2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Okay . . . let's try this again.

Moderators: Shirley, Sabo, brian, rass, DaveInSeattle

User avatar
brian
The Dude
Posts: 27740
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Downtown Las Vegas

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by brian »

Yeah, I read the fucking story. I don’t think the Wall Street Journal or any media outlet gets to decide whose national service is worthy of praise and whose isn’t. Everyone who has served their country in uniform honorably deserves a base amount of respect.

If Pete was pretending to have been carrying around an M-16 or doing tank missions in Kandahar it would be one thing.
Bandwagon fan of the 2023 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!
Johnnie
The Dude
Posts: 16732
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:31 pm
Location: TUCSON, BITCH!

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Johnnie »

We all have different motives for serving and all of them, to me, are fair and not "wrong" in any real way. My initial motive was simply "I want to do something different and I'm fucking tired of going to school." There was no family history of service. I don't love my country any more or less than anyone else. (Though I would tell you now I love a lot of things far less these days.) I wasn't looking at doing some post service political stuff and needed a resume stat. I was just bored. After a while of being in, values change, life happens, you get to experience things, and then you choose whether or not the lifestyle is for you. So, I certainly won't begrudge a person deciding to serve in any capacity. I will always say try it because it's something that you might not know you could like. (Plus you get money for school.)

But...

I do want to say that being active duty compared to Guard and Reserve is definitely a cultural military thing that my side takes umbrage to. Day in and day out I'm subject to the UCMJ at all times. Those other folks simply aren't. They're the civilitary. Weekend warriors. (Hey, remember that endearing term?) They can hold a regular job 90% of the year and then decide in some cases (yes, decide) to deploy when they want. I'm deployable always.

Plus, in the Guard and Reserve, you make rank by simply breathing. You fulfill a position tied to rank as opposed to earning rank and being placed into positions. (Why do you think the military moves around all the time? Different bases, different positions for different ranks.) And if you direct commission into an officer rank it really gives the impression that you worked a system. But you really didn't. You just found the opportunity. See, officers name fucking BANK compared to us enlisted, too. Look at the pay chart. My base pay is $4,172 a month and I've been in over 18 years. Haven't had a promotion since 2012. It sucks.

So when Joe Blow civilian becomes an O-1 and immediately outranks me or by virtue of his position on his base, is an E-7 in my career field but has been in for far less time or wasn't prior active duty, gets activated to deploy, and becomes my boss, it's an ego hit that I have to accept. (I will roll my eyes when that guy tries to make a decision based on experience, but I have to follow his orders regardless.)

In the case of Pete, I have to take everything in context. He served. Which is good. But as a Reserve Intel Officer on a direct commission, umm ok? I don't feel right to denigrate his service, but he was 27 by the time he came in and by the time I was 27 I had been in almost a decade. See, he had already established the ground work for being the politician he dreamt of becoming. Harvard, Oxford, McKinsey...it was kinda like he needed another box to check. So he checked it. Is that bad? Not necessarily. He obviously wanted to be a politician when he was a kid. And with that, he's going to get shit for it because you kinda have to do things that create a perception about you for a job like that.

So, I don't know. Like, I'm literally currently on my 6th (7th if you count that month plus in Haiti) deployment. After 20 years I just want the check. It is going to pay the rent for the rest of my life. I'm selfish like that. And no one is going to begrudge me for that choice I'm making. I'm using the military in that way. As such, Pete is using the military in his way. Does one usage matter more than another? No idea. It's all relative.

In any case, neither of us hold a candle to this guy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonny_Kim
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
User avatar
mister d
The Dude
Posts: 29047
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:15 am

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by mister d »

brian wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:52 pm Yeah, I read the fucking story. I don’t think the Wall Street Journal or any media outlet gets to decide whose national service is worthy of praise and whose isn’t. Everyone who has served their country in uniform honorably deserves a base amount of respect.
Just wanted to make sure you didn't forget them when talking about "Bernie Bots".
Johnnie wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8434
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Steve of phpBB »

brian wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:52 pm Yeah, I read the fucking story. I don’t think the Wall Street Journal or any media outlet gets to decide whose national service is worthy of praise and whose isn’t.
"Wall Street Journal attacks Democrat! Story at 11."

I figure, if a guy (or woman) put himself at the mercy of people with the power to order him into battle (or just deploy him somewhere within artillery range), then he served and it's praiseworthy. Even if - as seems likely - his *actual* service turned out to be like 1/10 of what Johnnie and his peers did.

