2020 Democratic Nominee

[Js1 85574]

Just now, Hank Kingsley said:

2008 was 500 years ago.

 

2008 also involved a global economic crisis and an unpopular war. 

[Fozzz 152]

Just now, Hank Kingsley said:

2008 was 500 years ago.

 

Which would suggest that line of attack would be even less effective today with the cold war that much further in the past. 

[bad_teammate 13224]

Pete... the Cheat!?!?

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

Bloomberg laughs at that number

[Zonahorn 8079]

Just now, Cheeseweasel said:

Bloomberg laughs at that number

"That's some nice pocket change you got there Pete..."

[Huckleberry 33096]

48 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

A platform labeled “Socialism” in Texas is a losing platform. 

That is plain as day for anyone that knows the state.

It might work in the Midwest or other places, but not Texas.

You might as well run under the platform of “population control” or “bureaucracy.” 

"When Donald Trump says he wants to get rid of Socialism, what he's really saying is he wants to get rid of your Social Security."

Repeat ad infinitum on Super PAC ads until the election. Buy airtime with that commercial every 15 minutes on Fox News. Absolutely bombard Facebook with it.

Fight fire with fire. Lie if you have to.

[Js1 85574]

I'd have the Bernie campaign hold off on making fun of FEC violations by another campaign.  Didn't they have a 639 page tally after his previous run, including a $14,500 fine for illegal contributions and foreign contributions? 

[F250 28818]

It's already been pointed out that the idea that the Republicans prefer Bernie as the candidate is pretty much the same as the Democrats preferring Trump to run against Clinton in 2016. As we all know that strategy backfired. No one expected Trump to ride a populist wave to victory. I am not sure if Trump even understood the political strategy that empowered him but just started reacting to the cheers once he started yelling crazy shit. Although, I am positive Bannon had clearly read the populist tea leaves.

There are millions of disenfranchised Americans in this country and while Trump misdirected some of their anger into MAGA nothing has changed and the anger still persists. Bernie seems to be tapping deep into this reservoir of class tension and I don't think establishment Democrats realize the kind of political force this class of people will bring to the election. Or maybe they do and fear it.

 

[henrygandorf 29194]

9 minutes ago, F250 said:

Bernie seems to be tapping deep into this reservoir of class tension and I don't think establishment Democrats realize the kind of political force this class of people will bring to the election. Or maybe they do and fear it.

pretty sure most just fear the idea of four more years of trump.

[Dbeasy 15092]

"When Donald Trump says he wants to get rid of Socialism, what he's really saying is he wants to get rid of your Social Security."
Repeat ad infinitum on Super PAC ads until the election. Buy airtime with that commercial every 15 minutes on Fox News. Absolutely bombard Facebook with it.
Fight fire with fire. Lie if you have to.

Outstanding idea. The simplicity of the message is a fantastic counter to the simple-minded voters stuck on “socialism”.

[Zonahorn 8079]

POLLICIDE

 

[henrygandorf 29194]

if these polls are accurate, and bloomberg finishes 2nd, the entire process will be forever changed.

why deal with a year of vetting and debates and attacks and pandering and camping out in states like iowa and new hampshire when you can just spend money to cut the line?

[wildcat09 29387]

The Warren erasure continues:

 

[Zonahorn 8079]

1 minute ago, henrygandorf said:

if these polls are accurate, and bloomberg finishes 2nd, the entire process will be forever changed.

why deal with a year of vetting and debates and attacks and pandering and camping out in states like iowa and new hampshire when you can just spend money to cut the line?

Makes me wanna rage punch the midget and everybody he's managed to buy off into the fucking sun

[Hank Kingsley 21054]

The beginning of the end for Bloomberg's campaign starts at tomorrow night's debate. 

I hope. 

It must. 

 

[henrygandorf 29194]

1 minute ago, Calihorn said:

Makes me wanna rage punch the midget and everybody he's managed to buy off into the fucking sun

certainly devalues every endorsement he gets, but the twitter noise will make that more complicated to keep track of.

[henrygandorf 29194]

Just now, Hank Kingsley said:

The beginning of the end for Bloomberg's campaign starts at tomorrow night's debate. 

I hope. 

It must. 

 

which brings me to another point.

why the f is he participating?  he could've easily gotten out of it.

[henrygandorf 29194]

2 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

It’s crazy to see Bernie unchanged.  With Trump in 2016, everybody always assumed R primary voters were Trump or Not Trump.  Which that would have made sense, but it wasn’t true.  Every time someone dropped out, Trump would pick up more of that person’s support than the others still in the race like Cruz or Kasich.  At least in this poll, the faltering candidates saw their support go to other non-Bernie candidates.

