|
Condiv posted:https://twitter.com/jjz1600/status/1032224489004781569?s=21 Looking at the Crosstabs, Bernie is 62% and Trump is 9% for black Americans. Biden is 62% and Trump is 10% for black Americans. For everyone else, including Booker and Harris (42% and 40% respectively), it's worse. For the ones who didn't vote in 2016, 44% prefers Sander compared to Biden's 39%. Again, everyone else is worse.
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 13:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 05:22 |
|
|
theCalamity posted:Looking at the Crosstabs, Bernie is 62% and Trump is 9% for black Americans. Biden is 62% and Trump is 10% for black Americans. For everyone else, including Booker and Harris (42% and 40% respectively), it's worse. People likely don't know Booker and Harris. I'm sure with media coverage and appearances their numbers with black Americans would shoot up quite a bit higher than 42%. Bernie was probably pretty low himself at the beginning of the 2016 campaign because he wasn't well known.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 14:11
|
|
|
A.I. Borgland Corp posted:People likely don't know Booker and Harris. I'm sure with media coverage and appearances their numbers with black Americans would shoot up quite a bit higher than 42%. Bernie was probably pretty low himself at the beginning of the 2016 campaign because he wasn't well known. yeah i'm sure harris will be a hit when her "lock everyone up for non-violent crime/keep nonviolent offenders in jail for cheap labor" viewpoints hit the mainstream
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 14:14
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Does make me wonder if a lot of Trump's base would stay home if Trump isn't on the ballot and the Republicans try to push through gutless establishment candidates. I think a lot of Trump supporters would stay home, but you'd pick back up everyone that stayed home because of him. Voters like FReep would still show up, but all the people that don't usually vote would probably go back to that. Cease to Hope posted:i repeat, this is not a matter of whether people will vote for someone as old as him, but whether he's willing and able to run in 2020 is by no means certain. same goes for biden. Trump is about as old as they are, and between the stress and reported diet Trump is far less likely to 'be able to run' in 2020. Condiv posted:https://twitter.com/jjz1600/status/1032224489004781569?s=21 Bernie and Biden are the only ones with high name recognition across the country, that's all polls this far out can measure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 14:18
|
|
|
Condiv posted:yeah i'm sure harris will be a hit when her "lock everyone up for non-violent crime/keep nonviolent offenders in jail for cheap labor" viewpoints hit the mainstream Yeah, I'm sure they'll do that any second now. Oh wait all reporting on both "sides" is top down controlled by intelligence agencies or fully discredited or both.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 14:19
|
|
|
A.I. Borgland Corp posted:People likely don't know Booker and Harris. I'm sure with media coverage and appearances their numbers with black Americans would shoot up quite a bit higher than 42%. Bernie was probably pretty low himself at the beginning of the 2016 campaign because he wasn't well known. Probably, but the fact that "Undecided" is still polling better than most of the 2020 hopefuls suggests that the "Anyone But Trump" bump the Dems are betting their future on isn't going to be all that big. The Dems' entire electoral strategy right now is assuming that people hate Trump so much that any Democratic candidate will get a sizeable bump just by not being in the Trump party. Every time someone looks at a "Trump v X" matchup and chooses Undecided, that's a sign that the blue wave isn't going to be the tsunami the Dems are hoping for. If there really was such an "Anyone But Trump" sentiment at the polls, you'd still expect the low-name-recognition Dems to benefit from people saying "well, I don't know who the heck they are, but at least they're not Trump!". The fact that "Don't know" is still beating most of the Dem candidates even in matchups against Trump means that #BlueWave2020 likely isn't going to live up to the hype, and that the Dem candidates are going to have to compete on the merits rather than expecting to coast to victory on "hey, don't you remember how much you hate Trump".
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 14:31
|
|
|
Re: B-but Bernie Sanders is old! Who loving cares? Even if he dies halfway into his first term that's still two years of a Bernie Sanders presidency and possibly even M4A. I'd take that over eight years of Harris or whoever any day. Plus as has been mentioned, that's kind of what VPs are for so as long as he picks a good one we're fine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 15:03
|
|
|
Establishment Democrats are absolutely hoping on anything that's a 'win without actually trying or doing anything' ticket. They are literally incapable of anything else.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 15:26
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
Condiv posted:yeah i'm sure harris will be a hit when her "lock everyone up for non-violent crime/keep nonviolent offenders in jail for cheap labor" viewpoints hit the mainstream Unfortunately those are pretty mainstream/popular positions even among Democratic voters!