I really should go to the Buttigieg town hall tonight, just to see what this "charisma" bullshit is all about. But damn, 8pm is so late at my age.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
brian
The Dude
Posts: 27740
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Downtown Las Vegas

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by brian »

Steve of phpBB wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:08 pm
brian wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:52 pm Yeah, I read the fucking story. I don’t think the Wall Street Journal or any media outlet gets to decide whose national service is worthy of praise and whose isn’t.
"Wall Street Journal attacks Democrat! Story at 11."

I figure, if a guy (or woman) put himself at the mercy of people with the power to order him into battle (or just deploy him somewhere within artillery range), then he served and it's praiseworthy. Even if - as seems likely - his *actual* service turned out to be like 1/10 of what Johnnie and his peers did.

I really should go to the Buttigieg town hall tonight, just to see what this "charisma" bullshit is all about. But damn, 8pm is so late at my age.
They're better than most Murdoch pubs about separating the news gathering operation from the opinion operation so I wasn't going to make that point, but yeah Fox/Murdoch taking a low blow on a Dem isn't exactly the biggest surprise.
Bandwagon fan of the 2023 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!
P.D.X.
The Dude
Posts: 5280
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:31 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by P.D.X. »

Just wait until the right wing spins draft dodging as more honorable than actual service.
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8434
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Steve of phpBB »

P.D.X. wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:38 pm Just wait until the right wing spins draft dodging as more honorable than actual service.
They'd never do that. They love the military. And they're patriots!
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Johnnie
The Dude
Posts: 16732
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:31 pm
Location: TUCSON, BITCH!

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Johnnie »

My draft take: if you don't want to be in the military, I don't want you to be in the military.

But don't cry like a bitch when you're called out for dodging when you could've done the George Carlin thing and enlisted in the Air Force before you got drafted into the Marines.

(Also, my big post upthread is from my point of view as an enlisted dude. It's definitely not the be all end all take that a civilian should just immediately adopt. I just wanted to bring a bit of a different perspective on the "which miliary service is the right military service" argument. Not all of us are high speed spec ops warriors with confirmed kills we don't talk about.)
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
Johnnie
The Dude
Posts: 16732
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:31 pm
Location: TUCSON, BITCH!

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Johnnie »

Good discussion on how Bernie Bro (and Obama Boy) came to be and what it all actually means.

mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
Johnnie
The Dude
Posts: 16732
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:31 pm
Location: TUCSON, BITCH!

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Johnnie »

Ok, Bloomberg.

mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8434
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Steve of phpBB »

Remember how I said Sanders needed to withdraw so we wouldn't get Biden? I take it all back.

Sanders needs to withdraw so we don't get Bloomberg.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
degenerasian
The Dude
Posts: 12302
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by degenerasian »

Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:38 pm Remember how I said Sanders needed to withdraw so we wouldn't get Biden? I take it all back.

Sanders needs to withdraw so we don't get Bloomberg.
if the democrats choose Bloomberg, that's the end of the Democratic party and what they stand for.
Kung Fu movies are like porn. There's 1 on 1, then 2 on 1, then a group scene..
Joe K
Walter Sobchak
Posts: 4754
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:37 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Joe K »

Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:38 pm Remember how I said Sanders needed to withdraw so we wouldn't get Biden? I take it all back.

Sanders needs to withdraw so we don't get Bloomberg.
Or how about the candidates with much less national support than Sanders withdraw and endorse him so that we don’t get a Republican plutocrat as the Democratic nominee?
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8434
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Steve of phpBB »

Joe K wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:06 pm
Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:38 pm Remember how I said Sanders needed to withdraw so we wouldn't get Biden? I take it all back.

Sanders needs to withdraw so we don't get Bloomberg.
Or how about the candidates with much less national support than Sanders withdraw and endorse him so that we don’t get a Republican plutocrat as the Democratic nominee?
Because then we'd likely get a Republican plutocrat as our President for another four years? (Repeat ad nauseam.)
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Joe K
Walter Sobchak
Posts: 4754
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:37 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Joe K »

Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:10 pm
Joe K wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:06 pm
Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:38 pm Remember how I said Sanders needed to withdraw so we wouldn't get Biden? I take it all back.

Sanders needs to withdraw so we don't get Bloomberg.
Or how about the candidates with much less national support than Sanders withdraw and endorse him so that we don’t get a Republican plutocrat as the Democratic nominee?
Because then we'd likely get a Republican plutocrat as our President for another four years? (Repeat ad nauseam.)


