2020 Democratic Nominee

[GSU&UT 1799]

10 minutes ago, Tuco said:

It's an issue, because people perceive it as an issue.  Older more moderate voters read the NYT , which included the following less than a month ago: 

Maybe it's all bullshit, but I know my wife (Warren supporter, and progressive activist) fucking despises the Bernie Bros.  So, if the only response to these stories is "whatabout the media" or "whatabout Clinton supporters four years ago", it will hurt Bernie, and that means it hurts the chances of getting rid of Trump. For what it's worth, I don't think Bernie is driving this.  I think there are plenty of pissed off people on the Democratic-ish side who are drawn to Bernie as a candidate, in part because he's not a DNC favorite. 

I donated to Warren and my wife is pretty much still committed to voting for Warren and is a social worker. She's 36, uses social media less frequently than me, and I don't think I've ever heard her complain about Bernie Bros probably because she rarely watches cable news.

I've no idea if you're even white, but god damn the only people I have heard complain about Bernie Bros are generally well off white people who at at least 45 if not outright boomers. They're savvy enough to use social media and just cannot fathom why he has a rabid fan base or they do absolutely no research of their own outside of listening to media pundits who cannot stand the fact that they get ratio'd on twitter. I try not to be a dick unless I know for a fact someone is being disingenuous and wouldn't ever vote for Bernie (usually never-Trumper conservatives), but for so many of us, and there are a lot of women who get nasty as shit on twitter in defense of Bernie, this isn't some game. This is real life and death situations and we aren't going to move forward enough, especially with climate change, with little steps.

I've said this before, I don't care if you don't vote for Bernie and don't want to vote for him in the general because we were the ones who were blamed for Trump, even though I and damn near ever Bernie supporter I know voted for Hillary. I can only tell people like your wife to really look at who is the most passionate, even on twitter, because it's a hell of a lot of non-white people and women. This isn't 2016, it's 2020 and you'll see how many people who really inspires by taking a look at who shows up to his rallies in Texas, Nevada, Washington, California.

Edited February 18, 2020 by GSU&UT

[Biff Tannen 46173]

13 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

I was planning on voting for her in the primary and the eventual nominee in the general, but now I'll likely vote for Bernie in the primary.

Why will she lose your primary vote?  Because she's behind?  That only puts her further behind.

[Zonahorn 8079]

What the fuck?

 

[Biff Tannen 46173]

14 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Because this is a repeat of 2016 in reverse. The Democrats though Trump would be the easiest to defeat, Hillary and Bill wanted him to win, and they completely failed to see what actually appealed to enough people. Republicans think saying Socialist enough times over (which is what they've done since Obama and it doesn't work as well anymore) about someone who will lean into that label will be enough.

I hope you're right, but this is also a big risk.  I think the SOCIALISM scare tactic works better than we would like to admit.

[Zonahorn 8079]

Thins going well for Amy in Nevada

 

 

[Dropout 355]

3 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Why will she lose your primary vote?  Because she's behind?  That only puts her further behind.

Biff... she’s done.

[Js1 87199]

Quote

 

In a Sooner Survey poll, 20% of past Oklahoma Democratic primary voters said they’d vote for Bloomberg on March 3, followed by 14% for Bernie Sanders, 12% for Joe Biden and 11% for Pete Buttigieg.

Elizabeth Warren had 8% of past Democratic primary voters' support, while Amy Klobuchar had 6%. Another 7% of voters said they would support other candidates, 9% said they are undecided and 14% said they probably won't vote.

 

Bloomberg is going to eat into some states Sanders was supposed to win. 

[Biff Tannen 46173]

9 minutes ago, Dropout said:

Biff... she’s done.

Username checks out

Also:

Edited February 18, 2020 by Biff Tannen

[bad_teammate 13560]

9 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Why will she lose your primary vote?  Because she's behind?  That only puts her further behind.

I am NOT arguing that people should think or do this, but some people choose to vote strategically.

