Beto 2020

[Hugo Stiglitz 23364]

38 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

The Bernie bros will not stop. They lack any self awareness. The ones on twitter “don’t believe the numbers”. Facts are as important to them as they are to trumpsters. Beto people are in for a rude awakening.

The most frustrating thing about the Bernie Bros is Bernie remaining silent on their tactics as if everyone can't see what is going on. 

Oh, he will say "let's be nice to each other" in public and then hire the guy that publishes nothing but hit pieces on his opponents. 

Heaven forbid he ever tell his cult to cut the bullshit out and focus on promoting his ideology.  

[Mole 4320]

 

 

 

58 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

How much did Pence help Trump?  Not much but Chris Christie would have hurt him.  

Pence probably helped with the evangelical "Trump is our King David"/"the Christian Hero we need" narrative.

[Js1 85141]

4 minutes ago, scottsins said:

 

I give few shits about anyone’s attacks, as long as the vote Dem in 2020 if the nomination isn’t “their guy”.

I’m skeptical about the loyalty of Bernie supporters, which is why I asked BT for his level of commitment to ANY Dem nominee.

I don’t think I’ve gotten an answer from him yet, but maybe I missed it.

For the record, there isn’t anyone on the Dem slate or even remotely possibly on that slate that I wouldn’t not pull the lever for in 2020.

 

This. This. This.

Will you see me going balls to the wall for Klobuchar, Gillibrand, Booker or Hickenlooper? Not really.  But I will vote for them over Trump.  And I will drag people to the polls to vote too. 

[Mole 4320]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The most frustrating thing about the Bernie Bros is Bernie remaining silent on their tactics as if everyone can't see what is going on. 

Oh, he will say "let's be nice to each other" in public and then hire the guy that publishes nothing but hit pieces on his opponents. 

Heaven forbid he ever tell his cult to cut the bullshit out and focus on promoting his ideology.  

 

[bad_teammate 13137]

48 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

it kinda seems like at least part of what gets you so agitated is that you're arguing with recent arrivals to the fold who don't pass your lib purity test

That's what policy arguments are. And some policy arguments get me "agitated", sure, like when people want to cut benefits for the lederly and poor. Yes, it bothers me. I get mad online when brow-furrowing libs talk about having to make the "tough" choice to cut benefits while pretending the rich don't exist.

47 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

He's an insufferable cunt.

Yes, I am.

57 minutes ago, troph said:

Being civil and nice in discourse isn’t about unity it’s about redrawing lines on how to disagree and what is acceptable and what isn’t. We actually have a rise in violence and a rise in disrespect of others. I’m not here to agree with folks I disagree with but trump makes calling me a tranny and me calling you a fuckstain ok. Beto is saying that has to stop. I do think there is middle ground to get reform on a lot of topics but that remains to be seen. We are so far from that we currently need to stop the discourse that leads to name calling, and physical violence.

So is Bernie.
Does that stop all of Bernie's fanboys? No.

Beto says it, too.
Did that stop Hugo and Bama Chick from immediately attacking Bernie's new staffers yesterday with lies and dishonesty? No.
Did they ever apologize or acknowledge that they promoted lies? No.

The Bernie contingent isn't any meaner than the Hillary or Beto contingents. We're playing a mostly-friendly game of streetball; stop calling fouls. Everyone is going to foul sometimes.

I joke about it ("woman erasers and POC silencers available on the Bernie store!") because I have self-awareness. The Hillary/Beto sides need to show the same self-awareness. I'd love to see Beto folks mock themselves for constantly demanding to speak to the manager about the unruly staff, that would be a hilarious bit of self-awareness. But I have a feeling I'll have to wait until I'm dead (soon, inshallah) for that to happen.

I think the Beto folks are leaning on it for the same reason the Hillary folks leaned on it: They can't attack Bernie. They have to attack someone, because that's what people do, so they attack the Bernie Bros.

2 minutes ago, scottsins said:

I’m skeptical about the loyalty of Bernie supporters, which is why I asked BT for his level of commitment to ANY Dem nominee.

