2020 Democratic Nominee

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

14 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Oh I know. But neither Bernie nor Biden loses Michigan, Wisconsin or Pennsylvania, which means trump has no path to victory. 

Biden totally loses those states. The idea that he is a true son of the Rust Belt is bullshit DNC conventional wisdom. The unions have figured out that the mainstream Dems think they are squicky and have no more use for them, and Biden offers more of the same shit sandwich HRC served up. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

2 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Biden totally loses those states. The idea that he is a true son of the Rust Belt is bullshit DNC conventional wisdom. The unions have figured out that the mainstream Dems think they are squicky and have no more use for them, and Biden offers more of the same shit sandwich HRC served up. 

Wrong. Not with trump running. Trump only won those states by a total of 80k votes because of Hillary, manafort and the Russians. 

Dont nominate Hillary and ensure a fair election and trump can’t win unless he steals it again. It helps that all 3 governors are now democrats.

[tantric superman 4667]

4 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

The same was frequently said about trump in 2016. 

A shitty poster like me is right once every four years.

[Aqua Buddha 14596]

Watching Colbert.  Pete is on during two segments.  The commercial between the segments had a 60 segment Bloomberg ad.  Lulz.

[staboner 4969]

2 hours ago, Message Board User said:

I read this article today and thought it was, at the very least, food for thought.  

This woman's theory - voters are motivated more by negative partisanship (beating the other side) than anything else these days and it's all about which base is more motivated.

 

No! 

*clutching my pearls of obviousnessness*

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

[bad_teammate 13195]

2016 losers stay mad

[Hank Kingsley 20934]

 

[Fozzz 152]

We know the rat clearly lost the popular vote in Iowa, and it's anyone's guess who has the most SDEs, and yet he is receiving the post-Iowa poll surge because of the ratfucking from the IDP, the DNC, and the rat's campaign.  Even the data guys at the NYT and CNN are appalled by what has happened in Iowa with the IDP releasing results they must know are riddled with errors.  

[washparkhorn 9939]

Bloomberg: Bernie Sanders would have beaten Donald Trump - but he didn't get the nomination for a variety of reasons.

Today - Center-Right/Right Democrats are planning a repeat of 2016 - and we are in the "variety of reasons" stage. 

[Fozzz 152]

lol even Kloby's support is more balanced and her entire campaign is premised on telling working class Americans to go fuck themselves

 

[Aqua Buddha 14596]

15 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

Biden’s support going to Pete.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

7 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Biden’s support going to Pete.

Biden is falling and he can't get up.

[bonnieblue 542]

 

 

[GSU&UT 1798]

LOL I posted that on another forum and Pete-lovers got so mad, as if those kind of dumbshit platitudes that you'd seen in a middle school classroom aren't the only thing he has left. That's shit older most well-off eat up and it's why he had almost no support from anyone under 40 in Iowa and non-white groups.

[Biff Tannen 45683]

5 minutes ago, bonnieblue said:

 

 

I mean, it's pretty accurate.  Our democracy is fucking broken and corrupt, so until that is addressed, none of the policy issues mean jack shit.  Healthcare?  Get the fuck outta here.  Climate?  Please.  NONE OF THIS MEANS FUCK ALL IF YOU DON'T STOP CORRUPTION.  

Hence my vote for Warren.

[bonnieblue 542]

2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I mean, it's pretty accurate.  Our democracy is fucking broken and corrupt, so until that is addressed, none of the policy issues mean jack shit.  Healthcare?  Get the fuck outta here.  Climate?  Please.  NONE OF THIS MEANS FUCK ALL IF YOU DON'T STOP CORRUPTION.  

Hence my vote for Warren.

Agreed on both counts - I just thought it was funny.

 

Also, even though Pete annoys me, I would run through a brick wall for him if he's the nominee.

[henrygandorf 29191]

20 minutes ago, bonnieblue said:

 

 

if he's such a rat-faced piece of garbage, you'd think there would be better examples to attack on twitter.  but sigh, here we are.

yes, he probably shouldn't have posted it without context, and i'm assuming he didn't, one of his social media team did.

just to give a slight bit of background, here's actually how that quote came to be - in his nh town hall last night, after about 40 minutes of answering specific questions, a high-school teacher asked him "if you could only fix one thing when you got into office, what would it be?" 

he was perplexed, and did some hemming and hawing, and was like "wow, that's a really tough question, because there's so much we need to address.  there's climate, there's healthcare, blah blah, so i guess if i was forced to answer (cuomo egged him on, and was like "nope, you can only pick one") i would say the broken system, the current system of govt we have right now, and the way it's structured (he had mentioned mcconnell's senate multiple times throughout the night), that the shape of our democracy is the one thing that can be fixed that could affect all the other things, and how we actually get things done that will help this country."

you would think after 6 months of progressive twitter coming after him for every single thing he does or says (or things he did or said 12 years ago), that he (or his team) would figure it out a little better.  there were plenty of good soundbytes from last night and the past week that were better than this.

