, he recognizes the gravity of the situation and the most important goal going forward: defeating the fascist, treasonous, piece of shit currently squatting in the White House. 

[bad_teammate 13192]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

What did he say specifically about supporting Joe Biden?

Video starts at 24 minutes in and lasts about 12 minutes.

Watch and tell me what you think about it.

 

[DanTheHorn 4917]

42 minutes ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

 

[bad_teammate 13192]

Just now, Dbeasy said:

Nope. His policies are far left and he failed over and over to help large swaths of the country understand why his policies make the most sense.

 

Part of making people understand would be drawing sharper lines between his policies and the policies of others. It's all part of the same issue.

Again, not saying he SHOULD have gone nastier/harder, just saying that his failure to do so made an insurgent campaign less tenable.

[Biff Tannen 45665]

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

Then you’re an unbelievable fucking moron. 

The amount of people that buy into these stupid right wing propaganda plays is staggering. 

I think I'm done trying to convince these people.  If you can't see that any of the options we have are better than the dotard, then I've got nothing to say to you.  

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

4 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

 

The Democratic Party has done poorly for one reason. They are way behind the Republicans in digital communications, social media, and digital warfare.

 

And they have shitty retread candidates most of the time

[mdmost 43001]

Yeah I always chuckle at these I held my nose and voted for Hillary but DEMENTIA JOE IS TOO MUCH posts. That's a load of bullshit. You've seen 3 years of Trump and still feel confident that Joe Biden isn't a much better alternative? Laughable. Even if Joe Biden isn't as fully together or as sharp as he might've once been, do you honestly think he wouldn't assemble a team of people to help run the government and set policy versus an asshole who fires people because they may say something that conflicts with his altered reality? Or put together a team that runs the government with some common fucking sense?

Edited April 8, 2020 by mdmost

[hobbes2702 13029]

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

I think I'm done trying to convince these people.  If you can't see that any of the options we have are better than the dotard, then I've got nothing to say to you.  

I tend to agree. It’s beyond embarrassing to have to continually tell people that, while normal isn’t perfect And it needs improving, it’s at least normal. We are currently in the fucking twilight zone and are watching our ideals (even if we don’t always live up to them) disappear in favor of authoritarianism.

If you can’t see the sides here then wake the fuck up and look around. 

[bad_teammate 13192]

@Loch Ness Monster

What would you say the most important issues/policies are going forward? You know I don't like Biden at all and I'm not interested in trying to persuade you (not because I think you're deplorable, but because Biden hasn't even earned my vote (m4a veto), much less my advocacy), but I'm interested in the calculus.

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

I tend to agree. It’s beyond embarrassing to have to continually tell people that, while normal isn’t perfect And it needs improving, it’s at least normal. We are currently in the fucking twilight zone and are watching our ideals (even if we don’t always live up to them) disappear in favor of authoritarianism.

If you can’t see the sides here then wake the fuck up and look around. 

Maybe part of the issue is that what you consider "normal" is actually hell for millions and millions and millions of people.

[mchookem 16322]

14 minutes ago, Storm the Field said:

Put all of Reddit on mass suicide watch.

yeah...my 18 yoa niece is having a meltdown. i feel bad for her 😒 and am trying to explain that politics is about nuance and the game, not absolutes and justice. 

i mean...it's a shitty lesson, but it's reality. 

she'll vote 'blue no matter who'... but right now she's grieving. 

[David Dennison 18851]

6 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

And they have shitty retread candidates most of the time

That's because better candidates aren't very good at getting more votes the shitty retread candidates.

 

[mchookem 16322]

12 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

 

The Democratic Party has done poorly for one reason. They are way behind the Republicans in digital communications, social media, and digital warfare.

 

i'd say they've done poorly bc they are still playing the game thinking rules exist whereas Republicans said 'fuck the rules' many, many years ago.

[hobbes2702 13029]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

@Loch Ness Monster

What would you say the most important issues/policies are going forward? You know I don't like Biden at all and I'm not interested in trying to persuade you (not because I think you're deplorable, but because Biden hasn't even earned my vote (m4a veto), much less my advocacy), but I'm interested in the calculus.

Maybe part of the issue is that what you consider "normal" is actually hell for millions and millions and millions of people.