I don’t think I’ve gotten an answer from him yet, but maybe I missed it.

 

Turn on your monitor.

53 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

Beto had 128,000 unique contributions in the first 24 hours. Average donation size was $47. Bernie bros attacks continue to fall flat.

What attack? Quote it.

I speculated, because that's all someone can do when they aren't given information.

For comparison with the other two biggest raisers...

Beto: $6.1M with 128k donors, claims $47 per donor
Harris: $1.5M with 38k donors, claims $38 per donor
Sanders: $5.9M with 225k donors, claims $27 per donor

Some pretty big differences there in number of individual donors and amount per donor

[Larry T. Spider 1745]

If I was talking about you, I would have used your name. Many Bernie supporters on the internet were claiming that almost all of betos money was coming from big donors, bundlers, his family, etc. This was bullshit and anybody with a brain knew it from the beginning. Now that the facts are out do the attacks stop? Of course not. Bernie bros are now claiming “fake news”. They are the lefts trumptards.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

11 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

So what happened?

He won Iowa on January 3rd and New Hampshire on January 8th.

Just a side note, but Hillary actually won New Hampshire and got a little bit of new life out of it.  Remember, she cried after Iowa and then came back in NH? 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

11 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

So what happened?

He won Iowa on January 3rd and New Hampshire on January 8th.

double post 

Edited March 20, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[horncyclist 1386]

On 3/19/2019 at 2:01 AM, horncyclist said:

Tapa weirdly cut off my first response. Trying again. 

All of this will come out eventually, why would they risk it? He has enough going for him. That tweet cites a story about a bundler guaging support for Beto and then infers that his 24 hour haul came from bundling. The bundler raised $500,000 k for Obama. For an entire presidential race. For Obama. You think he just grouptexts people and $6.1 million shows up?

 

To your second point on the well drying up. Do you really believe that? Beto may or may not be the nominee but he's not going to be out fundraised. In the same way that Beto brings in new volunteers and voters,he brings in new donors. At every level. 45% of his Senate haul came from small donors. My wife and I gave him $400. We previously had never given more than $50 to any candidate. Then you have people like Troph, hosting big $ fundraisers who are also new to it. He's a machine.

 

 

And it's great for Beto,the democratic party, and politics. But then, you seem scared. What's going on?

 

PS. Going to love it when Beto drops his average and total donors in a couple days. See Nate Silver tweet earlier, he's learned to play the media.

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Larry T. Spider said:

Beto had 128,000 unique contributions in the first 24 hours. Average donation size was $47. Bernie bros attacks continue to fall flat.

Bad_teammate, you really need to check your approach in arguing this. I like that we're discussing candidates, but you have a clear agenda against Beto. It's not helping you. 

[horncyclist 1386]

Sorry about the gloating. Here's my take. Beto said 128K unique contributions, average $47 (corrected to $48 by the campaign.)  Sanders had 225K with average donation of $27. So Beto definitely had more larger donations, but the conspiracy theories that his numbers were artificial and built on bundling just to beat Bernie are clearly wrong. On the other hand, Beto said "contributions" not contributors so it's possible they're counting each merchandise purchase a separate donation maybe to increase the number of small donations. If so, they're trying to present the numbers in the best possible light, but the bottom line isi that  he has broad support at all donor levels, much like his senate campaign.

 

Also, speculating here, but I'm guessing his small-dollar donations will be more sustained than Bernie especially once everyone wants to get one of those sweet shirts. His total fundraising for Q1 will likely come close to Bernie's total over a larger period. 

Edited March 20, 2019 by horncyclist

[wildcat09 29269]

1 hour ago, scottsins said:

 

My only take is that the most important quality/issue from now until 2020 is “can the candidate beat Trump”?

That’s literally the only thing that matters to me right now. Empty suit, progressive, centrist, etc. every alternative is better than 4 more years of DOTARD.

 

I think literally anyone running for the Dem nomination right now CAN beat Trump. Of those running, I think a few increase the odds of winning by a little bit and a few decrease the odds of winning by a little bit. That's obviously extremely important, but I think what we're losing sight of by focusing on "can they beat Trump?" is "if elected, will they take concrete action to prevent the next Trump?"