[bad_teammate 13195]

Declaring victory when you lost the popular vote and are tied for actual delegates because you are ahead one-tenth of one percent on a delegate allocation variable is a rat move. It's a politically smart move, but it's a rat move.

Calling a coalition of extremely good and progressive groups like the Sunrise Movement "dark money" is a rat move. A politically smart move, but a rat move.

There's two!

[henrygandorf 29191]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Declaring victory when you lost the popular vote and are tied for actual delegates because you are ahead one-tenth of one percent on a delegate allocation variable is a rat move. It's a politically smart move, but it's a rat move.

Calling a coalition of extremely good and progressive groups like the Sunrise Movement "dark money" is a rat move. A politically smart move, but a rat move.

There's two!

congratulations, you're a better twitter poster than a bushel of ana kasparians.

and i agree, pete should've never declared victory in iowa when he (checks notes) won iowa.

[bad_teammate 13195]

1) He didn't win Iowa.

2) He certainly had no reason to believe he did on the night itself.

Also, Ana rules.

[henrygandorf 29191]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

1) He didn't win Iowa.

2) He certainly had no reason to believe he did on the night itself.

Also, Ana rules.

the networks that report on results say he won iowa.  your post from 15 minutes ago said he won iowa.  the conspiracy was perfectly timed to let pete know he won iowa right after bernie's townhall and right before pete's, right?  i mean, what other information do you need?

as for #2, he had campaign people/volunteers at almost all of the 1700 precincts or whatever they're calling them.  they were relaying numbers in much quicker than official results were rolling in.  both pete and bernie's campaign had then and still have now a much better sense of the actual results.

iowa isn't a black-and-white winner-take-all situation, and iowa was a win for pete.  bad news is still news, friendo.

[bad_teammate 13195]

3 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

the networks that report on results say he won iowa. 

The talking heads on those networks say he won Iowa. The actual numbers people on those networks (and elsewhere) say it can't be called.

The SDE measurement is down to 0.1% and there are multiple inaccuracies in the data as reported by networks (not just other campaigns).

ABC, NBC, NYT, and AP won't call the race even with 100% reporting from IDP using the asinine measurement of SDE.

None, however, dispute the popular count calls, which Bernie won.

Bernie won Iowa.

Quote

 the conspiracy was perfectly timed to let pete know he won iowa right after bernie's townhall and right before pete's, right?

The timing was to give CNN an excuse to say that, obviously, but that doesn't make it real.

Which you understand.

 

 

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

Y’all are going to have to bear with me as I come to terms with this race appearing to come down to Bernie vs. Pete.

If those two end up the final two, slap my ass and call me a Bernie Bro.

Because while I dislike both groups of supporters (Bernie’s are aggressive assholes, Pete’s are passive aggressive assholes) and don’t love either candidate, I at least find Bernie to be consistent, genuine, and an actual true believer.

Pete is just a malleable paper doll that can be dressed up to fit any situation.

And I much prefer grumpy honesty to smarmy pandering.

Bernie’s policies are closer to my beliefs and I don’t believe he’ll shift because of polling or the influence of Blue Check Nation.

And as much as I cannot stand some of Bernie’s staff (Sirota can eat glass), I absolutely despise Lis Smith and I don’t want her anywhere near the Oval Office.

Finally, Chasten is a BEC for me. He makes my eyeballs itch.

Goddamn, it’s a political Sophie’s Choice.

I’m going to go barf now.

[henrygandorf 29191]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

The talking heads on those networks say he won Iowa. The actual numbers people on those networks (and elsewhere) say it can't be called.

The SDE measurement is down to 0.1% and there are multiple inaccuracies in the data as reported by networks (not just other campaigns).

ABC, NBC, NYT, and AP won't call the race even with 100% reporting from IDP using the asinine measurement of SDE.

None, however, dispute the popular count calls, which Bernie won.

Bernie won Iowa.

weird, i guess hillary clinton is the president, then?