So let's say you've got Warren #1, you kind of like Bernie (but hate b_t and the bros), and you really dislike Biden and Bloomberg.

Then let's say Liz is 3rd in Iowa (Bernie 1st), Liz is 4th in NH (Bernie 1st), Liz is 3rd in Nevada (Bernie 1st), Liz is 4th in South Carolina (Bernie 2nd).

You're in a Super Tuesday state, what do you do? Well, you could go with your heart and help Liz shoot for the moon. (This is what I think people should do, personally, I dislike people voting like pundits. People should vote values and policy.) OR you could say to yourself, "She doesn't have a shot, but my vote MIGHT actually prevent what I consider to be a bad outcome" and you vote for the candidate most likely to beat the candidates you really dislike.

That's the case for Warren Lads to vote with the Bros. If you love her policy, you will get that (AND MORE!) with Bernie and you'll get very little out of a Blooomberg presidency.

[bad_teammate 13560]

Also, the sooner she drops out (if it's looking bad) then the sooner this doomed-to-fail kamikaze mission she's running against Sanders can end and the unification can begin. Again, that's not me saying that's what SHOULD happen, but it's a thought people are having.

more and more are saying it, believe me

[GSU&UT 1799]

I don't think Sanders is supposed to win Oklahoma, Arkansas, or Alabama. You can tell what he's focusing on by where's had his huge rallies, mostly the biggest super Tuesday states. It's been North Carolina, Texas, California, and Washington. Virginia is probably where he needs to focus next given that poll that just dropped showing him tied with Blooms.

[Js1 87199]

2 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

I don't think Sanders is supposed to win Oklahoma, Arkansas, or Alabama. You can tell what he's focusing on by where's had his huge rallies, mostly the biggest super Tuesday states. It's been North Carolina, Texas, California, and Washington. Virginia is probably where he needs to focus next given that poll that just dropped showing him tied with Blooms.

He won it by 10 points in 2016 and is favored by 538 to win it.  Just saying.  He is supposed to, by the numbers. 

[Zonahorn 8079]

3 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

I don't think Sanders is supposed to win Oklahoma, Arkansas, or Alabama. You can tell what he's focusing on by where's had his huge rallies, mostly the biggest super Tuesday states. It's been North Carolina, Texas, California, and Washington. Virginia is probably where he needs to focus next given that poll that just dropped showing him tied with Blooms.

He won Oklahoma in 2016 by double digits.

[Dropout 355]

7 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Username checks out

Also:

Y’all use that too often. It’d mean more if every time someone said it they weren’t dead wrong.

[bad_teammate 13560]

Yep.

For the next 3+ cycles, there are going to be attacks on any candidate who endorsed Michael Bloomberg. This is red meat for all progressive challengers.

[bad_teammate 13560]

2 minutes ago, Calihorn said:

He won Oklahoma in 2016 by double digits.

Ain't no Hillary in this race. She was/is a PROFOUNDLY hated human being.

[GSU&UT 1799]

Okay, fair, but this isn't 2016 and he knows that he got destroyed in the more diverse states last time and therefore is focusing on changing that. If Bloomberg beats him by two or three points in Oklahoma but barely makes it above 15% and loses by possibly double digits in California then that more than makes up the difference.

[Zonahorn 8079]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Ain't no Hillary in this race. She was/is a PROFOUNDLY hated human being.

I'm aware, I was just pointing out why Oklahoma matters for Bernie.

1 minute ago, GSU&UT said:

Okay, fair, but this isn't 2016 and he knows that he got destroyed in the more diverse states last time and therefore is focusing on changing that. If Bloomberg beats him by two or three points in Oklahoma but barely makes it above 15% and loses by possibly double digits in California then that more than makes up the difference.

It wouldn't hurt to win.

[GSU&UT 1799]

Given that Bernie isn't going to outspend Bloomberg by any means he'll have to accept some loses somewhere and use his funds wisely. There's no chance that Bloomberg doesn't pickup a lot of delegates and probably a couple of states on Super Tuesday with spending damn near half a billion dollars at this point.