We know that answer is no for Biden, Klobuchar, Hickenlooper, and probably some of the other "who the hell is _____?" candidates. I think it's probably a no for Beto as well, which really sucks because he's good and can be pushed further in the right direction on a bunch of shit that matters to real people. But is he going to do what's necessary to rid us of the infection that is the current GOP? Is he going to dedicate the resources needed to ensuring that corruption and white collar crime can't infect every part of our political system? No, he would probably do what Obama did and try to set a good example by not accepting PAC money, while doing nothing to actually challenge the current structure of our political system, which is what has led us to the precipice. 

[bad_teammate 13137]

33 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

Many Bernie supporters on the internet were claiming that almost all of betos money was coming from big donors, bundlers, his family, etc.

Given his (relatively) high average donation and much lower donator total, it's pretty clear that Bernie & Beto's donor bases are different. Beto has fewer people giving more money and Bernie has more people giving less money.

Also, why are we talking about the speculation unnamed people from other, unnamed places? What use is that? Are you demanding to speak to the manager of the Internet?

If you are actively looking to upset yourself by going all over the Internet to look for things that upset you, that's a problem with you, not anyone else.

25 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Just a side note, but Hillary actually won New Hampshire and got a little bit of new life out of it.  Remember, she cried after Iowa and then came back in NH? 

Thanks for the correction. I was so high after the Iowa win I guess my mind rewrote the actual NH result.

Man, that felt good. Good times, man. Better times.

24 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

Bad_teammate, you really need to check your approach in arguing this. I like that we're discussing candidates, but you have a clear agenda against Beto. It's not helping you. 

Everyone has an agenda. I'm just honest with myself and others.

Quote

Also, speculating here, but I'm guessing his small-dollar donations will be more sustained than Bernie especially once everyone wants to get one of those sweet shirts. His total fundraising for Q1 will likely come close to Bernie's total over a larger period.

I don't think Beto catches Bernie in small-dollar contributors until Beto beats him in a primary. But hey, we've got a season of numbers to watch.

[Celery Man 20888]

56 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

That's what policy arguments are. And some policy arguments get me "agitated", sure, like when people want to cut benefits for the lederly and poor. Yes, it bothers me. I get mad online when brow-furrowing libs talk about having to make the "tough" choice to cut benefits while pretending the rich don't exist.

That's not what he said or what those policies would do as has been pointed out, but it's also not the point I was making.  Where do you think that all of the new shitlibs are coming from?  As the size of the republican party dwindles, what do you think is happening to the people who once were members?  What I quoted you was saying Beto didn't swing a bunch of Republicans over.  This requires an allowance for subtlety that I suspect you will blaze right past, but while some Gary Johnson shitheads or people who have just enough of a sense of right and wrong to waffle (but not enough to change) will tease the idea of getting behind the non Trump choice and then vote republican every single time, there are tons of members of the democrat coalition who were not all that long ago republicans.

Again, not saying "so we better run Klobuchar" or adopt a republican platform or whatever the fuck, but you're not correct on your point that figures like Beto haven't brought republicans into the fold.

[Larry T. Spider 1745]

13 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Given his (relatively) high average donation and much lower donator total, it's pretty clear that Bernie & Beto's donor bases are different. Beto has fewer people giving more money and Bernie has more people giving less money.

Also, why are we talking about the speculation unnamed people from other, unnamed places? What use is that? Are you demanding to speak to the manager of the Internet?

If you are actively looking to upset yourself by going all over the Internet to look for things that upset you, that's a problem with you, not anyone else.

Thanks for the correction. I was so high after the Iowa win I guess my mind rewrote the actual NH result.

Man, that felt good. Good times, man. Better times.

Everyone has an agenda. I'm just honest with myself and others.

I don't think Beto catches Bernie in small-dollar contributors until Beto beats him in a primary. But hey, we've got a season of numbers to watch.