You know it’s almost like I addressed that point in my post. You think normal puts more people in actual hell than a continued trump presidency? Because that’s the actual question. 
But you knew that already. You can fuck off to be honest. There was a time on this board where you seemed to be a level headed leftist voice that was truly necessary to this board. There’s actually way more policy that you and I agree on than you know. Where we differ is that you seem to have lost any ability to be pragmatic.
There is one goal in November. Period. We need to make things better for millions of people in this country but right now our options aren’t make things better. The options are return to normal and continue the fight or make things worse for everyone, and I mean the planet not just this country.

I would have loved a Bernie win in 2016 and I would have loved one now. It didn’t happen either time. That sucks but it didn’t. Let’s not make it worse by continuing with Donald.

[mdmost 43001]

You know I held my nose and voted for Hillary but Dementia Joe Biden is too much. I'd much prefer him lose and Trump to get even more Supreme Court selections, further pushing our country back into the 1950s.

Edited April 8, 2020 by mdmost

[wildcat09 29347]

In retrospect, a campaign strategy that depended on getting ~30% of the vote while every other candidate stayed in to split the rest was...not very smart. Winning Nevada and then telling that 70% that they couldn't stop you was especially stupid.

Every campaign has a million different things that you can second guess. Bernie deserves a lot of credit for putting together a huge grassroots campaign that had incredible enthusiastic support, and he faced some significant structural hurdles. But goddamn did he fuck up after Nevada. He should've been working to broaden his appeal to the rest of the party at that point and instead he basically told them to get fucked.

[Rip76 4925]

Serious question.  

Has or would Jon Tester ever think of running for VP? 

I think a lot of American voters would vote for him, on both sides of the aisle.

Edited April 8, 2020 by Rip76

[bad_teammate 13192]

Just now, hobbes2702 said:

You think normal puts more people in actual hell than a continued trump presidency? Because that’s the actual question.

Do I think that? No. But it's not about what I think, it's about what the voters we need think.

Quote

Where we differ is that you seem to have lost any ability to be pragmatic.

I'm the one saying we need to try to reach out to voters instead of just trying Deplorables 2.0. I'd say that's pretty pragmatic of me.

The impulse to say "fuck all of these people, write all of them off!" is about personal ego and emotional frustration, not pragmatism.

Quote

We need to make things better for millions of people in this country but right now our options aren’t make things better. The options are return to normal and continue the fight or make things worse for everyone, and I mean the planet not just this country.

Do you see how vague you are being?

The "normal" you reference was actually a process of making things worse for tens of millions of people in this country. Under Obama, wealth disparity worsened. Life expectancy dropped at the end of Obama's time in office.

What you see isn't the same as what everyone else sees.

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Do I think that? No. But it's not about what I think, it's about what the voters we need think.

I'm the one saying we need to try to reach out to voters instead of just trying Deplorables 2.0. I'd say that's pretty pragmatic of me.

The impulse to say "fuck all of these people, write all of them off!" is about personal ego and emotional frustration, not pragmatism.

Do you see how vague you are being?

The "normal" you reference was actually a process of making things worse for tens of millions of people in this country. Under Obama, wealth disparity worsened. Life expectancy dropped at the end of Obama's time in office.

What you see isn't the same as what everyone else sees.

Are you going to vote for Joe Biden?

[FondrenRoad 4378]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Do I think that? No. But it's not about what I think, it's about what the voters we need think.

I'm the one saying we need to try to reach out to voters instead of just trying Deplorables 2.0. I'd say that's pretty pragmatic of me.

The impulse to say "fuck all of these people, write all of them off!" is about personal ego and emotional frustration, not pragmatism.

Do you see how vague you are being?

The "normal" you reference was actually a process of making things worse for tens of millions of people in this country. Under Obama, wealth disparity worsened. Life expectancy dropped at the end of Obama's time in office.

What you see isn't the same as what everyone else sees.

And how is life expectancy working out under Trump?

[wildcat09 29347]

It's weird watching people argue with BT, given that his argument pretty consistently boils down to "we should offer people something that gets them excited to vote." That seems pretty obviously true.

[G650 14245]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

It's weird watching people argue with BT, given that his argument pretty consistently boils down to "we should offer people something that gets them excited to vote." That seems pretty obviously true.

Beating Donald Trump makes me pretty fucking excited to vote.