21 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The timing was to give CNN an excuse to say that, obviously, but that doesn't make it real.

Which you understand.

i had actually seen those numbers about 30 minutes earlier, but i prefer the narrative that they were released right at 6:59pm or whatever.

such intrigue!

[washparkhorn 9939]

3 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

If those two end up the final two, slap my ass and call me a Bernie Bro.

Welcome. Women supporting Sanders are fierce and changing minds. Here is another new Bernie Bro and her story:

https://www.elle.com/life-love/a30551979/bernie-sanders-medicare-for-all/

I Hated Bernie Bros Until I Loved And Lost One

About 45,000 people in the US die every year from not having health insurance. My boyfriend was one of them.

Spoiler

. . . About 45,000 people in the US die every year from not having insurance. Sometimes the causes are obvious—a lack of insulin or a cancerous tumor that goes unchecked. But there are also more insidious, cumulative circumstances that lead to the same conclusion. One morning Raghav didn’t wake up, and he never would again.

After his death, I was steeped in a kind of pain I didn’t know was possible—heavy, consuming, shattering. I finally understood how Raghav felt all the time. I got into secular Buddhism, muted happy couples on Instagram. I painted my room teal and decorated, trying to make it look like a place I could someday, one day, have sex again. I stormed out on a friend who suggested Raghav died because of astrology. The only thing that really helped was trying to better understand Raghav’s politics. I followed the journalists he followed on Twitter and read his favorite political authors. I retraced his steps to understand how he’d make sense of a tragedy like this. 

I didn’t grieve alone. Raghav’s Bernie Bro friends were not a bunch of sexists after all. Some were socialist feminist women, some were great guys. In the months that followed Raghav’s death, they made sure I ate and didn’t isolate myself. We’ve since stayed up till 3 a.m. working on jokes and talking a lot about Bernie Sanders. This weekend, all of us, including Jake, are heading to New Hampshire to canvass for Bernie, the only 2020 candidate who unequivocally supports for Medicare for All. I’m one of the bros now, I guess.

"Six months after we said I love you, Raghav was dead."

I recently went out to lunch with a friend I used to hate on Sanders with in 2016. She’s supporting Joe Biden now, whose healthcare plan would leave 10 million people uninsured. As well as I could, I attempted to persuade her any other candidate’s plan means people will keep dying preventable deaths—but I don’t think she was convinced. I tried not to get too mad, because before it hit home for me, I couldn’t fully grasp the reality either.

I used to think supporting Sanders would also somehow make me less of a feminist. Now I know that couldn’t be further from the truth—my feminism needs to fight for women who don’t have $500 a month to spend on health insurance premiums, for single moms working three part-time jobs and still not making ends meet, for women who can’t leave an abusive marriage because her insurance is tied to her husband’s job. In 2016, I thought Bernie was prioritizing economic issues over women’s issues—now I understand that they’re connected.

Contrary to the Bernie Bro narrative, the growing progressive movement in this country is multiracial, includes all genders, and is full of people who care deeply about creating a better world for everyone, including future generations. Anyone telling you otherwise is likely not on your side. I even kind of like when Sanders yells now, because he’s yelling for me. He’s yelling for Raghav.

 

 

[henrygandorf 29191]

23 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Y’all are going to have to bear with me as I come to terms with this race appearing to come down to Bernie vs. Pete.

If those two end up the final two, slap my ass and call me a Bernie Bro.

Because while I dislike both groups of supporters (Bernie’s are aggressive assholes, Pete’s are passive aggressive assholes) and don’t love either candidate, I at least find Bernie to be consistent, genuine, and an actual true believer.

Pete is just a malleable paper doll that can be dressed up to fit any situation.

And I much prefer grumpy honesty to smarmy pandering.

Bernie’s policies are closer to my beliefs and I don’t believe he’ll shift because of polling or the influence of Blue Check Nation.

And as much as I cannot stand some of Bernie’s staff (Sirota can eat glass), I absolutely despise Lis Smith and I don’t want her anywhere near the Oval Office.

Finally, Chasten is a BEC for me. He makes my eyeballs itch.

Goddamn, it’s a political Sophie’s Choice.

I’m going to go barf now.

and that's fair.

i don't think it's a bernie vs pete battle, tbh.  i think bloomberg is going to swing in and challenge with a nice showing on super tues, but it's bernie's race to lose.  and i have no problem with that, as i like bernie and am not on twitter enough to hate all his minions.

what's happening now is "a win" for pete, but he has no real path to the nomination.  no pete fan on this board has ever claimed otherwise.