You are such a fucking beating. Every tweet or article about Beto from a mainstream reporter gets inundated with Bernie bros talking shit. It’s not like this is a one time thing I found in a dark corner of the internet. We are (or should be) on the same team in trying to defeat trump. 

[NowThis 931]

1 minute ago, Larry T. Spider said:

You are such a fucking beating. Every tweet or article about Beto from a mainstream reporter gets inundated with Bernie bros talking shit. It’s not like this is a one time thing I found in a dark corner of the internet. We are (or should be) on the same team in trying to defeat trump. 

but we are not on the same team just yet.

[Larry T. Spider 1745]

1 minute ago, NowThis said:

but we are not on the same team just yet.

Clearly, but there is a way to go about a primary so that you don’t end up with a damaged candidate and a fractured party.

[NowThis 931]

1 minute ago, Larry T. Spider said:

Clearly, but there is a way to go about a primary so that you don’t end up with a damaged candidate and a fractured party.

didn't hurt Trump at all 

[Hawndoh 2382]

So your goal is a damaged party, just not as damaged as the other party?

 

[Hawndoh 2382]

There's something to be said about the company someone keeps and the kind of friends they have that reflects who they are as well.

It's like when I was researching which college to apply to I didn't research a single thing about A&M because I knew lots of Aggies and they were all insufferable idiots. 

I don't know that much about Sanders honestly. I'm not a big time participant in political news and arguments. 

But if someone seems to be surrounded by insufferable douchbags, and it seems like most of their followers are crazy jerks, then I have to believe they themselves are a crazy jerk. 

And right now that's all I see with Sanders. A crazy old man that is a combative jerk. I don't want another combative jerk as president, I can't stand the combative jerk we have now. 

That may not be fair to Sanders, but that's how it works. If everyone who likes you is a douchebag, then you are probably a douchebag as well. 

[NowThis 931]

7 minutes ago, Hawndoh said:

So your goal is a damaged party, just not as damaged as the other party?

 

no, contentious nominations are the norm on both sides.  Heated rivalries, then unity after the convention. Bernie did a lot of work for HRC afterwards. 

[David Dennison 18662]

16 minutes ago, NowThis said:

no, contentious nominations are the norm on both sides.  Heated rivalries, then unity after the convention. Bernie did a lot of work for HRC afterwards. 

And his supporters did a whole lot of damage.

[bad_teammate 13137]

30 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

You are such a fucking beating. Every tweet or article about Beto from a mainstream reporter gets inundated with Bernie bros talking shit.

And on every Tweet or article about Bernie, you get Dems talking negatively. It happens. Stop crying.

I DEMAND TO SPEAK TO THE MANAGER OF THE INTERNET SOME ANONYMOUS PERSON IN THE COMMENTS WAS VERY RUDE TO MY SON

[NowThis 931]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

And his supporters did a whole lot of damage.

lots of hype about that 

[bad_teammate 13137]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

And his supporters did a whole lot of damage.

How? What?

[David Dennison 18662]

Just now, NowThis said:

lots of hype about that 

Their votes would have helped.

[TexEx15 17491]

Bernie is to Democrats what Trump is to Republicans (extreme policy not general shit baggery).  Beto has captured the imagination of voters, which no other candidate has to date.   Biden is the wildcard.

[David Dennison 18662]

Just now, TexEx15 said:

Bernie is to Democrats what Trump is to Republicans (extreme policy not general shit baggery).  Beto has captured the imagination of voters, which no other candidate has to date.   Biden is the wildcard.

Beto has captured the imagination of some voters. A whole lot of people outside of Texas still have no idea who he is.

[TexEx15 17491]

Just now, David Dennison said:

Beto has captured the imagination of some voters. A whole lot of people outside of Texas still have no idea who he is.

Fair.  Rephrase to “shown the ability to...”

[NowThis 931]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Their votes would have helped.

lots of people didn't vote for one reason or another. 

[NowThis 931]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Beto has captured the imagination of some voters. A whole lot of people outside of Texas still have no idea who he is.

once he's a regular on Ellen, The View, and other female shows - he'll get noticed. 