Sanders consistently polls better against Trump than the less popular candidates you prefer. Repeat ad nauseum.
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8434
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Steve of phpBB »

Dude, be careful how much you want to rely on those kinds of polls.

Because more recently, Bloomberg and Biden have both been running better than Sanders against Trump (though like all these polls, the differences are slight, and meaningless). https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/po ... /national/

And apparently there was a poll the past few days showing that nearly half of Americans are opposed to voting for a democratic socialist. https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/c ... sstabs.pdf

So I guess if we don't want Trump, we need all of our candidates to drop out so Biden or Bloomberg will win?

Edit: The stuff about voting for a democratic socialist was on page 2 of that second link. But if you look on pages 19 and 20, things look even worse on the "socialism" vs "capitalism" front. (I guess those old conservative folks aren't dying off fast enough.)
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
mister d
The Dude
Posts: 29047
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:15 am

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by mister d »

degenerasian wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:40 pmif the democrats choose Bloomberg, that's the end of the Democratic party and what they stand for.
Or, like the Republicans and Trump, is it just explicitly spelling out what they stand for?
Johnnie wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
Joe K
Walter Sobchak
Posts: 4754
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:37 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Joe K »

Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:24 pm
So I guess if we don't want Trump, we need all of our candidates to drop out so Biden or Bloomberg will win?
You specifically said you didn’t want Bloomberg or Biden — hence my use of the phrase “candidates you prefer.” And no, the Democrats obviously shouldn’t base decisions solely on who can beat Trump without any regard for policy. Otherwise they’d just nominate Ted Cruz or Mitt Romney as their candidate.

I know you are absolutely convinced the “socialist” word is toxic but throughout both the 2016 and 2020 cycles, Sanders consistently beat Trump in head to head polling. He also consistently polls as one of the most respected politicians among independent voters. That data has to mean something. And frankly, the suggestion that the candidate who got the most votes in IA and NH, leads the national polls, and has the most individual donors should drop out is crazy.
User avatar
degenerasian
The Dude
Posts: 12302
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by degenerasian »

mister d wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:37 pm
degenerasian wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:40 pmif the democrats choose Bloomberg, that's the end of the Democratic party and what they stand for.
Or, like the Republicans and Trump, is it just explicitly spelling out what they stand for?
More so in this case. Repubicans are for the rich and Trump is rich.. Trump has given the tax breaks and the anti-immigrant stuff. The status quo that republicans like.

Democrats are the liberals and the progressives. Change for the poor and the oppressed. Running a billionaire would be a disaster.
Last edited by degenerasian on Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Kung Fu movies are like porn. There's 1 on 1, then 2 on 1, then a group scene..
tennbengal
The Dude
Posts: 11975
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:07 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by tennbengal »

I really like(d) Warren. Can't believe how little traction she's gotten relatively. I think she would have made an outstanding president.
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8434
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Steve of phpBB »

Joe K wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:37 pm
Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:24 pm
So I guess if we don't want Trump, we need all of our candidates to drop out so Biden or Bloomberg will win?
You specifically said you didn’t want Bloomberg or Biden — hence my use of the phrase “candidates you prefer.” And no, the Democrats obviously shouldn’t base decisions solely on who can beat Trump without any regard for policy. Otherwise they’d just nominate Ted Cruz or Mitt Romney as their candidate.

I know you are absolutely convinced the “socialist” word is toxic but throughout both the 2016 and 2020 cycles, Sanders consistently beat Trump in head to head polling. He also consistently polls as one of the most respected politicians among independent voters. That data has to mean something. And frankly, the suggestion that the candidate who got the most votes in IA and NH, leads the national polls, and has the most individual donors should drop out is crazy.
In all honesty, I really did not think the socialist word was nearly as toxic as that poll makes it out to be. 26% favorable vs 47 percent unfavorable - 10% very favorable vs 38% very strongly unfavorable. I actually figured most of the people who'd think "socialism" was such a terrible thing had died off.

I know it's only one poll, but it's almost enough to make me support Buttigieg as the least-bad alternative. Because another term of Trump as head of the executive branch and the appointer of the federal judiciary will be the death of the Republic.

Do you know if there have been any polls about what percentage of the voting public actually knows that Sanders is a self-proclaimed socialist or democratic socialist? I mean, it's obvious to people like us, but we are not representative.

