2020 Democratic Nominee

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

23 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

you're saying pete took off because he feels good.

i'm saying pete took off because he actually is good

How do we know Pete is good?  He’s the mayor of small city in the Midwest.  We haven’t seen him do anything except be a rhetorical leader, which he’s exceptional at because he make people feel good.  

Bad teammate is right, Pete is an empty vessel to be filled with whatever we want him to be. At this moment in time.

Edited August 9, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[henrygandorf 29,174]

9 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

How do we know Pete is good?  He’s the mayor of small city in the Midwest.  We haven’t seen him do anything except be a rhetorical leader, which he’s exceptional at because he make people feel good.  

Bad teammate is right, Pete is an empty vessel to be filled with whatever we want him to be. At this moment in time.

how do we know he's a good president?  we don't.  and we could say that about every candidate out there except trump.

they're all candidates, and he's a good candidate.

b_t loves bernie, and bernie is also a good candidate.  does this mean we know he'll be a good president?  no, we don't know.  what if he ran away with this thing, and was polling at 70%?  then he trounced trump in the general?  does that mean he'll get his policies passed?  or his issues heard?  or bring unity to the country?  or reform gun law, immigration, healthcare, college costs?

these are all unknown.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Pete's success, aside from being exceptionally smart and a great communicator, is in his focus on major political reform.   Obama was conventional in every respect.   Pete is conventional on policy, but is on the revolutionary side with things like court packing and eliminating the filibuster, both of which Bernie opposes.  The things he wants to get done would have an enormous impact on our country. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

29 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Pete's success, aside from being exceptionally smart and a great communicator, is in his focus on major political reform.   Obama was conventional in every respect.   Pete is conventional on policy, but is on the revolutionary side with things like court packing and eliminating the filibuster, both of which Bernie opposes.  The things he wants to get done would have an enormous impact on our country. 

I agree and I also think the skepticism is his commitment to making his ideas a reality versus Pete’s commitment to fighting for Pete’s political success.  

With candidates like Warren and Bernie, they’ve demonstrated their movements are driven by the ideas they’re trying to advance instead of merely demonstrating how they would be a good placeholder of peace as president (like Biden).  Pete might have some good ideas but once he reaches the top, how hard is he going to fight for those ideas?  It’s a challenging judgement call to answer for any candidate because we don’t know for sure.  

You ultimately have to speculate an answer to this question:

”Is the candidate promoting these ideas just to become president or do they want to become president to make those ideas a reality?”

it’s the question for everyone and that’s why we vote. 

Edited August 9, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Hank Kingsley 20,678]

20 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Pete might have some good ideas but once he reaches the top, how hard is he going to fight for those ideas?  It’s a challenging judgement call to answer for any candidate because we don’t know for sure.  

He's been speaking on democratic reform much more loudly than other candidates. The system is rigged and he plainly states that major reform is needed in order to get any shit done. 

And it's not like his numerous calls to abolish the electoral college, de-politicize the SC, end the filibuster, etc. have been red meat issues for D voters. They're not particularly popular ideas.

He's not fighting for votes by talking about this stuff. He's fighting for the ability to make necessary change. 

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by Hank Kingsley

[henrygandorf 29,174]

17 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

”Is the candidate promoting these ideas just to become president or do they want to become president to make those ideas a reality?”

it’s the question for everyone and that’s why we vote. 

he left big money in the private sector in favor of public service at a fairly low level.  i don't think he's doing it for the prestige.

if you listen to pete and think it's about the trophy instead of wanting to change things, then you should get better at listening.

just because bernie is in this for the 'right' reasons, doesn't mean pete is in it for the 'wrong' ones.  he's been a long-time admirer of bernie (~20 years?), so one would probably think he shares some core values and beliefs.

