The Swamp

Was about to post, almost verbatim, what Syb said.

Bernie is going to lead the pack, or tuck up under Biden, until the real campaigning starts and the younger and more relatable crop starts to make themselves known. Media and everyone calling this a crowded field are being a little silly. There are easily 10 "candidates" out there that have absolutely no chance up against the 8 or so heavy hitters.

Even if you shoestring the fuck out of a campaign, you need SOME fundraising dollars, and there are a bunch of folks that just wont achieve any kind of lift off.

And, related to that, Dems need to say fuck playing nice when it comes to attacking each other on where the funding is coming from.

Rush2112 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:58 pm

brian wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:22 pm I just think anyone who is not a Bernie stan is done with him at this point. But again, we'll see.

You realize that he routinely polls as one of the most popular politicians in the country, right?

So does Hillary Clinton. I don't want her to run either.

Honestly if people like Kulinski call out Dems and rake them over the coals like he did here with Maher and the field and it picks up traction, then I see Bernie winning the nomination.



And now my avatar looks a bit sillier, but oh well.

Joe K wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:58 pm The thing about those “younger” and “more appealable” faces is that they don’t have nearly the same consistent track record of progressive politics that Sanders does. To use a few examples, remember when Booker went on Meet the Press and bashed Obama for criticizing Romney’s work in private equity? Or how Harris first ran for San Francisco DA on a hardline, tough on crime platform? Or how Gillibrand initially ran for Congress as a conservative Dem? Authenticity matters to voters and I think that’s a big part of why Sanders consistently polls as one of the most popular politicians in America.

Is there something wrong with private equity? I mean it's all for nothing if you can't cash out. There are a lot of folks that buy into the social agenda but not the socialism part. Still, its hard for me to listen to a serious immigration debate without an acknowledgement that whatever laws are implemented must be enforced. Alas, those thoughts are too much to ask. Just don't run it off the rails. And that's why Trump will be reelected. Al Gore knows.

To be very clear, I don't think anyone supporting Sanders' agenda but not Sanders is going to be backing Harris or Booker or Gillibrand.

brian wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 1:24 pm

Rush2112 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:58 pm

brian wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:22 pm I just think anyone who is not a Bernie stan is done with him at this point. But again, we'll see.

You realize that he routinely polls as one of the most popular politicians in the country, right?

So does Hillary Clinton. I don't want her to run either.

You don't seem to mention any cult in regards to Hillary, but repeatedly do when mentioning Bernie. You do realize that most of the online "Bernie Bros" where Russian bots right? But anyone who supports Sanders is a "Bernie Stan" got ya.

I said nothing even remotely of the kind in this thread.

I don't think Bernie has a chance to beat Trump. That is essentially the only reason I won't support his candidacy. I think he can be effective moving the Democratic Party leftward and I hope he does. If he's the nominee, he will lose. Period.

Then what the Hell is a "Bernie stan?"

he raised a million bucks in 3 hours after announcing and gets millennials off their asses...but ya couldn't beat Trump

Rush2112 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:15 pm Then what the Hell is a "Bernie stan?"

he raised a million bucks in 3 hours after announcing and gets millennials off their asses...but ya couldn't beat Trump

He won't beat Trump. No one wants to replace a wet, old man with...<checks notes> another wet, even older man. Fortunately he has almost no chance at the nomination.

I guess all those polls are wrong because you've deemed it so. The two leaders are **checks notes** both older white men.


Why even have a primary? The DNC should just get the answer from you.

I'd be OK with that.

I realize Bernie is popular but I don't think anyone is factoring in that every advantage he had in 2016 is gone. He isn't the only other candidate, he's older than most of the field as opposed to being essentially the same age as Hillary, his positions aren't even significantly further left than most of the candidates. He'll also be more throughly vetted than he was in 2016, especially if he ever does establish himself as some kind of nominal front-runner.

Once he gets up on a stage with a dozen people a generation or more younger than him, the choice will be stark and clear and unequivocal.

brian wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:30 pmhis positions aren't even significantly further left than most of the candidates.

Yooooooo ...

As noted previously, all the younger candidates just recently came to the light and moved left. Bernie, if anything, has moved right since his start in politics. The advantage he had, and still has, is that he's been fighting for the same things since he was the mayor of a small city. One could argue that Warren is somewhat in the same boat, but the rest just realized that they need to lean a little more left.

Aside, from maybe Biden, he's had by far the most experience and has at this time by far the most name recognition.

These early polls don't always seem to vet out, but as soon as Bernie announced he became the front-runner, especially without good old Uncle Joe in the race

mister d wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:50 pm

brian wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:30 pmhis positions aren't even significantly further left than most of the candidates.

Yooooooo ...