I am also curious - this is not meant to be a dig or anything even remotely like that - do you believe a Sanders presidency would measurably improve your own life and/or your family's over the next few years? (And to what extent does that answer depend on whether Medicare 4 All is enacted in the next 5 years?) Is your support based more on a general "this is so fucked and we need drastic action to fix it" rationale? Something in between?

(Feel free not to answer - I know this is really not my business and you don't owe me shit.)
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8434
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Steve of phpBB »

degenerasian wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:43 pm
mister d wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:37 pm
degenerasian wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:40 pmif the democrats choose Bloomberg, that's the end of the Democratic party and what they stand for.
Or, like the Republicans and Trump, is it just explicitly spelling out what they stand for?
More so in this case. Repubicans are for the rich and Trump is rich.. Trump has given the tax breaks and the anti-immigrant stuff. The status quo that republicans like.

Democrats are the liberals and the progressives. Change for the poor and the oppressed. Running a billionaire would be a disaster.
Wasn't FDR hugely wealthy?
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Joe K
Walter Sobchak
Posts: 4754
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:37 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Joe K »

degenerasian wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:43 pm
mister d wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:37 pm
degenerasian wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:40 pmif the democrats choose Bloomberg, that's the end of the Democratic party and what they stand for.
Or, like the Republicans and Trump, is it just explicitly spelling out what they stand for?
More so in this case. Repubicans are for the rich and Trump is rich.. Trump has given the tax breaks and the anti-immigrant stuff. The status quo that republicans like.

Democrats are the liberals and the progressives. Change for the poor and the oppressed. Running a billionaire would be a disaster.
It’s not just that Bloomberg is a billionaire, although that’s obviously significant. It’s that he’s also extremely anti-workers’ rights and was very oppressive to racial and religious minorities as mayor. If he’s the nominee, Democrats can’t complain for one second if they lose because of low turnout among working class voters and minorities.
User avatar
mister d
The Dude
Posts: 29047
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:15 am

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by mister d »

degenerasian wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:43 pmDemocrats are the liberals and the progressives. Change for the poor and the oppressed. Running a billionaire would be a disaster.
Democrats are very much not the party of progressives; they're the default vote getters from progressives because the other party is much worse. If you take a truth serum vote of top party leadership and donors on whether they'd want 4 more years of Trump or 4 years of Sanders, I don't think it would land as one might like.
Johnnie wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
Joe K
Walter Sobchak
Posts: 4754
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:37 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Joe K »

Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:50 pm
Joe K wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:37 pm
Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:24 pm
So I guess if we don't want Trump, we need all of our candidates to drop out so Biden or Bloomberg will win?
You specifically said you didn’t want Bloomberg or Biden — hence my use of the phrase “candidates you prefer.” And no, the Democrats obviously shouldn’t base decisions solely on who can beat Trump without any regard for policy. Otherwise they’d just nominate Ted Cruz or Mitt Romney as their candidate.

I know you are absolutely convinced the “socialist” word is toxic but throughout both the 2016 and 2020 cycles, Sanders consistently beat Trump in head to head polling. He also consistently polls as one of the most respected politicians among independent voters. That data has to mean something. And frankly, the suggestion that the candidate who got the most votes in IA and NH, leads the national polls, and has the most individual donors should drop out is crazy.
I am also curious - this is not meant to be a dig or anything even remotely like that - do you believe a Sanders presidency would measurably improve your own life and/or your family's over the next few years? (And to what extent does that answer depend on whether Medicare 4 All is enacted in the next 5 years?) Is your support based more on a general "this is so fucked and we need drastic action to fix it" rationale? Something in between?

(Feel free not to answer - I know this is really not my business and you don't owe me shit.)
Without going into too much detail, the answer is no. My wife and I are fortunate enough to be in the group that would (hopefully) pay more taxes under any Democratic presidency and can also afford out of pocket health care costs. At one point I had a lot of student loan debt but not anymore.

But I think a Sanders presidency would help a lot of people nationwide who aren’t so lucky and is also the least likely to cause undue suffering to people in other countries through bad foreign policy choices.
User avatar
Shirley
The Dude
Posts: 7516
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:32 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Shirley »

I think a lot of people - maybe even most - know that Bernie is a "Socialist." Many fewer know that he's a "Democratic Socialist." And fewer than that know the difference.

But if there's one thing Bernie has shown is that he's really damn good at explaining what he's all about. And people like what he says. If that weren't true, an old Jewish dude from Vermont who looks like a crazy old professor would never be doing as well as he has the last two election cycles.

