The Swamp

L-Jam3 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 1:13 pm

BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 12:41 pm These kind of electoral shenanigans will absolutely alienate the fragile centrist collation which has mostly hung with the Dems thru Trumpism and Dobbs blowback. I know a lot of these people. They hold their nose when they vote for Biden (and Whitmer) but they do vote for them because the Dems are seen as more small d democratic. Using law suits to removing names from a ballot - even if it’s someone they mostly loathe like Trump - is the best way to make sure they vote GOP in 2024.

"Yeah, Trump couldn't accept that he lost and lied that he won, and his shitty white-trash supporters attacked the Capitol and killed some Federal Police. But the Democrats want to take him off that ballot for doing that? That's bullshit. Gotta go with Trump again."

I’M saying if they succeed in knocking Trump off the ballot. And the presidential election isn’t the only thing on the ballot in 2024.

Edited to be more civil and coherent.

L-Jam3 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 1:13 pm

BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 12:41 pm These kind of electoral shenanigans will absolutely alienate the fragile centrist collation which has mostly hung with the Dems thru Trumpism and Dobbs blowback. I know a lot of these people. They hold their nose when they vote for Biden (and Whitmer) but they do vote for them because the Dems are seen as more small d democratic. Using law suits to removing names from a ballot - even if it’s someone they mostly loathe like Trump - is the best way to make sure they vote GOP in 2024.

"Yeah, Trump couldn't accept that he lost and lied that he won, and his shitty white-trash supporters attacked the Capitol and killed some Federal Police. But the Democrats want to take him off that ballot for doing that? That's bullshit. Gotta go with Trump again."

I think you're assuming that voters follow a logical process in deciding how to vote. They vote on how candidates or parties make them feel.

In 2020, after four years of Trump and Covid and George Floyd, a lot of moderately conservative voters felt that Trump was bad, so they voted for the Dems. And the Dems basically needed every one of those votes in the 3-4 states that decided the election. But if those voters feel that both parties are crazy, they'll find a way to rationalize voting R.

Why wouldn't every democrat celebrate a trump primary victory? Instead they're off trying to subvert democracy (irony?) and bastardize organized crime statutes for what reason I have no idea. These fuckers should be praying for the very thing they're fighting against. Typical Democrats.

wut

I have to respectfully disagree. TFG committed crimes against the voting populace. Punishing him, even if it means trying novel approaches like the RICO charge in Georgia, is the appropriate remedy. And if he gets convicted, and deters these types of shenanigans moving forward, even a little, then it's worth it.

Really though. Why have laws against subverting democracy if we're not going to use it here in this very blatant occurrence? And removing him from the ballot using the 14th Amendment is the exact type of punishment that the 14th Amendment was written for.

There's a lot of justifiable criticism that the Democratic Party backs down from standing up for itself. I've made that same criticism. But now Democratic leaders are taking the fight to Trump, and some of you are mad at that because of potential potential blowback?

It's not like in this day and age we could have a kangaroo court, behead them, and stick their heads on pikes leading to the Capitol. The Democrats are using the tools available to them. The GOP is going to hurl lines about the Democrats being a bunch of crooked child molesters anyway; might as well bring TFG down in the process.

This is also not being discussed widely enough.

The Heritage Foundation through Trump wants to drastically remake America in an authoritarian vision and it's sickening.

Conservatives aim to restructure U.S. government and replace it with Trump’s vision

https://www.project2025.org/

L-Jam3 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 3:29 pm There's a lot of justifiable criticism that the Democratic Party backs down from standing up for itself. I've made that same criticism. But now Democratic leaders are taking the fight to Trump, and some of you are mad at that because of potential potential blowback?

It's not like in this day and age we could have a kangaroo court, behead them, and stick their heads on pikes leading to the Capitol. The Democrats are using the tools available to them. The GOP is going to hurl lines about the Democrats being a bunch of crooked child molesters anyway; might as well bring TFG down in the process.

I agree with you on fighting Trump and the GOP are going to do their worst regardless, so fuck it. Maybe I shouldn't speak for others, but I was just knocking this one particular argument for keeping Trump off the ballot as being weak and legally questionable.

We like trump because he will lose

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 5:21 pm We like trump because he will lose

Yeah, that's what we said during the 2016 primaries. I have zero confidence Biden beats Trump if they are the nominees in 2024, right now it's a coin toss if you look at the polls.