[heso 2863]

Fighting for 37 delegates on a day where 1,344 are up for grabs in a state that trump will win by 35 points is a waste of resources unless you have a few billion to spend on the campaign. 

[triplehorn 2664]

42 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Msnbc had a temper tantrum this morning. One dude told a fellow commentator, who happens to be black, "Mike apologized!!1! for stop and frisk." another guy said Bernie would lose 40 states to Donald. Lulz the Bern has the establishment shook. 

I don't see how it could be anyone but Bernie at this point. I wanted Liz bad, she's who we need. I was planning on voting for her in the primary and the eventual nominee in the general, but now I'll likely vote for Bernie in the primary.

There's a massive disconnect somewhere and I can't figure it out. Bern energizes the base, polls well nationally, and the only thing that can be used against him is ahhh SoCiaLisM1?!! Bloomberg is a good option for moderates to rally behind, but I can't imagine what shit they can use against him in the general. I'm guessing stop and frisk is nothing compared to whatever else they can dig up. From what I see, Bernie is the far better candidate and much more likely to beat Donald.....so what's going on? Why are Donald fans praying to face Bernie? If he's polling well nationally why are pundits claiming he'll lose 49 states? 

 

Trump interests aside, in my view, the disconnect arises from Liz arguably being a bigger threat to the establishment than the Sandman, a threat to big banks in particular.  Maybe BS has detailed plans to rein in the banksters doing the next bankster thing, and that whole other world of offshore banking and international money laundering into the US, but I haven'y heard much about it from him.  It'd be great if he does and he's serious, just that Liz is taking it head on.  Follow the money.  That IS the establishment.

[bad_teammate 13560]

9 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

Unless of course Bloomberg wins and becomes President, in which case all those progressive challengers will be told to eat shit.

By whom?

[Hank Scorpio 17924]

 

 

[henrygandorf 29227]

3 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

9 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

ugh, you still don’t get it. 

You will gain a new understanding after The Procedure.

yeah, you're kinda missing the point.

pretend procedures aside, we don't want to become bernie bros.  we're not interested in that.  and we don't need to be.  for the vast majority of us, the minute bernie wins the nomination, we're on board.  lock, stock, and barrel.  let's fucking do this.

we don't need a crusade or a revolution.  we're about beating trump, and we will do whatever we need to do to get him the fuck out of the white house.  democrats fall in love, republicans fall in line.  we need to fall in line.  whether it's behind bernie, klobuchar, or a box of curly fries.  and that's what we're prepared to do.  there's too much at stake on this one.

[Js1 87199]

Arbys or Jack in the Box curly fries?

Because I can't commit until I know. 

[bad_teammate 13560]

2 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

yeah, you're kinda missing the point.

You're not going to miss the point...

of the needle

when I personally inject you with communism.

[bad_teammate 13560]

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Arbys or Jack in the Box curly fries?

Because I can't commit until I know. 

wow look at this shitlib over here

#Pathetic

[gmr548 16702]

The downside to being everybody's second choice is being nobody's first choice. It sucks because she's awesome. 

It sucks unless this thing ends up with no delegate majority. Not that I agree with it, but I think het campaign team might be using that as a sort of hedge. It'd explain the unity pivot.

[bad_teammate 13560]

A unity candidate brings warring factions together, it doesn't stand on one side and school marm the other.

And that's fine, if Warren wants to run as the scold of the left and see how many manager-seeking women and hall monitor young people she can get, best of luck to her. But if she thinks scolding us like a mother for months, lying about Bernie being a misogynist, and doing a temper tantrum on camera and hot mic after the debate will lead to a natural pivot for her to just say, "OK, deplorables, come to mommy" then her terrible political instincts will once again be on display. Not only does a small and vocal chunk of her supporters hate us, but she does, too.