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 15:34
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Re: B-but Bernie Sanders is old! Nobody. All of those people would support Biden or Clinton in a heartbeat. They only pretend to care because they don't want to admit they prefer losing to Trump again than winning but with a socialist* on the ticket. *Actually a just a standard New Deal Liberal, which is now socialism
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 15:51
|
|
|
They should be arrested for treason, but it's an ok start I guess
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
So I hear a lot of liberals being against a $15 minimum wage because in rural areas and I guess poorer areas, making 15 is a lot of money compared to cities. But if people are being paid more money, doesn’t that more people have more money to spend on things which strengthens the economy? I’m dumb when it comes to that kind of stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 16:06
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:So I hear a lot of liberals being against a $15 minimum wage because in rural areas and I guess poorer areas, making 15 is a lot of money compared to cities. But if people are being paid more money, doesn't that more people have more money to spend on things which strengthens the economy? I'm dumb when it comes to that kind of stuff. Yeah, but it's being spent on things like goods and services and not financial instruments so they don't care. readingatwork posted:Re: B-but Bernie Sanders is old! At that point the election is about the VP and not the actual candidate so their policy goals become more important, and you'll see a lot more pressure being put in to have a compromise candidate that can assume the presidency if necessary. It totally sunk McCain since Palin was untested but good with the base, and proved herself to be unfit for the presidency despite whatever McCain could have done in the chair.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 16:16
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:So I hear a lot of liberals being against a $15 minimum wage because in rural areas and I guess poorer areas, making 15 is a lot of money compared to cities. But if people are being paid more money, doesn’t that more people have more money to spend on things which strengthens the economy? I’m dumb when it comes to that kind of stuff. Anyway, every year that nothing is done, an $15 minimum wage becomes less and less extravagant especially in many coastal states at this point. If liberals were fine with a universal living wage (it could be $18 in a city, $11 in a rural area) it would make more sense but honestly I think the general thrust is to keep minimum wages well...minimal. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 16:38 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 16:36
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:So I hear a lot of liberals being against a $15 minimum wage because in rural areas and I guess poorer areas, making 15 is a lot of money compared to cities. But if people are being paid more money, doesn’t that more people have more money to spend on things which strengthens the economy? I’m dumb when it comes to that kind of stuff. Eh, it's really pedantic because of the population divide. Yes a $15 dollar minimum wage would help rural people more than urban ones because the cost of living is higher in the city. Ideally the minimum wage would fluctuate and change based on where you live to account for this and not even be consistent from one major city to another but what are you going to do? Its basically a repackaged "but I already make 15 bucks an hour!" gripe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 16:51
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Ideally the minimum wage would fluctuate and change based on where you live to account for this and not even be consistent from one major city to another but what are you going to do? Its basically a repackaged "but I already make 15 bucks an hour!" gripe. this is a bad idea and all it does is incentivize keeping wages artificially low in more economically distressed areas
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 17:18
|
|
|
Also a lot of the age-related bad poo poo that happens to a human comes down to lifestyle and genetics, and Bernie basically busts his rear end to stay in shape for the former and apparently got lucky on the latter. Trump's brain is turning to mush at 71 and Sanders is very nimble mentally and still pretty much sounds like he did 20 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 17:25
|
|
|
Age concerns are just a red herring. Biden could be a 300-year-old corpse reanimated by infusions of liquified cash from the payments of eternal debt slaves, only capable of hugging on young women and signing consumer bankruptcy protection rollbacks and they'd be all "Diamond Joe!" "Here comes the TransAm!" "Obama's third term!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
Corsair Pool Boy posted:Trump is about as old as they are, and between the stress and reported diet Trump is far less likely to 'be able to run' in 2020. "what happens in 2020 if trump has an aneurysm" is an interesting hypothetical to me too tbh. he is just much less likely than sanders, biden, etc. to decide to retire instead of going through the ordeal of running VitalSigns posted:Age concerns are just a red herring. nobody is arguing "what if biden is too old to win," but rather "what if biden is too old to try" what do things look like if biden and/or sanders take themselves out of the running Cease to Hope fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Anyway, every year that nothing is done, an $15 minimum wage becomes less and less extravagant especially in many coastal states at this point. If liberals were fine with a universal living wage (it could be $18 in a city, $11 in a rural area) it would make more sense but honestly I think the general thrust is to keep minimum wages well...minimal. I think I said it earlier in the thread but it needs to be tied to inflation and pegged to a starting point. Arbitrarily picking 2012 since that's when the (poorly named) Fight For 15's website says they were formed, that $15 wage should already be $16.62 in July 2018 dollars. Otherwise this is going to get dragged out and then "phased in" over 5-15 years, and you'll have corporatist Dems claiming victory over a minimum wage hike to a number that only meant something in 2012, and furthermore, the problem will just happen all over again, getting worse with every year past when it was implemented, necessitating the same uphill battle again in the future. That's not progressive change, that's kicking the can down the road with your feet dragging along the ground to protect corporate interests. The ACA all over again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 18:29
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Age concerns are just a red herring. loving lmao. https://twitter.com/carterforva/status/1032310690227343360?s=21 Lee Carter status: still owns
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 18:30