The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 6:22 pm

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 5:21 pm We like trump because he will lose

Yeah, that's what we said during the 2016 primaries. I have zero confidence Biden beats Trump if they are the nominees in 2024, right now it's a coin toss if you look at the polls.

People said the same thing in 2020 FWIW

BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 6:26 pm

The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 6:22 pm

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 5:21 pm We like trump because he will lose

Yeah, that's what we said during the 2016 primaries. I have zero confidence Biden beats Trump if they are the nominees in 2024, right now it's a coin toss if you look at the polls.

People said the same thing in 2020 FWIW

And it was REALLY FUCKING CLOSE! I'm not saying Biden can't win, I'm saying I have no confidence it's a sure thing. If I had to put odds on it, I'd say 60/40 Biden wins.

The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 6:22 pm

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 5:21 pm We like trump because he will lose

Yeah, that's what we said during the 2016 primaries. I have zero confidence Biden beats Trump if they are the nominees in 2024, right now it's a coin toss if you look at the polls.

This exactly. Why do yall think America is in a hurry to reelect someone who is seemingly losing his mental capacity right before our eyes? The democrats need to be running a non biden candidate or i think anyone could win if he looks bad enough campaigning and debating.

TT2.0 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 8:03 am

The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 6:22 pm

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 5:21 pm We like trump because he will lose

Yeah, that's what we said during the 2016 primaries. I have zero confidence Biden beats Trump if they are the nominees in 2024, right now it's a coin toss if you look at the polls.

This exactly. Why do yall think America is in a hurry to reelect someone who is seemingly losing his mental capacity right before our eyes? The democrats need to be running a non biden candidate or i think anyone could win if he looks bad enough campaigning and debating.

Biden has some definite mental decline, but I think it's slightly overblown. The guy has always been a huma gaffe machine with no ability to control himself from saying stupid shit.

And if you think he hasn't earned the right to continue leading one of the most powerful nations on earth from ages 82 to 85? Well, buddy, fuck you. Its a binary choice and I don't want to hear any negative shit about the one you're told you have to pick.

The Sybian wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 8:42 am

TT2.0 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 8:03 am

The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 6:22 pm

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 5:21 pm We like trump because he will lose

Yeah, that's what we said during the 2016 primaries. I have zero confidence Biden beats Trump if they are the nominees in 2024, right now it's a coin toss if you look at the polls.

This exactly. Why do yall think America is in a hurry to reelect someone who is seemingly losing his mental capacity right before our eyes? The democrats need to be running a non biden candidate or i think anyone could win if he looks bad enough campaigning and debating.

Biden has some definite mental decline, but I think it's slightly overblown. The guy has always been a huma gaffe machine with no ability to control himself from saying stupid shit.

Don’t feed the troll.

mister d wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 8:49 am And if you think he hasn't earned the right to continue leading one of the most powerful nations on earth from ages 82 to 85? Well, buddy, fuck you. Its a binary choice and I don't want to hear any negative shit about the one you're told you have to pick.

Your non-binary choices are going to get a lot of women killed.

You’re a populist, but at least you’re coming around to admitting it.

Is this the binary where its either Republicans win or Biden wins because no one else is capable?

A_B wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 8:52 am

The Sybian wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 8:42 am

TT2.0 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 8:03 am

The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 6:22 pm

HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 5:21 pm We like trump because he will lose

Yeah, that's what we said during the 2016 primaries. I have zero confidence Biden beats Trump if they are the nominees in 2024, right now it's a coin toss if you look at the polls.

This exactly. Why do yall think America is in a hurry to reelect someone who is seemingly losing his mental capacity right before our eyes? The democrats need to be running a non biden candidate or i think anyone could win if he looks bad enough campaigning and debating.

Biden has some definite mental decline, but I think it's slightly overblown. The guy has always been a huma gaffe machine with no ability to control himself from saying stupid shit.

Don’t feed the troll.

I didn't see it as a troll, but a wakeup call. I think Dems need to realize Biden isn't a good option. I'm well beyond the point of voting for "anyone but Trump," but Dems need to realize that isn't enough. Most people aren't well informed, and many are living under a different set of facts than us. Yeah, Trump is horrible and dragged the majority of the GOP with him, but we can't be self-righteous and ignore people who don't see things the way we do because we know we are "right." We also can't ignore that Biden is really fucking far from a perfect candidate or President. A million times better than Trump, but he is still a shitty option.