If it comes time for supporters of the non-Bernies to go to Bernie, then it will be easier because Bernie hasn't been attacking them directly. He's been making policy and values arguments. He hasn't shoved his finger in your face to call you a deplorable. He doesn't hate you, even if small and vocal chunk of his supporters hate you.

6 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

By 90% of the Democratic Party who were happy with winning.  

lol how much of the vote do you think Bernie and other progressives will be getting?

Delusion.

[bad_teammate 13560]

It's not even that I think she is actively seeking out being the scold, I just think she's terrible at dealing with difficult politics. Headline-seeking journalists put a rake in front of her in the laziest and most obvious way and she steps on it EVERY TIME.

[triplehorn 2664]

47 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Trump interests aside, in my view, the disconnect arises from Liz arguably being a bigger threat to the establishment than the Sandman, a threat to big banks in particular.  Maybe BS has detailed plans to rein in the banksters doing the next bankster thing, and that whole other world of offshore banking and international money laundering into the US, but I haven'y heard much about it from him.  It'd be great if he does and he's serious, just that Liz is taking it head on.  Follow the money.  That IS the establishment.

crickets.

[henrygandorf 29227]

8 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

If it comes time for supporters of the non-Bernies to go to Bernie, then it will be easier because Bernie hasn't been attacking them directly. He's been making policy and values arguments. He hasn't shoved his finger in your face to call you a deplorable. He doesn't hate you, even if small and vocal chunk of his supporters hate you.

we already have a poll showing 90%+ will go to bernie if he gets the nomination.  it has absolutely zero to do with who was or wasn't mean.

[bad_teammate 13560]

2 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

crickets.

In 2018, Bernie introduced the "Too Big to Fail, Too Big to Exist" bill in the Senate with a House co-sponsor. The bill would determine which firms would be considered "too big to fail" and would require them to be broken up and would...

"Require the breakup of JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and Morgan Stanley within one year of enactment."

He also wants to Get Money out of Politics:

• Ban all corporate contributions to the Democratic Party Convention and all related committees, and as President he would ban all corporate donations for inaugural events and cap individual donations at $500.
• Abolish the now-worthless FEC and replace it with the Federal Election Administration, a true law enforcement agency originally proposed by former Senators John McCain and Russ Feingold.
• Enacting mandatory public financing laws for all federal elections.
• Updating and strengthen the Federal Election Campaign Act to return to a system of mandatory public funding for National Party Conventions.
• Passing a Constitutional Amendment that makes clear that money is not speech and corporations are not people.

 

[bad_teammate 13560]

4 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

we already have a poll showing 90%+ will go to bernie if he gets the nomination.

Yes, and  was simply explaining why that is.

[Aqua Buddha 14807]

5 hours ago, Calihorn said:

Holy shit Aqua, he's above 30%!!!!

 

Maybe.  Maybe not.  Still don't know why the Biden people are hanging on.

 

[henrygandorf 29227]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Yes, and  was simply explaining why that is.

that 90% wasn't specific to bernie.

stop sleeping on curly fries.

[henrygandorf 29227]

4 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Maybe.  Maybe not.  Still don't know why the Biden people are hanging on.

 

not sure i trust polls conducted entirely in tom steyer's living room.

[F250 29202]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Yep.

For the next 3+ cycles, there are going to be attacks on any candidate who endorsed Michael Bloomberg. This is red meat for all progressive challengers.

[Zonahorn 8079]

3 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Maybe.  Maybe not.  Still don't know why the Biden people are hanging on.

 

Pete with that hot 4% among AA voters and 7% among Latino voters

[bad_teammate 13560]

2 minutes ago, F250 said:

I'm thinkin' more...

[triplehorn 2664]

19 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

In 2018, Bernie introduced the "Too Big to Fail, Too Big to Exist" bill in the Senate with a House co-sponsor. The bill would determine which firms would be considered "too big to fail" and would require them to be broken up and would...

"Require the breakup of JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and Morgan Stanley within one year of enactment."