[Aqua Buddha 14596]

Well played:

 

[bad_teammate 13195]

The shape of Pete's democracy.

 

[Fozzz 152]

51 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Y’all are going to have to bear with me as I come to terms with this race appearing to come down to Bernie vs. Pete.

If those two end up the final two, slap my ass and call me a Bernie Bro.

Because while I dislike both groups of supporters (Bernie’s are aggressive assholes, Pete’s are passive aggressive assholes) and don’t love either candidate, I at least find Bernie to be consistent, genuine, and an actual true believer.

Pete is just a malleable paper doll that can be dressed up to fit any situation.

And I much prefer grumpy honesty to smarmy pandering.

Bernie’s policies are closer to my beliefs and I don’t believe he’ll shift because of polling or the influence of Blue Check Nation.

And as much as I cannot stand some of Bernie’s staff (Sirota can eat glass), I absolutely despise Lis Smith and I don’t want her anywhere near the Oval Office.

Finally, Chasten is a BEC for me. He makes my eyeballs itch.

Goddamn, it’s a political Sophie’s Choice.

I’m going to go barf now.

I knew that when the time came you would make the right choice.  

[bad_teammate 13195]

Bama simply tell us when you're ready and we'll send you the cult manual with the harassment code words, meme-generation software on a series of floppy disks, and Bernie's secret recipe for kombucha.

 

[workswithseed 2104]

28 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The shape of Pete's democracy.

 

Hey, that's how I see Bernie. Living off the hard work of the people to do nothing of note except love all the Democratic Socialist like Cuba, Russia, Venezuela. 

 

[Chuckie Finster 22694]

This article might cause b_t to stroke out.  (I don't agree with everything Carville says, but I think he's closer to the truth than many in this thread.)

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/7/21123518/trump-2020-election-democratic-party-james-carville

Edited February 7, 2020 by Chuckie Finster

[bad_teammate 13195]

Just now, Chuckie Finster said:

This article might cause b_t to stroke out.

Look, James Carville might be hot, but I can control myself.

Oh, wait.

As to Carville's statements...

1) Turnout in Iowa wasn't low. It matched 2016 turnout.
2) Out of a field of roughly 12k candidates, why is the supposedly-low turnouts the fault of only one of those candidates? It's not Bernie's fault if turnout didn't boom. Carville doesn't even attempt an explanation, he just uses it as an excuse to rant about how much he hates Bernie.

Which is understandable, because James Carville is a right-wing Blue Dog operative from the late 80s. A Zell Miller boy who pushed messaging like this:

Yawn #NoRocko

[Fozzz 152]

Damn, I would have thought the architect of Bill's 92 campaign would be a big Bernie supporter.  

If you ask me, if the dems are serious about Trump then they're going to need to get a lot more racist.  

Edited February 7, 2020 by Fozzz

[Message Board User 12395]

6 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

This article might cause b_t to stroke out.  (I don't agree with everything Carville says, but I think he's closer to the truth than many in this thread.)

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/7/21123518/trump-2020-election-democratic-party-james-carville

Yeah if Carville wasn’t 100% right in everything he said, he was damn close.

I especially liked Carvilles blunt truth that the purpose of a political party is to acquire power.  Period.  And so many Democrats don’t seem to get that.

 

[Biff Tannen 45683]

Quote

James Carville

We have candidates on the debate stage talking about open borders and decriminalizing illegal immigration. They’re talking about doing away with nuclear energy and fracking. You’ve got Bernie Sanders talking about letting criminals and terrorists vote from jail cells. It doesn’t matter what you think about any of that, or if there are good arguments — talking about that is not how you win a national election. It’s not how you become a majoritarian party.

Aside from I guess Beto in the first part, what in god's holy name is he blathering about?  When did Bernie say let criminals and terrorists vote from jail cells?  Who is talking about no nuclear energy?

[bad_teammate 13195]

No one is calling for open borders, that is literally Trump talking points coming out of James Carville's math.

Everyday people do not care about nuclear power or fracking. They just want electricity for their houses.

The people who care deeply about putting immigrants in jail are Republicans.

Carville's advice is that we should attack Trump for wanting to cut Medicare and sucking off the global elites.

For fuck’s sake, we’ve got Trump at Davos talking about cutting Medicare and no one in the party has the sense to plaster a picture of him up there sucking up to the global elites, talking about cutting taxes for them while he’s talking about cutting Medicare back home.