[Zavala 1,384]

lulz racist slip

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by Zavala

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

11 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

he left big money in the private sector in favor of public service at a fairly low level.  i don't think he's doing it for the prestige.

if you listen to pete and think it's about the trophy instead of wanting to change things, then you should get better at listening.

just because bernie is in this for the 'right' reasons, doesn't mean pete is in it for the 'wrong' ones.  he's been a long-time admirer of bernie (~20 years?), so one would probably think he shares some core values and beliefs.

 

I never said Pete is in it for the wrong reasons.  I’m saying it’s more challenging to determine the reasons a 37 year old Ivy League war veteran thinks he needs to be president right now.  

This dude clearly grew up wanting to be president since he was five years old.  He’s worked his ass off to make that a reality at lightning speed.  He’s got the measurables, and I haven’t seen anything that would lead me to believe he’s a bad guy or that he would make a bad president. 

What I don’t know are the ideas most important to him that he wants to advance.  I feel like I can answer those questions for Bernie and Warren. 

That’s not a dig at Pete, he has plenty of time to shine.

Edited August 9, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

30 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I agree and I also think the skepticism is his commitment to making his ideas a reality versus Pete’s commitment to fighting for Pete’s political success.  

With candidates like Warren and Bernie, they’ve demonstrated their movements are driven by the ideas they’re trying to advance instead of merely demonstrating how they would be a good placeholder of peace as president (like Biden).  Pete might have some good ideas but once he reaches the top, how hard is he going to fight for those ideas?  It’s a challenging judgement call to answer for any candidate because we don’t know for sure.  

You ultimately have to speculate an answer to this question:

”Is the candidate promoting these ideas just to become president or do they want to become president to make those ideas a reality?”

it’s the question for everyone and that’s why we vote. 

My biggest concern about Pete is definitely that I can't assess how hard he will work for the big changes on which he is campaigning.   I'm not saying that he's a liar; he seems pretty genuine.  Nor do I think he's weak.  I just don't know what he's willing to use his political capital for when push comes to shove.  With the kinds of political reform he's pushing, it would be pretty easy to throw up his hands in office and say, "I tried but there's not much I can do," and then play the part of generic corporate Democrat. 

There are two top candidates like that for me:  Pete, based on his minimal track record, and Harris, based on her consistent obfuscation and contradictions.  I know what Bernie and Warren will fight for (and I like it).  I know what Biden will fight for (and I like it a lot less).  Even Beto, whose policy positions are less distinguishing, I believe that he'll fight hard from the heart. With Pete, all I really know is that I'll be getting a smart, interesting guy who's willing to consider new ideas.  Which is light years ahead of Trump, but not enough in the primary. 

The other thing with Pete is that he's getting a lot of donations from billionaires, who generally have a strong interest in not making structural changes.  Maybe he's found a bunch of really socially conscious billionaires, but I don't know why they'd zero in on him alone. 

[cactusflinthead 27,594]

On 8/7/2019 at 6:46 AM, Loch Ness Monster said:

Bernie was really good on the Joe Rogan podcast.

Hour+ long conversations is crucial.

Still on team Warren for now though.

I'm gonna give it a listen. As of earlier today it had 6+million hits. Warren would do well to talk to Joe and talk about weed while she has a beer.

On 8/7/2019 at 9:28 PM, Js1 said:

My point was it’s breaking down by education instead of race/age - Bernie and Biden are both competing for non-college educated democrats and Harris/Warren appeal to the college-educated. Polls show that to be true. 

Demographically, Biden is winning due to black voters and old voters. Reliable primary voters. 

This right here. See 50 something black lady mentioned elsewhere in thread. 

16 hours ago, Patrick Bateman said:

Now I don’t think he meant harm, but the more he has to campaign, the more frequent these situations will hurt his chances.

 

 

 

16 minutes ago, Zavala said:

lulz racist slip

 

Do try to keep up. Or fuck off, that's cool too.

[Hank Kingsley 20,678]

5 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Maybe he's found a bunch of really socially conscious billionaires, but I don't know why they'd zero in on him alone. 