Yup. I can say I'm voting Dem no matter who it is every day until the election and I'll still get "you people are what lost it for us" if Biden loses because I'm not waving the pom-poms. Its not about appealing to me, its about appealing to the idiots in the center too dumb to see the differences or those who are fine staying home rather than voting for piss over shit. Repeatedly saying "fuck you, this is our choice for you now do it" doesn't work when that candidate lacks some sort of motivating factor versus the perpetual "I'm not him/them".

It's the one big problem I have with the Democrats.

They will decide for you who the correct candidate is because you are the proletariat and they are the ruling class.

It's why you better be With Her™ and why you should dare not question it when Buttigieg and Klobuchar drop out of the race to endorse Biden when Sanders was surging.

(And no, being nominated to becoming Secretary of Transportation is completely above board for a small town mayor. How dare you question this, peasant.)

What are you going to do, peasant? Vote for the other guy?

The indignation and hubris of the Democrats is really something to behold, honestly. All that they have going for them is that Team Red is beholden to religious fanatics who want to demonstrably regress the nation to the 1950s or earlier.

It's almost like a nation of 330 million people has too many diverse opinions to be adequately represented by two parties.

The Sybian wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 11:13 am It's almost like a nation of 330 million people has too many diverse opinions to be adequately represented by two parties.

That, and the Bell Curve of human intelligence is real with a sample size that big.

It's the old Carlin joke: "Imagine the intelligence of the average American and realize half of the people are dumber than that."

The Sybian wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 10:26 am We also can't ignore that Biden is really fucking far from a perfect candidate or President. A million times better than Trump, but he is still a shitty option.

You also can't ignore that waging a primary campaign against a sitting, incumbent President would have disastrous consequences, for both the "rebel" candidate and the Party. Look how well it worked out in 1980.

Biden ain't perfect, by a looooooooooong shot, but unless he decides not to run again, it's who the Dem's are stuck with.

The Dems have proven that promoting/protecting establishment Dems is priority #1, otherwise it wouldn't have to be a rogue challenger but rather a torch passing to someone more individually electable which would only increase the odds in 2024.

mister d wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 12:52 pm The Dems have proven that promoting/protecting establishment Dems is priority #1, otherwise it wouldn't have to be a rogue challenger but rather a torch passing to someone more individually electable which would only increase the odds in 2024.

It's not a "Dem's protecting the establishment" thing. Since Primaries became the way to select a party's nominee, no challenger to an incumbent has won the nomination.

Here's the History of Primary Challenges to Incumbent Presidents

Truman vs. Kefauver (1952)
Johnson vs. McCarthy (1968)
Ford vs. Reagan (1976)
Carter vs. Kennedy (1980)
Bush vs. Buchanan (1992)

Of those, 2 dropped out of the race before the convention (Truman, Johnson) with the eventual nominees (Stevenson, Humphrey) losing the general. And the other 3 lost their re-election campaign.

Dave, I think you're mixing a couple things here, at least IMO.

The retort to "We need a better candidate" isn't "Yea, but if you switch horses midstream, it looks weak and you can't primary the sitting guy."

No kidding to both of those points. I'm not advocating for that either. We're stuck with Biden and that's that.

I'm just saying when the opportunity is presented to have a fresh face and new leader of the party, the establishment will decide for you.

You will be guilted into voting for them because Team Red sucks and will fuck your existence into submission. It's our candidate, peasant. Deal with it.

Hillary Clinton hung around and hung around and hung around in 2008 when it was obvious Obama was what the voters wanted. But she subtly referenced RFK as a reason to do so implying Obama might be murdered. (That's my recollection of it. I remember a wicked takedown by Keith Olbermann about it.)

She was then anointed in 2016 AND we all know how that went.

For Democrats, party leadership is the priority and everything else is secondary, as Syb said.

What’s this “anointed” shit? There was a series of primaries around the country. She got the most votes. You don’t have to like her but at least acknowledge it was small d democratic.

Would you say the party ever works to direct votes where they want or is it equal support to all candidates and may the best win?

mister d wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 1:55 pm Would you say the party ever works to direct votes where they want or is it equal support to all candidates and may the best win?

This isn’t the Soviet Union. People can vote for whomever they want.

Not my question.

BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 1:42 pm What’s this “anointed” shit? There was a series of primaries around the country. She got the most votes. You don’t have to like her but at least acknowledge it was small d democratic.

It's not a tough argument to make that the super delegates are pretty close to anointing oils.

BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 1:42 pm What’s this “anointed” shit? There was a series of primaries around the country. She got the most votes. You don’t have to like her but at least acknowledge it was small d democratic.