Bernie is in a good spot, though, with Warren faltering more quickly than Biden/Pete/Klobuchar.  If they all stick around and materially split the moderate vote with Bloomberg on Super Tuesday, while Bernie cleans up the left wing because Warren tanked, then it’s going to be hard to beat Bernie.

we seem to be in a collision course with two certainties:

-bernie will go into the convention with the most delegates (but possibly not "enough")

-adding up all the "moderates" will produce a higher number than adding up the "progressives"

it's gonna be ugly, and i have no idea what's going to happen.

[David Dennison 18946]

Voted for Bernie today.

Sorry, Liz.

[washparkhorn 9939]

 FWIW (which may not be a lot), adding first and second choice together gives us -

• Sanders - 46%
• Warren - 31%
• Buttigieg - 30%
• Biden - 25%
• Bloomberg - 24%
• Klobuchar - 22%

Edited February 18, 2020 by washparkhorn
Please feel free to correct my math - no hurt feelings for pointing out my errors - ever

[henrygandorf 29194]

1 minute ago, longhornmatt said:

The spending money part sucks, but the process does need to change and move away from the bullshit cable news ratings driver that it’s become.  I don’t want someone buy the election, but I also don’t  want to choose a candidate based on who is best at shamelessly visiting Bumfuck, Iowa ever weekend for a year, and then doing 20 useless debates full of 60 second sound byte answers while sharing the stage with 2 other real candidates and 18 grifters.

My hope is that the candidates will realize they get shop worn doing all the dog and pony show bullshit for a year in advance of the actual primary, and they will start waiting until later to declare their candidacy.  That and changing the primary calendar to remove the one podunk state at a time bullshit would be glorious.

i'm not even saying the spending money part sucks.  visiting iowa and nh shouldn't matter, but it does, and this is the current process.  i have no problem with people gearing their campaigns to win early states and gain momentum, because that's how it's structured in 2020.  there were no surprises in state ordering or debate thresholds.

the fact that you can avoid all that shit if you have the money and some name recognition is the issue, even if you're pure and awesome.  if oprah can roll in four years from now and run the table without any of the nonsense, i have no doubt she'd be 100x the president trump pretends to be.  but none of that really scares me.

get ready for republicans to use this playbook starting in 2024 (yes, i know bloomberg is a republican, but you know what i mean).

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Until someone is pulling in well over at least a third of the vote the story thus far is democrats still don’t have much of an idea what they want. 

[David Dennison 18946]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Until someone is pulling in well over at least a third of the vote the story thus far is democrats still don’t have much of an idea what they want. 

I don't see anyone getting to 1,991 before Milwaukee.

What a mess.

[Aqua Buddha 14610]

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

I'm sorry but this is too big to just bury

 

So is this:

 

[David Dennison 18946]

2 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

So is this:

 

Donald Trump is at 43% and that's where he will be on election day. It's the most stable constant in politics.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

I don't see anyone getting to 1,991 before Milwaukee.

What a mess.

The race is too volatile to make predictions. 
 
There are three candidates that could drop dead any day of old age.  

[Aqua Buddha 14610]

Just now, David Dennison said:

Donald Trump is at 43% and that's where he will be on election day. It's the most stable constant in politics.

He's crept up to the high 40's in a lot of polls at this point.  Let's run a guy who espouses socialism.  Wonder how that turns out.

[Aqua Buddha 14610]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The race is too volatile to make predictions. 
 
There are three candidates that could drop dead any day of old age.  

No one talks about this angle but it could absolutely happen.  Also, any surprise result could swing things wildly with anyone but Bern.  

[Brisketexan 105336]

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I don't see anyone getting to 1,991 before Milwaukee.

What a mess.

Tell ya what I see.

Eight years of Trump.  And it really not mattering what comes after that.

[Zonahorn 8079]

4 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

So is this:

 

DON'T KNOW ANY CANDIDATE THE FIRST 3 APPLY TO.

[David Dennison 18946]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Tell ya what I see.

Eight years of Trump.  And it really not mattering what comes after that.

Most likely a Democrat.

Maybe not, but probably.

[David Dennison 18946]

4 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

He's crept up to the high 40's in a lot of polls at this point.  Let's run a guy who espouses socialism.  Wonder how that turns out.

He's at 43%. It never moves.

[DCA_HORN 725]

Tell ya what I see.
Eight years of Trump.  And it really not mattering what comes after that.

What post war president with a strong economy didn't get a second term?

[Brisketexan 105336]

Just now, DCA_HORN said:

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Tell ya what I see.
Eight years of Trump.  And it really not mattering what comes after that.