Well, they're not all going to Buttigieg. He has the most, but Biden, Harris, Beto and others are getting donations from billionaires. Which are still maxed out at $2800 for the primary. 

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by Hank Kingsley

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Well, they're not all going to Buttigieg. He has the most, but Biden, Harris, Beto and others are getting donations from billionaires. Which are still maxed out at $2800 during the primary. 

 

That's true; I meant compared to the big change candidates on the left.  If the billionaire thing is an accurate signal, and Pete falls in with Biden and Harris, that would justify my concerns about him. 

[Hank Kingsley 20,678]

4 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

That's true; I meant compared to the big change candidates on the left.  If the billionaire thing is an accurate signal, and Pete falls in with Biden and Harris, that would justify my concerns about him. 

Billionaires donate to political campaigns. Pete will take their $2800 donations and continue campaigning on his ideas.

Obviously the super wealthy and Bernie mutually hate each other. 

 

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by Hank Kingsley

[henrygandorf 29,174]

4 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

That's true; I meant compared to the big change candidates on the left.  If the billionaire thing is an accurate signal, and Pete falls in with Biden and Harris, that would justify my concerns about him. 

i think pete is a lot more progressive than people realize (maybe not bernie or liz level, but certainly to the left of kamala/biden).  his packaging and demeanor makes him seem more centrist and moderate.  it's an elaborate ruse.

the billionaire thing is funny to me though.  it's not like they gave a billion dollars to his campaign.  and it's not like their preferences override those who only have $500mm, or $5mm, or contributors who may be closer to pete's inner circle and have more sway in general.

i do know he's gotten a ton of support from hollywood, (and gay hollywood) and a lot of those people's list of concerns centers around anti-discrimination and other issues that already matter to pete.  although he did hire someone who worked at goldman-sachs 15 years ago, so he's likely also in the pocket of the big banks. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

He sells access by doing private fundraisers for the super wealthy.  That’s how he raised $24M last quarter.  

It doesn’t mean anything except that Pete is willing to play ball like a politician.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

3 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Billionaires donate to political campaigns. Pete will take their $2800 donations and continue campaigning on his ideas.

Obviously the super wealthy and Bernie mutually hate each other. 

 

 

No doubt.   It's just one data point.  The problem for me is that there are relatively few of them for me to consider for a 37-year-old small town mayor.  20 billionaires could donate to Warren today and my opinion of her wouldn't change because of all the other things I know about her from a long career. 

[Hank Kingsley 20,678]

 

[RomaVicta 29,775]

Warren wants big political reform, too, doesn't she?

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

The other thing is that "Washington outsider" is much less positive to me than a lot of other people.   It took Bill Clinton awhile to get up and running and figure things out.  Obama had a few years under his belt and got up and running fast, but even still completely miscalculated how to deal with congressional Republicans.   I want someone who knows what's what and hits the ground running. 

[Zavala 1,384]

31 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

I'm gonna give it a listen. As of earlier today it had 6+million hits. Warren would do well to talk to Joe and talk about weed while she has a beer.

This right here. See 50 something black lady mentioned elsewhere in thread. 

Do try to keep up. Or fuck off, that's cool too.

Dude WEED! Joe Rogan!

So tough to keep up with you brah

[Rougarou 594]

50 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

That’s not a dig at Pete, he has plenty of time to shine.

Disagree. I was (and still am) a Pete Stan, but I think he's largely done. Maybe this is me betraying not knowing the history of Presedential campaigns, but the gap seems to wide now to bridge and between Biden, Harris, Sanders and Warren you would need to see a historic collapse at this point. Like having the Astros be in 5th place with a quarter of the season left to play and have all the teams ahead of you collapse while you surge. Possible but unlikely.

That said, I love his pedigree, he instill extreme confidence that he could get into the office and make changes and articulate vision and execute on strategy. I know people bag on his McKinsey experience, but there is a reason those guys are sought after to do things like reduce costs/expenses or provide commercial excellence and growth strategies to the biggest companies in the world...