[GW Hayduke 1952]

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

I think literally anyone running for the Dem nomination right now CAN beat Trump. Of those running, I think a few increase the odds of winning by a little bit and a few decrease the odds of winning by a little bit. That's obviously extremely important, but I think what we're losing sight of by focusing on "can they beat Trump?" is "if elected, will they take concrete action to prevent the next Trump?"

We know that answer is no for Biden, Klobuchar, Hickenlooper, and probably some of the other "who the hell is _____?" candidates. I think it's probably a no for Beto as well, which really sucks because he's good and can be pushed further in the right direction on a bunch of shit that matters to real people. But is he going to do what's necessary to rid us of the infection that is the current GOP? Is he going to dedicate the resources needed to ensuring that corruption and white collar crime can't infect every part of our political system? No, he would probably do what Obama did and try to set a good example by not accepting PAC money, while doing nothing to actually challenge the current structure of our political system, which is what has led us to the precipice. 

I have the opposite take but I think it depends on what you think it would take to “get rid of the current infection.”

Campaign finance reform, election reform, anti-corruption reform, etc. would depend on the overall make up of Congress and is firmly on the democratic ticket no matter who the party nominated imo.

If the infection is related to civil discourse and respect for common decency and fellow citizens, then Beto is the best suited to address imo.

[bad_teammate 13137]

19 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Their votes would have helped.

Hillary got Bernie primary voters' votes right in line with every historical norm.

[David Dennison 18662]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Hillary got Bernie primary voters' votes right in line with every historical norm.

So this is the historic norm for party switching in presidential elections?

 

[bad_teammate 13137]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

So this is the historic norm for party switching in presidential elections?

Yes, 8-12% is well within the historical norms. It happens every year. The Sanders -> Trump controversy is an excuse-making exercise.

Moreover, defections from a primary to general election are common. More voters went from Hillary Clinton to John McCain in 2008 than went from Sanders to Trump in 2016; about 13 percent of Trump’s 2016 voters also voted for Barack Obama in 2012.

Not only that, but those who "defected" weren't strong Democrats/liberals anyway. They were the people that Bernie brought INTO the party by talking about working class issues.

But they (Sanders->Trump "defectors) were also older and whiter [than the average Bernie voter in the primary], and also less liberal.

Of the ones that switched to Trump, only about 25 percent also voted for a Democratic candidate for Congress. And we do have a little bit about what they did in 2012 — it looks like they were split roughly evenly, 50-50, between Obama and Romney. So these appear to be people who are trending out of the Democratic Party.

Of those Bernie voters who supported Trump in the general election, the average age was 52. Those who stuck with Clinton were an average age of 45, and of those who broke for a third party, the average age was 44. Of those that didn’t vote, their average age was 35 — these were the ones that got activated by Bernie, and then dropped back out when he didn't win. It’s worth noting that very few of the primary voters stayed home. People who vote in primaries are highly engaged in politics — they’re not people who come in and out of the electorate.

Hillary failed on her own merits and blaming Bernie makes no sense. She lost. Deal with it and learn some lessons so it doesn't happen again. Or learn absolutely nothing, I guess. Your choice.

 

[David Dennison 18662]

8 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Yes, 8-12% is well within the historical norms. It happens every year. The Sanders -> Trump controversy is an excuse-making exercise.

Moreover, defections from a primary to general election are common. More voters went from Hillary Clinton to John McCain in 2008 than went from Sanders to Trump in 2016; about 13 percent of Trump’s 2016 voters also voted for Barack Obama in 2012.

Not only that, but those who "defected" weren't strong Democrats/liberals anyway. They were the people that Bernie brought INTO the party by talking about working class issues.

But they (Sanders->Trump "defectors) were also older and whiter [than the average Bernie voter in the primary], and also less liberal.

Of the ones that switched to Trump, only about 25 percent also voted for a Democratic candidate for Congress. And we do have a little bit about what they did in 2012 — it looks like they were split roughly evenly, 50-50, between Obama and Romney. So these appear to be people who are trending out of the Democratic Party.