[hobbes2702 13029]

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Do I think that? No. But it's not about what I think, it's about what the voters we need think.

I'm the one saying we need to try to reach out to voters instead of just trying Deplorables 2.0. I'd say that's pretty pragmatic of me.

The impulse to say "fuck all of these people, write all of them off!" is about personal ego and emotional frustration, not pragmatism.

Do you see how vague you are being?

The "normal" you reference was actually a process of making things worse for tens of millions of people in this country. Under Obama, wealth disparity worsened. Life expectancy dropped at the end of Obama's time in office.

What you see isn't the same as what everyone else sees.

No fucking shit it’s not the same but equating the Obama normal and how bad it was with the Trump normal is not a legit comparison. 
I don’t really care to argue about all of the issues facing Americans everyday. Go make a thread about those things. The choice is Biden or Trump. If you can’t see the reasons to choose one over the other than I’m not the guy to convince you. I’ve tried. I’m done trying. If you still need convincing at this point then frankly my opinion of your intelligence is too low for me to take the time to try. Now that might not be pragmatic, but it will certainly keep me more sane. 
This isn’t that hard. Which is why I say those still pretending there is an actual choice here, can fuck off.

Edited April 8, 2020 by hobbes2702

[Biff Tannen 45665]

11 minutes ago, mdmost said:

You know I held my nose and voted for Hillary but Dementia Joe Biden is too much. I'd much prefer him lose and Trump to get even more Supreme Court selections, further pushing our country back into the 1950s.

SCOTUS is important of course, but they are probably not in my top 5, maybe even top 10 concerns about keeping the dotard.

[henrygandorf 29189]

 

[UDontKnow 10441]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Do I think that? No. But it's not about what I think, it's about what the voters we need think.

I'm the one saying we need to try to reach out to voters instead of just trying Deplorables 2.0. I'd say that's pretty pragmatic of me.

The impulse to say "fuck all of these people, write all of them off!" is about personal ego and emotional frustration, not pragmatism.

Do you see how vague you are being?

The "normal" you reference was actually a process of making things worse for tens of millions of people in this country. Under Obama, wealth disparity worsened. Life expectancy dropped at the end of Obama's time in office.

What you see isn't the same as what everyone else sees.

A Republic Congress under Obama's second term had no role in wealth disparity? Their attempts to dismantle the Affordable Care Act has no role in this?  Do you know why life expectancy dropped at the end of Obama's presidency? Is he completely to blame for the opioid epidemic (which is why the life expectancy declined)? The opioid epidemic was the product of the late 90s Big Pharma movement to recognize pain as the fifth vital sign and attempts were made to tie provider reimbursement to patient satisfaction. Translation: doc gimme the pain pills or I will go somewhere else. That's how doctor shopping arose. Also, the economically indigent are hit a lot harder by the opioid epidemic, despite the disease not discriminating among victims. IIRC, in Clinton's second term Congress was ruled by the Republicans. So I specifically place the blame on lowered life expectancy and widening wealth disparity on Republicans and their supporters. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

16 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

That's because better candidates aren't very good at getting more votes the shitty retread candidates.

 

What better candidates have even run, other than Barack Obama?

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

It's weird watching people argue with BT, given that his argument pretty consistently boils down to "we should offer people something that gets them excited to vote." That seems pretty obviously true.

Of course, but the problem is that Bernie and really the whole progressive maximalist agenda doesn't get a majority of Democrats excited, because the Democratic party is and always has been and will be a coalition of discrete interests, not an exclusionary ideological coalition. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

13 minutes ago, Rip76 said:

Serious question.  

Has or would Jon Tester ever think of running for VP? 

I think a lot of American voters would vote for him, on both sides of the aisle.

Love Jon Tester, but he's too valuable in the Senate to be waste on the VP nomination. I'd support him for president though. 

[Rip76 4925]

1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Love Jon Tester, but he's too valuable in the Senate to be waste on the VP nomination. I'd support him for president though. 

Me too.  Maybe he just likes where he is.

[Beantown Express 2.0 6559]

4 minutes ago, Rip76 said:

Me too.  Maybe he just likes where he is.

Plus Biden already said he would pick a woman and not doing so may piss some people off.  I wouldn't mind the Michigan Governor being his choice as I think she could solidify MI in the Blue column.  