[Hank Kingsley 20,678]

15 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

No doubt.   It's just one data point.  The problem for me is that there are relatively few of them for me to consider for a 37-year-old small town mayor.  20 billionaires could donate to Warren today and my opinion of her wouldn't change because of all the other things I know about her from a long career. 

And that's fair. Pete has a short window to convince voters he's the right candidate. Hence the massive media blitz and fundraising efforts to get in front of the American people for as long as possible. 

 

[Hank Kingsley 20,678]

A no-name 37 year old small town mayor - with a donor email list of 7k people when he announced his exploratory committee -  is now a top 5 (I'd describe it as top of the 2nd tier at the moment) candidate and outraised everyone in Q2. 

The cynic/detractor responds with: "He is owned by the rich and corporate interests."

The optimist/supporter would say: "Holy shit. This guy's organizational and strategic skills are off the fucking charts."

[Hank Kingsley 20,678]

56 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

He sells access by doing private fundraisers for the super wealthy.  That’s how he raised $24M last quarter.  

It doesn’t mean anything except that Pete is willing to play ball like a politician.

So far counting Q1 + Q2 fundraising totals, Warren has raised around $17 million from small (less than $200) donors. Pete has raised almost $16 million from that same group.  EDIT: Got those numbers based off this info: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/07/16/us/politics/democratic-fundraising-2020.html

He's getting big and small money. And his total amount of donors is roughly 4 times the size of South Bend. 

 

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by Hank Kingsley

[Rougarou 594]

44 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

A no-name 37 year old small town mayor - with a donor email list of 7k people when he announced his exploratory committee -  is now a top 5 (I'd describe it as top of the 2nd tier at the moment) candidate and outraised everyone in Q2. 

The cynic/detractor responds with: "He is owned by the rich and corporate interests."

The optimist/supporter would say: "Holy shit. This guy's organizational and strategic skills are off the fucking charts."

Don't you dare drag me back and get me to start believing again! My heart can't take it!

[Hank Kingsley 20,678]

3 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Don't you dare drag me back and get me to start believing again! My heart can't take it!

He's still a long shot. But I wouldn't count him out just yet. 

 

[Rougarou 594]

Just now, Hank Kingsley said:

He's still a long shot. But I wouldn't count him out just yet. 

 

It's just easier emotionally to move on and latch on to Warren (or whomever you would choose) than go all-in with an underdog I feel like.

[henrygandorf 29,174]

it's not like he's going to go away.  he'll be a force in the party for as long as he wants to be involved in politics.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

Yeah, Pete ain’t winning this nomination but he couldn’t have done a better job laying his foundation as a force to be reckoned with for the foreseeable future.

[BradInATX 9,208]

A no-name 37 year old small town mayor - with a donor email list of 7k people when he announced his exploratory committee -  is now a top 5 (I'd describe it as top of the 2nd tier at the moment) candidate and outraised everyone in Q2. 
The cynic/detractor responds with: "He is owned by the rich and corporate interests."
The optimist/supporter would say: "Holy shit. This guy's organizational and strategic skills are off the fucking charts."

There's no way you accomplish what he's accomplished at his age without being a great communicator and incredibly effective at whatever it is he's doing on a day in day out basis. Especially given that, from what I know anyway, he doesn't come from super-wealth. And especially especially as a gay man in Indiana.

He's great. Unfortunately I agree with Rougarou that he's done this cycle. But I hope he hangs around. Pretty sure he will.

[BradInATX 9,208]

Or, what hugo just said..

[Jive Turkey 12,568]

 

[Prepuce of Doom 20,983]

11 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

I'll admit that I like Biden and have for a long time, but he's clearly past it. Speaking was his forte, now he has to be terribly careful and he still struggles. It's sad that his moment has come too late, and that time has passed him by.

I'd happily vote for him over Trump, but I'd like to get started changing the country with somebody else.