If he's the nominee, he'll have plenty of time to explain the difference between democratic socialism and Josef Stalin.
Totally Kafkaesque
User avatar
Shirley
The Dude
Posts: 7516
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:32 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Shirley »

To the question about money - like most Swampers, my family is pretty well off. We're pretty damn close to being in the 1% Bernie talks about (and in NC, we're already in there). But my wife is a huge Bernie supporter (she's a Bro!) and I like him too (I'd prefer Warren, but I like them both). I'm willing to give up a small amount of my wealth to improve our country's future.
Totally Kafkaesque
Joe K
Walter Sobchak
Posts: 4754
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:37 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Joe K »

tennbengal wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:43 pm I really like(d) Warren. Can't believe how little traction she's gotten relatively. I think she would have made an outstanding president.
I think she’d have been the best President in at least 50 years. It’s hard to say but I think her struggles are due in part to the fact that she has never really been able to connect with working class voters despite backing policies that would help them. Unfortunately I think that’s far more due to style than substance. I also think that she tried moving to the center too quickly, which led a lot of progressive activists who might have otherwise remained neutral to back Sanders.
Johnnie
The Dude
Posts: 16732
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:31 pm
Location: TUCSON, BITCH!

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Johnnie »

Steve of phpBB wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:38 pmRemember how I said Sanders needed to withdraw so we wouldn't get Biden? I take it all back.

Sanders needs to withdraw so we don't get Bloomberg.
Remember how I said moderate Democrats are nothing more than diet Republicans? I take it all back.

I meant to say they are actual Republicans.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8434
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Steve of phpBB »

Shirley wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:57 pm I think a lot of people - maybe even most - know that Bernie is a "Socialist." Many fewer know that he's a "Democratic Socialist." And fewer than that know the difference.

But if there's one thing Bernie has shown is that he's really damn good at explaining what he's all about. And people like what he says. If that weren't true, an old Jewish dude from Vermont who looks like a crazy old professor would never be doing as well as he has the last two election cycles.

If he's the nominee, he'll have plenty of time to explain the difference between democratic socialism and Josef Stalin.
Shirley wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 2:01 pm To the question about money - like most Swampers, my family is pretty well off. We're pretty damn close to being in the 1% Bernie talks about (and in NC, we're already in there). But my wife is a huge Bernie supporter (she's a Bro!) and I like him too (I'd prefer Warren, but I like them both). I'm willing to give up a small amount of my wealth to improve our country's future.
I hope you're right on your first post, and I wish more people took our approach on your second.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
mister d
The Dude
Posts: 29047
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:15 am

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by mister d »

Maybe give them a chance versus saying the front-runner needs to drop out so a less popular centrist can take over?
Johnnie wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8434
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Steve of phpBB »

mister d wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 2:12 pm Maybe give them a chance versus saying the front-runner needs to drop out so a less popular centrist can take over?
Unless I'm misunderstanding you, giving them a chance means seeing how they vote in November. At which point it will be too late and millions of people will be fucked. I'm not willing to take a chance on voters in the swing states suddenly being willing to pay more in taxes for the benefit of illegal immigrants.

And when you say less-popular centrist, do you mean within the Dem party or nationally? Because my concern is what happens in November. Those more recent polls I was citing earlier do not indicate that the centrists are less popular (or more popular) than Sanders.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
mister d
The Dude
Posts: 29047
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:15 am

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by mister d »

If you're writing those "vs Trump" polls off as inside the margin of error and you're ignoring Dem polls with Sanders leading, what are you basing any of this on? Just a gut feel that someone bland is the way to go, despite bland Dems failing over and over in recent history?
Johnnie wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
User avatar
Rush2112
The Dude
Posts: 7277
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:35 pm
Location: Cyrus X-1
Contact:

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Rush2112 »

mister d wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 3:28 pm If you're writing those "vs Trump" polls off as inside the margin of error and you're ignoring Dem polls with Sanders leading, what are you basing any of this on? Just a gut feel that someone bland is the way to go, despite bland Dems failing over and over in recent history?
Yup. While Bernie might turn off some off the middle of the road voters, the support that he's garnered from those more likely NOT to vote in a typical election is what helps the Democratic party from top to bottom.
Did you see that ludicrous display last night?
Joe K
Walter Sobchak
Posts: 4754
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:37 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Joe K »

mister d wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 3:28 pm If you're writing those "vs Trump" polls off as inside the margin of error and you're ignoring Dem polls wit I h Sanders leading, what are you basing any of this on? Just a gut feel that someone bland is the way to go, despite bland Dems failing over and over in recent history?
Also, who’s the safe choice here? Every Democratic candidate has significant potential liabilities in a general election. Biden has his son’s sketchiness and is also showing signs of cognitive decline; Buttigieg polls poorly with minority voters and got smoked when he ran for statewide office; Bloomberg could have major issues with working class and minority voters; Klobuchar is an abusive boss with a sketchy past as a prosecutor; and Trump will hammer Warren over the Native American claims. I’d find it easier to buy the electability arguments against Sanders if there weren’t these types of issues with all of the alternatives.
User avatar
degenerasian
The Dude
Posts: 12302
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by degenerasian »