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:Re: B-but Bernie Sanders is old! He might: a) decide not to run for president b) have a hard time doing the legwork of actual campaigning Sure, his physical condition is great now, but two years is a long time when you're in your late 70s. Unlike the mainstream Dems, the progressive movement has plenty of other options who could run - if not in 2020, then definitely in 2024. Putting too much importance on Bernie specifically is kind of unnecessary - there's plenty of others who can present about the same message at least as well as he can.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
I’m fairly confident at this point that unless he’s bedridden or dead in 2020, Bernie is running. I also don’t think he’s still here by 2024, and neither is Biden or either Clinton imo, most likely.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 18:41
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Putting too much importance on Bernie specifically is kind of unnecessary - there's plenty of others who can present about the same message at least as well as he can. He has name recognition and a dedicated base who already voted for him last time. You can't just expect that to fully transfer over to a new candidate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
Also if Bernie wins the primary you're going to get a Democratic Ross Perot - some dipshit third way businessperson who siphons off enough votes for him to realistically lose (as opposed to now, where every poll shows him kicking Trump's teeth in)
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 19:37
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I'm fairly confident at this point that unless he's bedridden or dead in 2020, Bernie is running. Beto 2024.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 19:43
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:So I hear a lot of liberals being against a $15 minimum wage because in rural areas and I guess poorer areas, making 15 is a lot of money compared to cities. But if people are being paid more money, doesn’t that more people have more money to spend on things which strengthens the economy? I’m dumb when it comes to that kind of stuff. it'd also make them more capable of moving to a big city like liberals loudly demand daily that they do. but i guess they should just bootstrap their way into a big city  HootTheOwl posted:Eh, it's really pedantic because of the population divide. Yes a $15 dollar minimum wage would help rural people more than urban ones because the cost of living is higher in the city. Ideally the minimum wage would fluctuate and change based on where you live to account for this and not even be consistent from one major city to another but what are you going to do? Its basically a repackaged "but I already make 15 bucks an hour!" gripe. no, it's an awful idea. all the companies in small rural towns are big loving companies with the $$$ to pay minimum wage. also, when you do this kind of "you live in a poorer area, less money for you!" game, you end up locking those people into poorer areas and out of opportunity.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 19:45
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:He has name recognition and a dedicated base who already voted for him last time. You can't just expect that to fully transfer over to a new candidate. That's why we have to spend the next two years (and probably the next four years after that) building name recognition and popularity for new candidates
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:That's why we have to spend the next two years (and probably the next four years after that) building name recognition and popularity for new candidates ... electorialism was a mistake
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
A.I. Borgland Corp posted:Unfortunately those are pretty mainstream/popular positions even among Democratic voters! Idk how anyone mentally deals w this stuff because these simple concepts like "slavery is wrong" are unpopular with most Americans
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
Even after 13th came out, woke libs performatively showed concern for like a week and went back to not caring, just like with the more recent child concentration camps
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Ocasio2018/status/1032315258042507264 she's so good
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
I knew that perez had weaksauced the unity reform commission's proposal for superdelegates, but this twist is new to me:quote:As the latest proposal stands, superdelegates in such an instance would be apportioned along with the pledged delegates to reflect that primary and caucus voting. If that still left no candidate with a majority, superdelegates then would be free to vote however they pleased on subsequent ballots. https://www.apnews.com/9426e9644df14629bf6acc3651af2ed0/Democrats-gather-to-confront-lingering-2016-frustration how in the world do you "apportion" to candidates those who believe that their edict for each to represent the will of 12,000 voters is a god-given right? eta: I guess what I'm asking is does this mean that supers can't declare their choices until the primaries in their states happens in which case they're "assigned" to candidates proportionately? Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Aug 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:38
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ocasio2018/status/1032311699506954242?s=21
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:40
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Also if Bernie wins the primary you're going to get a Democratic Ross Perot - some dipshit third way businessperson who siphons off enough votes for him to realistically lose (as opposed to now, where every poll shows him kicking Trump's teeth in) The only "advantage" to this is that it would at least officially make the hostility of that branch of the party towards the left explicit, as opposed to the sort of "polite" opposition that happens now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:40
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Also if Bernie wins the primary you're going to get a Democratic Ross Perot - some dipshit third way businessperson who siphons off enough votes for him to realistically lose (as opposed to now, where every poll shows him kicking Trump's teeth in) Nah, the only people who'll vote for a hypothetical candidate Bloomberg are upper middle to upper class liberals, and if there's one voting block the Dems can actually afford to lose it's them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 20:59
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:He might: Who are the deep pools of progressive talent poised to win the national election in Bernie's stead?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:I knew that perez had weaksauced the unity reform commission's proposal for superdelegates, but this twist is new to me: I don't know wtf that article is talking about in the later paragraphs. The plan is to not allow super-delegate voting on the first ballot unless a candidate has so much of a lead that the vote is a formality. That's it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 05:22 |
|
|
yeah it's p amazing that while we're in the midst of a deepening climate crisis, dems are showing leadership by.... accepting massive bribes from oil donors....
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 21:26
|
|