Of those Bernie voters who supported Trump in the general election, the average age was 52. Those who stuck with Clinton were an average age of 45, and of those who broke for a third party, the average age was 44. Of those that didn’t vote, their average age was 35 — these were the ones that got activated by Bernie, and then dropped back out when he didn't win. It’s worth noting that very few of the primary voters stayed home. People who vote in primaries are highly engaged in politics — they’re not people who come in and out of the electorate.

Hillary failed on her own merits and blaming Bernie makes no sense. She lost. Deal with it and learn some lessons so it doesn't happen again. Or learn absolutely nothing, I guess. Your choice.

 

I'm not blaming Bernie. I'm blaming his primary voters who switched. And they are to blame along with the shitty campaigner.

[bad_teammate 13137]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

I'm not blaming Bernie. I'm blaming his primary voters who switched. And they are to blame along with the shitty campaigner.

Facts and math don't care about your feelings.

[elfenix 34188]

ah yes, the call for civility

[David Dennison 18662]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Facts and math don't care about your feelings.

They switched their votes from Bernie in the primary to not Bernie in the general. Fact.

If they vote for Hillary Clinton in the general, we don't have President Trump. Also a fact.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23364]

What this thread needs is more Bernie talk.

 

[Nivek 16866]

Sorry about the gloating. Here's my take. Beto said 128K unique contributions, average $47 (corrected to $48 by the campaign.)  Sanders had 225K with average donation of $27. So Beto definitely had more larger donations, but the conspiracy theories that his numbers were artificial and built on bundling just to beat Bernie are clearly wrong. On the other hand, Beto said "contributions" not contributors so it's possible they're counting each merchandise purchase a separate donation maybe to increase the number of small donations. If so, they're trying to present the numbers in the best possible light, but the bottom line isi that  he has broad support at all donor levels, much like his senate campaign.
 
Also, speculating here, but I'm guessing his small-dollar donations will be more sustained than Bernie especially once everyone wants to get one of those sweet shirts. His total fundraising for Q1 will likely come close to Bernie's total over a larger period. 

It seems like the Russians are at it again.

[NowThis 931]

from his website "The challenges we face are the greatest in living memory. "

well no, people who lived in the 1940s and still here would disagree.  The recession of 2008-09 was bad, so was the inflation times of the 1970s not to mention the Vietnam war.  Economy is strong, threat level is low. Times are actually quite good, so this alarmist BS doesn't hold. 

[bad_teammate 13137]

45 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

They switched their votes from Bernie in the primary to not Bernie in the general. Fact.

If they vote for Hillary Clinton in the general, we don't have President Trump. Also a fact.

Do you also blame the ones that stayed home entirely?

How about the black vote? Do you blame them, too?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23364]

27 minutes ago, NowThis said:

 

from his website "The challenges we face are the greatest in living memory. "

well no, people who lived in the 1940s and still here would disagree.  The recession of 2008-09 was bad, so was the inflation times of the 1970s not to mention the Vietnam war.  Economy is strong, threat level is low. Times are actually quite good, so this alarmist BS doesn't hold. 

 

Fucking solid troll post bro.

[NowThis 931]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Fucking solid troll post bro.

so you think we are facing the greatest challenges of our lives? not in the least bro. 

[bad_teammate 13137]

Beto refused to commit to campaigning against Cornyn.

lol

 

[happyfunball 481]

Which poster here is it?

[bad_teammate 13137]

That looks cool as hell.

[wildcat09 29269]

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Beto refused to commit to campaigning against Cornyn.

lol

 

This doesn't at all reinforce what I just said about Beto not being willing to do what is necessary to fix our underlying structural problems.

[GW Hayduke 1952]

13 minutes ago, NowThis said:

so you think we are facing the greatest challenges of our lives? not in the least bro. 

I don’t ever remember our relationships with foreign allies being as strained, this kind of alignment with hostile foreign countries, having an authoritative leader, or this level of strain on the constitution, rule of law, and democratic bedrocks such as free press or election integrity.

[Larry T. Spider 1745]

America has faced tougher times. We have not faced tougher times as far as the electorate and how we treat each other. Trump is a symptom of a larger problem that Beto is trying to address.