This is what Bernie would do in the general election.

He's already doing it now in the primary against the people he's running against.

- He's run hits on Biden for wanting to cut Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security.
- He's running a hit right now on Buttigieg for pandering to billionaire donors in secret.

BERNIE IS ALREADY DOING THIS SHIT.

 

[bad_teammate 13195]

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

When did Bernie say let criminals and terrorists vote from jail cells? 

 

 

Quote

Who is talking about no nuclear energy?

His Green New Deal calls for a halt to nuclear energy production. One of the things I don't like.

Because I think advanced nuke plants are the future.

 

[Biff Tannen 45683]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

 

 

 

 

Oh.  Well that's not the best look.  And finishing the article, I agree with some of what Carville says.  

Definitely this about Warren:

Quote

Warren knows her stuff, and I’m particularly hard on her, because she was the star pupil, the one who was smart, had a good story. But I think she gets distracted and loses her core anti-corruption message, which resonates

 

[bad_teammate 13195]

We absolutely should allow prisoners to vote, it's a great look because it's yet another way that Bernie is taking a position today that will be seen as common sense in 10 years.

The liberal finally acknowledged that our policing and prison systems are profoundly and deeply racist. In the Clinton era, he denied it up and down. Well he's on board now so he admits today that the jails are full of people who shouldn't be there for lengths of time that are far too long because of the same racist reasons they were locked up in the first place.

But the liberal can't let them vote today, because the liberal can't realize these kinds of things until he's smashed over the head with it for a decade or so.

Then, in 2030, the liberal will forget he ever opposed it.

If you believe our criminal justice system is racist then you must acknowledge that there are men in prison who should not be.

If you believe the right to vote should be withheld prisoners then you must acknowledge that you are fine with unjustly imprisoned men being denied their most basic right as a citizen.

Unconscionable.

[bad_teammate 13195]

no war but class war

 

[Chuckie Finster 22694]

Until the day I die, I will still never understand how Kamala didn't run away with this.  

(This is not an invitation to rehash her faults, I know what they are.  But a moderate, middle-aged, African American woman seems almost perfect considering the electability debates going on now.)

Edited February 7, 2020 by Chuckie Finster

[Js1 85333]

4 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Until the day I die, I will still never understand how Kamala didn't run away with this.  

(This is not an invitation to rehash her faults, I know what they are.  But a moderate, middle-aged, African American woman seems almost perfect considering the electability debates going on now.)

Because black women have to work twice as hard to get half the credit compared to a mediocre white male candidate like Pete.
 

She had missteps of course. She also had the most negative twitter campaigns run against her.

The Bernie Bros destroyed her early with “she’s a cop” since before she ran because that’s who they are. 

[GRHorn 105]

He has a point. 

 

 

[GSU&UT 1798]

17 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Because black women have to work twice as hard to get half the credit compared to a mediocre white male candidate like Pete.
 

She had missteps of course. She also had the most negative twitter campaigns run against her.

The Bernie Bros destroyed her early with “she’s a cop” since before she ran because that’s who they are. 

Something like 80% of people polled in the Iowa caucus said they didn't use Twitter, Kamala's image problem was her own fault. Tulsi also kamikazied her.

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

13 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Because black women have to work twice as hard to get half the credit compared to a mediocre white male candidate like Pete.
 

She had missteps of course. She also had the most negative twitter campaigns run against her.

The Bernie Bros destroyed her early with “she’s a cop” since before she ran because that’s who they are. 

But she is a cop, to the core. Consider her crusade against Backpage, her grandstanding against "human trafficking omg" that has done nothing more than provide job safety for pimps and put prostitutes back on the streets. 

It's akin to a Dem adopting a drug warrior stance today. We should be moving towards the legalization and regularization of prostitution. It is never going to be stamped out and Harris, of all people knows that full well, just as she knows the dangers street prostitutes face. 

Backpage was a step towards relative freedom for prostitutes and Harris cynically exploited a scant few occasions wherein children were trafficked through the site to shut the whole thing down.  Democrats are supposed to be the party of letting women do what they want with their own bodies, not the party of moralist busybodies and the carceral state. 

[Skipper 6135]

Carville piece was great and not surprised it didn't go over well on this forum LOL.

[Hank Scorpio 17729]

 

 

[Hank Kingsley 20934]

Being dismissive and making fun of Pete on Twitter for the last 8 months has really paid off for his detractors. I'd recommend they change strategies if they want him gone.