He also wants to Get Money out of Politics:

• Ban all corporate contributions to the Democratic Party Convention and all related committees, and as President he would ban all corporate donations for inaugural events and cap individual donations at $500.
• Abolish the now-worthless FEC and replace it with the Federal Election Administration, a true law enforcement agency originally proposed by former Senators John McCain and Russ Feingold.
• Enacting mandatory public financing laws for all federal elections.
• Updating and strengthen the Federal Election Campaign Act to return to a system of mandatory public funding for National Party Conventions.
• Passing a Constitutional Amendment that makes clear that money is not speech and corporations are not people.

 

^^^ That stuff really misses it.

 

Warren actually understands it:

"This week, the Warren Campaign put out its plan to “rein in Wall Street” – their words not mine – including some hyper-specific proposals to completely blow up the private equity business model and offer access to plain vanilla banking services directly from the Federal government.

Elizabeth Warren is a much more dangerous candidate for the banking industry than Bernie Sanders ever was, because Warren actually understands how all this stuff works, while Bernie just shouts the loudest. She’s done the research. She’s documented all the ways in which finance acts counterproductively for the economy and channels more of the available wealth to its own executives – in many cases while laying the risk off onto other parties and even regular people.

[...]

My plan would transform the private equity industry and end this looting with a comprehensive set of legal changes, including:

Putting private equity firms on the hook for the debts of companies they buy, making them responsible for the downside of their investments so that they only make money if the companies they control flourish.

-Holding private equity firms responsible for certain pension obligations of the companies they buy, so that workers have a better shot of getting the retirement funds they earned.

-Eliminating the ability of private equity firms to pay themselves huge monitoring fees and limiting their ability to pay out dividends to line their own pockets.

-Changing the tax rules so that private equity firms don’t get sweetheart tax rates on all the debt they put on the companies they buy.

-Modifying bankruptcy rules so that when companies go bust, workers have a better shot at getting pay and benefits and executives can’t pocket special bonuses.

-Preventing lenders and investment managers from making reckless loans to private equity-owned companies already swimming in debt and then passing along the danger to the market by requiring them to retain some of the risk.

-Empowering investors like pension funds with better information about the performance and effects of private equity investments and preventing private equity funds from requiring investors to waive their fiduciary obligations.

-Closing the carried interest loophole that lets firm managers pay ultra-low tax rates on the money they loot.

Like a skilled acupuncturist, she knows all the pressure points. Even if you disagree with her violently negative view of finance, you have to admit that she understands and articulates how it works, and how it fails, better than anyone else who has ever run for President.

In a world where Warren becomes the Democratic nominee for President, you would see the entirety of the financial services lobby work furiously to reelect President Trump (and, by extension, Mick Mulvaney), who have done more to deregulate the sector in two and a half years than any President (and advisor) in modern history, including Bill Clinton and Robert Rubin in the mid 90’s."

 

Edited February 18, 2020 by triplehorn
https://medium.com/@teamwarren/end-wall-streets-stranglehold-on-our-economy-70cf038bac76

[Aqua Buddha 14807]

8 minutes ago, Calihorn said:

Pete with that hot 4% among AA voters and 7% among Latino voters

Yeah, it’s why he’s always been DOA after NH.

[Zonahorn 8079]

1 minute ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Yeah, it’s why he’s always been DOA after NH.

Amy too

[Zonahorn 8079]

Nothing wrong with this at all

[Biff Tannen 46173]

4 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

^^^ That stuff really misses it.

 

Warren actually understands it:

"This week, the Warren Campaign put out its plan to “rein in Wall Street” – their words not mine – including some hyper-specific proposals to completely blow up the private equity business model and offer access to plain vanilla banking services directly from the Federal government.

Elizabeth Warren is a much more dangerous candidate for the banking industry than Bernie Sanders ever was, because Warren actually understands how all this stuff works, while Bernie just shouts the loudest. She’s done the research. She’s documented all the ways in which finance acts counterproductively for the economy and channels more of the available wealth to its own executives – in many cases while laying the risk off onto other parties and even regular people.