He would have been the president if he ran in 2016. I get that his son died, etc., but his willingness to step aside for Hillary is an oft-overlooked but absolutely indisputable reason for why we're in this fucking conundrum in the first place, and I can't believe that nobody has thrown that back in his face during any of the debates thus far. 

Thanks for nothing, Uncle Joe. 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

3 minutes ago, Prepuce of Doom said:

He would have been the president if he ran in 2016. I get that his son died, etc., but his willingness to step aside for Hillary is an oft-overlooked but absolutely indisputable reason for why we're in this fucking conundrum in the first place, and I can't believe that nobody has thrown that back in his face during any of the debates thus far. 

Thanks for nothing, Uncle Joe. 

You must not know any Hillary PUMAs.  There are enough of them that it will kill a campaign to attack her like that. They still hold it against Bernie that he had the gall to run against her and delay the anointing. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,277]

You must not know any Hillary PUMAs.  There are enough of them that it will kill a campaign to attack her like that. They still hold it against Bernie that he had the gall to run against her and delay the anointing. 

That’s why the Bernie Bro thing is bullshit. More Hillary primary voters voted for McCain than Bernie voters voted for Trump.

[Underdog 28,446]

3 hours ago, Rougarou said:

It's just easier emotionally to move on and latch on to Warren (or whomever you would choose) than go all-in with an underdog I feel like.

I appreciate it. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

I swear to gawd y’all gotta let Hillary go.  You should all be thankful she’s not running now.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

My ultimate argument for Warren's electability is that she's the best person to unite the Hillary and Bernie factions of the party (along with everyone else). 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,277]

I swear to gawd y’all gotta let Hillary go.  You should all be thankful she’s not running now.

Do you see evidence that Democrats learned and have applied the Important lessons to be learned from 2016? It’s not about Hillary Clinton. It’s about not losing to Trump again.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

Do you see evidence that Democrats learned and have applied the Important lessons to be learned from 2016? It’s not about Hillary Clinton. It’s about not losing to Trump again.

I see no evidence.  Their out of touch cowardly complacent asses need to go too. 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

9 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Do you see evidence that Democrats learned and have applied the Important lessons to be learned from 2016? It’s not about Hillary Clinton. It’s about not losing to Trump again.

IMO the fact that there is a real competition for the nomination among several major candidates reflects the most important lesson learned. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

[troph 24,562]

IMO the fact that there is a real competition for the nomination among several major candidates reflects the most important lesson learned. 

This race really hasn’t even started and whomever comes out is going to be supremely battle tested.

[BradInATX 9,208]

IMO the fact that there is a real competition for the nomination among several major candidates reflects the most important lesson learned. 

It's definitely a testament to the quality of this year's field that the 2016 runner up is an also ran this time around.

[RollLeft 5,040]

Warren/O'Rourke is the best possible shot at a win.  The woman + his minority/ginger vote + her appealing to both the fly overs and east coasters + his appeal to the youth and persuadable s + money on both sides + his major social media ground game. 

Buttplug is too inexperienced.  Booker has more backing than Harris.  Biden is a fucking joke and needs to be put out to pasture, quick.  Those who want to see the world burn will want Sanders but it appears he has lost momentum.  Oh yeah Iowa is fucking out of touch with those polls a few pages back.  Fuck them.    

Edited August 10, 2019 by RollLeft

[HenryJames 65,887]

 

[bad_teammate 13,132]

 

This is the ideal male body, you may not like it, but this is what peak performance looks like.

[troph 24,562]

What is it with straight old men and their orangutan bellies?

[Message Board User 12,389]

18 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

59 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

This is the ideal male body, you may not like it, but this is what peak performance looks like.

Gotta hand it to Bernie - I hope I look that good when I'm 113.

[bolverk 29,397]

17 minutes ago, troph said:

What is it with straight old men and their orangutan bellies?

I've got a "Gut Feeling" it's related to Devo-lution

 

Edited August 10, 2019 by bolverk
And beer. Are we not men?