Joe K wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 3:44 pm
mister d wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 3:28 pm If you're writing those "vs Trump" polls off as inside the margin of error and you're ignoring Dem polls wit I h Sanders leading, what are you basing any of this on? Just a gut feel that someone bland is the way to go, despite bland Dems failing over and over in recent history?
Also, who’s the safe choice here? Every Democratic candidate has significant potential liabilities in a general election. Biden has his son’s sketchiness and is also showing signs of cognitive decline; Buttigieg polls poorly with minority voters and got smoked when he ran for statewide office; Bloomberg could have major issues with working class and minority voters; Klobuchar is an abusive boss with a sketchy past as a prosecutor; and Trump will hammer Warren over the Native American claims. I’d find it easier to buy the electability arguments against Sanders if there weren’t these types of issues with all of the alternatives.
so you're saying there's a chance...
Kung Fu movies are like porn. There's 1 on 1, then 2 on 1, then a group scene..
User avatar
Giff
The Dude
Posts: 10794
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:26 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Giff »

Only one of those is really fucking stupid. ETA: I'm sure JoeK agrees with me that it's stupid. Not that is overall point is (that I happen to agree with).
well this is gonna be someone's new signature - bronto
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8434
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Steve of phpBB »

mister d wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 3:28 pm If you're writing those "vs Trump" polls off as inside the margin of error and you're ignoring Dem polls with Sanders leading, what are you basing any of this on? Just a gut feel that someone bland is the way to go, despite bland Dems failing over and over in recent history?
I'm not ignoring polls with Sanders leading among Dems. I am well aware that he is ahead of the other Dems but well short of a majority.

Regarding my view on the general election, its based on the fact that (i) political scientists seem to agree that candidates perceived as moderates do better than candidates perceived as more extreme, (ii) there are a lot fewer liberals in the US than there are either moderates or conservatives, so of course a candidate perceived as strongly liberal is going to have less of a chance, and (iii) I have never seen any kind of substantiation of the argument that a more liberal candidate will do better on a national level than a more moderate one.

According to this poll from early October 2016, 58% percent of voters saw Hillary as liberal; only 47% saw Trump as conservative. https://news.gallup.com/poll/196064/tru ... dates.aspx (It's possible this changed over the following month; I think the Access Hollywood tape came out right after this poll did.)

In 2008, 62% of voters saw Obama as liberal and also 62% saw McCain as conservative. So, Hillary was seen as slightly less liberal than Obama, but Trump was seen as much less conservative than McCain (or Romney).

In all honesty, though, did Obama take any positions in 2008 that were more liberal than the ones Clinton took in 2016? I have a feeling Obama was inherently seen as liberal because he was black, so he bent over backwards to appear moderate. And I think we consider Clinton "moderate" because we're thinking about economic issues and comparing her to Sanders. I think she was quite liberal (as far as I can remember) on social issues and/or issues affecting women and minorities.

Finally, I don't know if you were including her in the litany of "bland" candidates, but I know plenty of women who definitely were excited as hell for her candidacy. We do need to remember that we are looking at all this as straight white guys, and our perspective is not the only one.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Joe K
Walter Sobchak
Posts: 4754
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:37 pm

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by Joe K »

Giff wrote: Tue Feb 18, 2020 3:54 pm Only one of those is really fucking stupid. ETA: I'm sure JoeK agrees with me that it's stupid. Not that is overall point is (that I happen to agree with).
I assume that you’re referring to Warren and I agree that it’s stupid. It’s been a non-issue in the Democratic Primary for that reason. I am concerned though that it is the type of stupid shit that gets an outsized role in a general election when amplified by the MAGA troll complex and lazy corporate media.
User avatar
brian
The Dude
Posts: 27740
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Downtown Las Vegas

Re: 2020: The Democratic Presidential Nomination Thread

Post by brian »

Bandwagon fan of the 2023 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!
Post Reply