[...]

My plan would transform the private equity industry and end this looting with a comprehensive set of legal changes, including:

Putting private equity firms on the hook for the debts of companies they buy, making them responsible for the downside of their investments so that they only make money if the companies they control flourish.

-Holding private equity firms responsible for certain pension obligations of the companies they buy, so that workers have a better shot of getting the retirement funds they earned.

-Eliminating the ability of private equity firms to pay themselves huge monitoring fees and limiting their ability to pay out dividends to line their own pockets.

-Changing the tax rules so that private equity firms don’t get sweetheart tax rates on all the debt they put on the companies they buy.

-Modifying bankruptcy rules so that when companies go bust, workers have a better shot at getting pay and benefits and executives can’t pocket special bonuses.

-Preventing lenders and investment managers from making reckless loans to private equity-owned companies already swimming in debt and then passing along the danger to the market by requiring them to retain some of the risk.

-Empowering investors like pension funds with better information about the performance and effects of private equity investments and preventing private equity funds from requiring investors to waive their fiduciary obligations.

-Closing the carried interest loophole that lets firm managers pay ultra-low tax rates on the money they loot.

Like a skilled acupuncturist, she knows all the pressure points. Even if you disagree with her violently negative view of finance, you have to admit that she understands and articulates how it works, and how it fails, better than anyone else who has ever run for President.

In a world where Warren becomes the Democratic nominee for President, you would see the entirety of the financial services lobby work furiously to reelect President Trump (and, by extension, Mick Mulvaney), who have done more to deregulate the sector in two and a half years than any President (and advisor) in modern history, including Bill Clinton and Robert Rubin in the mid 90’s."

 

Yep.  We are going to fuck this up so bad.  See y'all on the Ledge.

[bad_teammate 13560]

Warren has wonderful ideas. That's why Bernie's campaign researched if someone could be VP and Treasury Secretary at the same time. That's why Bernie wanted her to run in 2016 and asked her personally to do so.

The ideal situation from the perspective of Sandersworld is a highly-empowered Warren taking a flamethrower to the financial sector on behalf of working people.

I apologize if I don't take "That stuff really misses it" as serious, substantive commentary.

[Tuco 5094]

1 hour ago, GSU&UT said:

I've no idea if you're even white, but god damn the only people I have heard complain about Bernie Bros are generally well off white people who at at least 45 if not outright boomers.

And what percentage of the voting population do you think that would include?

1 hour ago, tantric superman said:

It is.  Its certainly a bullshit reason to have a big effect on one's vote.

Well, 90% of the negative shit people* believed about Hillary Clinton was bullshit.  Failing to address it is a problem. 

* not just reliable Republican voters. 

[GSU&UT 1799]

3 minutes ago, Tuco said:

And what percentage of the voting population do you think that would include?

Not big enough imo, it's a percentage that is slowly shrinking from the overall picture as more younger and more diverse people come of voting age. These were the people who were actively courted last time and couldn't stomach Hillary enough to stop Trump, I don't think it's fair to all the other groups of people of color and extremely poor who are much dire straights to entertain this idea that the only way to beat Trump is by tone policing on social media.

Edited February 18, 2020 by GSU&UT

[triplehorn 2664]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I apologize if I don't take "That stuff really misses it" as serious, substantive commentary.

I'm just being brief and to the point.

[Biff Tannen 46173]

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Warren has wonderful ideas. That's why Bernie's campaign researched if someone could be VP and Treasury Secretary at the same time. That's why Bernie wanted her to run in 2016 and asked her personally to do so.

The ideal situation from the perspective of Sandersworld is a highly-empowered Warren taking a flamethrower to the financial sector on behalf of working people.

I apologize if I don't take "That stuff really misses it" as serious, substantive commentary.

Need Warren to stay in the Senate if she loses.  She would be replaced by an R if she went VP or cabinet route.