So then Democrat voters are dumb as dogshit sheeple then? Maybe they do need the puppet mastering the establishment provides.

That same establishment with the machinations behind the scenes to outright put the thumb on the scales to make sure there's only a singular choice with all of the money behind it.

Shirley wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:13 pm

BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 1:42 pm What’s this “anointed” shit? There was a series of primaries around the country. She got the most votes. You don’t have to like her but at least acknowledge it was small d democratic.

It's not a tough argument to make that the super delegates are pretty close to anointing oils.

2016 Democratic primary popular vote totals

Hillary Clinton 16,917,853
Bernie Sanders 13,210,550

Johnnie wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 10:56 amwhen Buttigieg and Klobuchar drop out of the race to endorse Biden when Sanders was surging.

Lol.

Sanders got 20 percent in South Carolina the week before Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropped out. That was even worse than Sanders had done there in 2016. (26 percent.)

(And neither Buttigieg nor Klobuchar even reached 9 percent in South Carolina - showing that they just didn't have any pull with the black voters who make up a large part of the Dem base. But yeah, it's a mystery why they dropped out after that.)

Yeah, silly to think the now Secretary of Transportation and the one-time front-runner for VP (and speaker at the inauguration) had any incentive to drop out when they did.

Do you think he would have stayed in the race without that offer because he would have preferred Sanders to win?

Syb's right, this is all because of our two-party system. At some point, the focus will be on who is the most electable and not who has the best ideas for what some of us feel are the track this country should be on. And unfortunately, the other side has become so increasingly revolting and frightening (I mean, we really are close to the point where next time I go to New Mexico, I'm going to get pulled over to make sure I'm not taking my wife or daughter to get an abortion) that we're at a point where ideas don't really matter. It's finding the most likely person to win. I'd give anything to replace Biden with someone younger and more progressive, but that's handing the election to Trump at this point.

BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:18 pm

Shirley wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:13 pm

BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 1:42 pm What’s this “anointed” shit? There was a series of primaries around the country. She got the most votes. You don’t have to like her but at least acknowledge it was small d democratic.

It's not a tough argument to make that the super delegates are pretty close to anointing oils.

2016 Democratic primary popular vote totals

Hillary Clinton 16,917,853
Bernie Sanders 13,210,550

Yeah, but that's skewed because Hillary wrapped the contest up relatively early because she had all superdelegates on her side (something like 15% of the total votes) on day 1. People tend to vote for the candidate they know is going to win.

I agree to a point with Johnnie's argument that the party itself has a thumb on the scale, but I think you're forgetting that the primary point of "the establishment" is to get candidates elected. If Sanders and his ideas were more popular nationwide and he ultimately was more likely to win in 2016 than Hilary was I would think that they would have "anointed" him the nominee with the SuperDelegates. If you recall there was talk about instituting SuperDelegates on the GOP side when they were worried that TFG was going to get the nomination.

Keep in mind a couple points for national elections:

1. Because of the fucking Electoral College, the only important states are the swing states: PA, OH, NC, VA, WI, MI, IL, FL, AZ, and NV. The other 41 jurisdictions are locked in place.

2. Because of the demographics of the country in whole, winning the cities in those states are only half the battle. The other half is the white middle class Gen X / Boomers, which are the major tilting factors in those states. If a candidate can win those, by either dog-whistling racist bullshit, pandering to their economic needs, or by keeping enough of them home that the urban counties carry the day, they take them.

3. Regarding #2, also remember the vast majority of people aren't as plugged into this as we are here. And this isn't saying that they're all dumb (although that's a significant enough portion). It's that these people have busy lives of jobs and kids, and frankly don't have the time to follow politics. At least in 2016, I can see how people might've considered giving TFG a try, as he was a presence in their lives for the prior 15 years or so.*

Would Sanders, or Warren, or Klobacher have been better for the Progressive cause? Of course they would have. But would they have the same national appeal for those I described in #3 above? Maybe, maybe not. Arguing whether "the establishment" got it wrong in underestimating their national appeal, that's a valid complaint. Arguing that "the establishment" thought someone else would have greater national appeal but chose Biden anyway, that's flat-out incorrect.


* This does not excuse the people in the NYC, NJ, Philly, or Jersey Shore areas. They've been watching him step on rakes for the last forty fucking years. The people who voted for him there in 2016 need to be reminded of their shitty choice at every opportunity. And I'm counting my parents in this group.