What post war president with a political party that's willing to sacrifice all norms and the rule of law, suppress votes, and invite foreign interference in our elections, including in many states with entirely electronic, hackable voting, with a strong economy didn't get a second term?

FIF how fucked we are.

[David Dennison 18946]

2 minutes ago, DCA_HORN said:

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Tell ya what I see.
Eight years of Trump.  And it really not mattering what comes after that.

What post war president with a strong economy didn't get a second term?

Donald Trump is doing his best to buck the trend. At the moment, he's still losing to all of the top Democrats.

[triplehorn 2664]

37 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

The Warren erasure continues:

 

For all the chafing about billionaires influencing politics, that’s the most tangible evidence of their ‘invisible hand’ slapping us in the face right there.  I can only imagine what purist won’t be calling attention to it.  

[Js1 85574]

6 minutes ago, DCA_HORN said:

13 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Tell ya what I see.
Eight years of Trump.  And it really not mattering what comes after that.

What post war president with a strong economy didn't get a second term?

None have had approvals as consistently poor as Trump. 

[RayDog 682]

4 minutes ago, DCA_HORN said:

11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Tell ya what I see.
Eight years of Trump.  And it really not mattering what comes after that.

What post war president with a strong economy didn't get a second term?

The coronavirus is starting to cause a world wide recession. The US may be in recession in Q2 and Q3 from it. Recession could cause some economic bubbles to burst. This is coming at the worse possible time for Trump.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

17 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Tell ya what I see.

Eight years of Trump.  And it really not mattering what comes after that.

Kinda what I’m seeing too. Time to find a job in Western Europe. 

[bad_teammate 13224]

Asking people about which disembodied traits they like or dislike is stupid. People don't vote for traits, they vote for candidates, and they love Bernard.

[Brisketexan 105336]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Kinda what I’m seeing too. Time to find a job in Western Europe. 

Make sure to select your country descending into xeonophobia and idiocy, WWI to WWII-style, carefully.

[Js1 85574]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Kinda what I’m seeing too. Time to find a job in Western Europe. 

Damn, you are taking Warren’s decline really poorly. RIP, Hugo 

[David Dennison 18946]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Asking people about which disembodied traits they like or dislike is stupid. People don't vote for traits, they vote for candidates, and they love Bernard.

Enough to get 1,991 delegates?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

6 minutes ago, Js1 said:

None have had approvals as consistently poor as Trump. 

You put too much stock in contemporary polling data without entertaining the very real likelihood the media will bend over backwards to make the race close and screw us all.  I mean, our system  is working overtime already to ensure Trump gets re-elected.  FFS Bernie Sanders is the “front runner“. 

[Brisketexan 105336]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Asking people about which disembodied traits they like or dislike is stupid. People don't vote for traits, they vote for candidates, and they love Bernard.

Bernie is the Grateful Dead and licorice: "not everyone likes licorice, but the people who like licorice....REALLY like licorice."

Don't mistake enthusiasm for numbers.  A Bernie supporter who loves him 100,000% still just gets one vote, the same as a discouraged member of another Dem constituency who decides to vote third party or not vote at all, has.

And don't discount the effects of disenfranchisement, invited hacking that will completely escape any consequences by the Trump Law Firm (the DO not J), etc.

We're going to lose if we pick Bernie.  But buck up -- we were gonna lose no matter who we picked.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Make sure to select your country descending into xeonophobia and idiocy, WWI to WWII-style, carefully.

I’m looking at places in the north that would hold up best when the rest of the world falls apart due to climate change.

[Zonahorn 8079]

MOAR POLLS, MOOOOOOAAAAAARRRRRR

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

We're going to lose if we pick Bernie.  But buck up -- we were gonna lose no matter who we picked.

Nominating Bernie will kill the down ballot stuff. Forget about the Senate and dethroning McConnell too.

Edited February 18, 2020 by Hugo Stiglitz

[bad_teammate 13224]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Enough to get 1,991 delegates?

Definitely possible.

More likely if a bunch of dead-enders and grifters get out before Super Tuesday. Hard to win 51% when you've got 9 people running against ya!

Regarding the "there will be more combined votes for moderates than votes for Sanders" thing... how do y'all think Warren and Buttigieg (and hell, probably even Biden) feel about being called "moderates"?

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Don't mistake enthusiasm for numbers.

What if I mistake numbers for numbers? As in 50k people attending rallies in 3-4 days. As in getting the most votes. As in getting record numbers of volunteers and donors. As in record-breaking turnout in a state that neighbors his own.

[David Dennison 18946]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I’m looking at places in the north that would hold up best when the rest of the world falls apart due to climate change.

Yeah, that's where climate refugees will be going, too.

Should be fun.