[Hank Kingsley 20908]

 

[David Dennison 18851]

23 minutes ago, Rip76 said:

Serious question.  

Has or would Jon Tester ever think of running for VP? 

I think a lot of American voters would vote for him, on both sides of the aisle.

Joe Biden has said it will be a woman. He can't go back on that now.

 

[Rip76 4925]

1 minute ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

Plus Biden already said he would pick a woman and not doing so may piss some people off.  I wouldn't mind the Michigan Governor being his choice as I think she could solidify MI in the Blue column.  

Oh, I believe it will be a woman as well.  Just for votes alone.

[David Dennison 18851]

I'm pretty sure the days of two white men running at the top of the Democratic ticket are over. 

 

[Beantown Express 2.0 6559]

1 minute ago, Rip76 said:

Oh, I believe it will be a woman as well.  Just for votes alone.

So can a Biden/Whitmer ticket win key states like MI, PA, OH, WI, MN, FL, AZ, NC?  I think that ticket takes MI, PA, WI, and MN.  OH is red and FL is probably also.  No idea on NC and AZ.

[UpperWestside 6161]

Senator Sanders is a good guy. I would have voted for him if he were the Democratic nominee. I don't care that Joe Biden is the nominee. I would vote for H.R. Pufnstuf if that was the nominee at this point. So long as the name isn't Donald John Trump next to the Democratic option on the ballot they have my vote.

Edited April 8, 2020 by UpperWestside

[fattyflattie 4639]

17 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

yes, i would like a mammal who can walk upright and doesn't spend every waking moment trying to get reelected in order to continue to personally enrich himself.

You aren’t getting that with either candidate.  I know, #bothsides.  But seriously. 

[Beantown Express 2.0 6559]

2 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

Senator Sanders is a good guy. I would have voted for him if he were the Democratic nominee. I don't care that Joe Biden is the nominee. I would vote for H.R. Pufnstuf if that was the nomineeat this point. So long as the name isn't Donald John Trump next to the Democratic option on the ballot they have my vote.

I could also get behind a Pufnstuf/Sleestak ticket.

Edited April 8, 2020 by Beantown Express 2.0

[David Dennison 18851]

22 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

What better candidates have even run, other than Barack Obama?

Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker, Jay Enslee, Julian Castro. The list goes on and on.

They couldn't convince enough people to vote for them.

[LTtxfan 49148]

7 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

I could also get behind a Pufnstuf/Sleestak ticket.

[UDontKnow 10441]

Just spitballin' here, but maybe a woman of minority descent would be helpful. Not AOC and her group because they would be too polarizing. For that matter, I think Kamala Harris would be harmful towards the effort. Maybe Stacey Abrams is the only  VP candidate that makes sense.

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker, Jay Enslee, Julian Castro. The list goes on and on.

They couldn't convince enough people to vote for them.

If they couldn't gert voters they weren't better candidates. Elizabeth Warren would have been better in 2016 but had a poor strategy in 2020. Amy Klobuchar never found her lane. The Harris campaign was a mess. Pete Buttigieg is like the mayor of Shreveport or something. Cory Booker couldn't read the room. Jay Enslee's logo looked like Captain Planet. Julian Castro never bothered to get famous. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

Just now, UDontKnow said:

Stacey Abrams is the only  VP candidate that makes sense.

Stacy Abrams is awesome but unqualified. She needs more on the resume.  She's also doing crucial work that's more important than being VP. 

[David Dennison 18851]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

If they couldn't gert voters they weren't better candidates. Elizabeth Warren would have been better in 2016 but had a poor strategy in 2020. Amy Klobuchar never found her lane. The Harris campaign was a mess. Pete Buttigieg is like the mayor of Shreveport or something. Cory Booker couldn't read the room. Jay Enslee's logo looked like Captain Planet. Julian Castro never bothered to get famous. 

Ergo, Joe Biden is the best candidate.

[David Dennison 18851]

4 minutes ago, UDontKnow said:

Just spitballin' here, but maybe a woman of minority descent would be helpful. Not AOC and her group because they would be too polarizing. For that matter, I think Kamala Harris would be harmful towards the effort. Maybe Stacey Abrams is the only  VP candidate that makes sense.

Also, AOC is ineligible to be VP because of her age.