Should have said relative to 2016, but the fact remains that support for M4A and Green New Deal are probably going to be required to get the nomination. Once you get past those Bernie's positions are mostly consistent with much of the field.

And he's a huge reason those platforms will be required. You can't diminish what he's done to shape this entire movement just because others are (reluctantly and against their own record) joining him.

mister d wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:57 pm And he's a huge reason those platforms will be required. You can't diminish what he's done to shape this entire movement just because others are (reluctantly and against their own record) joining him.

I'm not. I never did. But that's a large reason why he himself is not going to win the nomination.

Here's the thing: I expect anyone from the far left to vote for a centrist or moderate candidate if that's how this plays out. I will absolutely vote for a progressive, including Bernie if that's how we land.

We're all on the same side here, no reason to get pissy with each other. While I agree with brian that Bernie is going to have trouble from an optics standpoint, I am not at all opposed to his presence in this race.

For sure. I hope I'm being clear that I welcome his positions and if him being in forces the eventual nominee to the left, that's a good result.

But there are some legitimate reasons why him being in the race is a negative, one of the main reasons being that the nomination fight is now essentially going to be a re-litigation of the 2016 primary, which is extremely counterproductive. If that doesn't end up happening I'll be very pleasantly surprised.

The problem with Bernie is resistance to Bernie outpaces resistance to Bernie's ideas.

I can't wait for the first time a Bernie supporter accuses Obama of pulling the strings behind determining who the nominee is after it becomes clear the rank and file want a younger, more diverse candidate as opposed to a white, old man.

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:09 pm Here's the thing: I expect anyone from the far left to vote for a centrist or moderate candidate if that's how this plays out. I will absolutely vote for a progressive, including Bernie if that's how we land.

We're all on the same side here, no reason to get pissy with each other. While I agree with brian that Bernie is going to have trouble from an optics standpoint, I am not at all opposed to his presence in this race.

I voted for Hillary, so I can confidently say I will not hesitate to vote for any Dem nominee against Trump (assuming that's how it plays out).

brian wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:26 pm I can't wait for the first time a Bernie supporter accuses Obama of pulling the strings behind determining who the nominee is after it becomes clear the rank and file want a younger, more diverse candidate as opposed to a white, old man.

Here’s a verified Twitter account with over 50K followers suggesting, within hours of Sanders announcing, that his candidacy is part of a Russian plot.

But sure, Bernie’s supporters are the uniquely irrational and conspiratorial ones here...

Sanders DOES have his own issues with Russia frankly. I wouldn't go as far as this person, but it'll become a bigger issue if he's the nominee.

I’ll support anybody who can beat Trump. I’ll support your dog, if he can get more votes than Trump.

sancarlos wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:14 pm I’ll support anybody who can beat Trump. I’ll support your dog, if he can get more votes than Trump.

The good news is most dogs are smarter, too.

sancarlos wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:14 pm I’ll support anybody who can beat Drumpf. I’ll support your dog, if he can get more votes than Drumpf.

BERNESE STAN

I'm with fur?

Ryan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:12 am

sancarlos wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:14 pm I’ll support anybody who can beat Drumpf. I’ll support your dog, if he can get more votes than Drumpf.

BERNESE STAN

That's my favorite breed, but we better vote in a puppy or make sure there is a good VP. Those adorable fluffy bastards have a life expectancy of 6-8 years.

Between this and being invited to an event to have a beer with the Senator on Saturday (which regrettably I will be unable to attend), I think I have my candidate for the nomination, as unlikely as it is for him to even finish in the top five.

(I actually like Brown quite a bit and always have, but so that's not why. But I think he'd be a great candidate, could possibly help the Dems carry Ohio, when would mean it would be impossible for Trump to win and he's a sneakily funny dude.)

I was willing to give Klobuchar some rope after those initial stories came out about her being a shitty boss.

But today's NYT story is the final straw. Horrible boss = terrible human. I'm not voting for a piece of shit like that. I had a boss like her once, totally scarring experience. Fuck that shit.

She's a garbage human. What a fucking asshole.



Edit:

This commentary is better.

Beto is not running.

For the Texas Senate seat. He is running for President of the United States.

I say this as someone who bought a Beto t-shirt and has a Beto sticker on his garage (beer) fridge. Fuck off, Beto.

Can I call right now he’s going to be the eventual VP for the woman who runs against the white dude (with Booker) in the Dem primary finals?

And honestly I think he already knows this and that’s the play.

I don't know. There's a lot of time between now and the first primaries. I still think if Beto gets the nomination he kills Trump in a walk, but I'm not gonna push my chips in on a candidate yet. Definitely want to see what they say at the various debates, town halls, etc. I'm going to keep my mind open.

govmentchedda wrote: ↑Wed Feb 27, 2019 8:22 pm . Fuck off, Beto.

Really? Why?

What’s your favorite Beto policy position?