|
Who do you want to be the 2020 Democratic Nominee? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Joe "the liberal who fights busing" Biden |
|
27 | 1.40% |
| Bernie "please don't die" Sanders |
|
1017 | 52.69% |
| Cory "charter schools" Booker |
|
12 | 0.62% |
| Kirsten "wall street" Gillibrand |
|
24 | 1.24% |
| Kamala "truancy queen" Harris |
|
59 | 3.06% |
| Julian "who?" Castro |
|
7 | 0.36% |
| Tulsi "gay panic" Gabbard |
|
25 | 1.30% |
| Michael "crimes crimes crimes" Avenatti |
|
22 | 1.14% |
| Sherrod "discount bernie" Brown |
|
21 | 1.09% |
| Amy "horrible boss" Klobuchar |
|
12 | 0.62% |
| Tammy "stands for america" Duckworth |
|
48 | 2.49% |
| Beto "whataburger" O'Rourke |
|
32 | 1.66% |
| Elizabeth "instagram beer" Warren |
|
284 | 14.72% |
| Tom "impeach please" Steyer |
|
4 | 0.21% |
| Michael "soda is the devil" Bloomberg |
|
9 | 0.47% |
| Joseph Stalin |
|
287 | 14.87% |
| Howard "coffee republican" Schultz |
|
10 | 0.52% |
Jay "nobody cares about climate change  " Inslee |
|
13 | 0.67% |
| Pete "gently caress the homeless" Butt Man |
|
17 | 0.88% |
| Total: | 1930 votes | ||
|
theblackw0lf posted:The only candidate who I can see generating actual enthusiasm across the left and center left after they win the nomination, with minimal sniping, is Warren. I don't know if it's sexism on my part but I find her really stilted and the whole "mawmaw and pawpaw" mannerisms annoy me too. I feel much more positively about Sanders even if some of his supporters in my personal circles are annoying people.
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 22:15 |
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:while that's undoubtedly true, it's not quite the same thing as saying it'd be better if trump won in the absence of a sanders nomination Agreed, but again there was a dude arguing really clearly earlier today that he does in fact think that if Bernie isn't the candidate that four more years of Trump is the more desired outcome than another Democrat winning. Like, i'm not extrapolating out of "Bernie or Bust" what "Bust" means. The dude was really, honestly arguing for paragraphs that Bernie > Trump > Democrat is the preferred order.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:50
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Yeah, I don't disagree with any of this; Harris is the candidate I've seen getting the most traction, but it could go a lot of different ways. My bigger thing is the certainty that her lovely cop record will doom her feels a lot like a reprise of the "Hillary said super-predators, she's doomed in the South!" vibe of 2016. That did happen though, she won the South with fewer votes in 2016 than she lost with in 2008. Voters didn't show up But nobody wanted to pay any attention to that, so they convinced themselves that her high percentage of the drastically low turnout indicated she was incredibly popular and nobody really cared that she owned slaves and spent her whole career fighting to lock up black people forever and showed John McCain how to really run a hosed-up racist campaign against Obama, and welp turns out a lot of people remembered after all didn't they
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:50
|
|
|
Honestly, I think the "if we have a divided primary, Trump wins!!!" fear is a little overblown; unless we're talking a full blown convention theft scenario, I think 95% of primary voters will end up voting for the winner, even if it's not their pick.VitalSigns posted:That did happen though, she won the South with fewer votes in 2016 than she lost with in 2008. Voters didn't show up Okay all of that is true but... she still won the South. And for the purpose of this conversation (what will happen in the 2020 primary), that's sort of the relevant part. Z. Autobahn fucked around with this message at 04:55 on Jan 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:51
|
|
|
We're months away from the debates and over a year away from the first primary. Trying to guess how this is actually gonna shake out based on the current vibe on twitter is kinda pointless. This time last year, nobody had hear of Michael Avennati. Six months ago, people were talking about him as a serious presidential contender. Now he's a joke.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:53
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Honestly, I think the "if we have a divided primary, Trump wins!!!" fear is a little overblown; unless we're talking a full blown convention theft scenario, I think 95% of primary voters will end up voting for the winner, even if it's not their pick. I am hoping a lot of the "I hate Sanders!" people will see the wet blankets from the centrist camp and realizing that Sanders' greater charisma is the better evil.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:54
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Honestly, I think the "if we have a divided primary, Trump wins!!!" fear is a little overblown; unless we're talking a full blown convention theft scenario, I think 95% of primary voters will end up voting for the winner, even if it's not their pick. So long as it isn't someone like Biden I'd agree with this. To be clear, I'd still vote for Biden over Trump but I would be right pissed off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:55
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Honestly, I think the "if we have a divided primary, Trump wins!!!" fear is a little overblown; unless we're talking a full blown convention theft scenario, I think 95% of primary voters will end up voting for the winner, even if it's not their pick. Yeah, again, that's my hope and that a lot of the rancor and stubborn intractability we're hearing now is largely just people working out their poo poo before it all comes together. Obviously the concern is a repeat of 2016 where turnout is law and Trump gets another narrow victory but I'd like to believe that the last 2 years of Blue Wave and focused fight against a common enemy doesn't dry up now. Gripweed posted:We're months away from the debates and over a year away from the first primary. Trying to guess how this is actually gonna shake out based on the current vibe on twitter is kinda pointless. This time last year, nobody had hear of Michael Avennati. Six months ago, people were talking about him as a serious presidential contender. Now he's a joke. I agree with your overall point but was anyone serious ever SERIOUSLY talking about Avenatti as a serious candidate. Seriously?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:55
|
|
|
I can't see Warren going anywhere. The left will go to Bernie, and the centrist clinton wing will be behind Harris. She'll be stuck between the two, and the recent DNA thing really soured a lot of her goodwill. If Bernie doesn't run then, yeah I can see her scooping up the left but she doesn't have the spark to fill stadiums and enthuse people like Bernie, so the clinton machine will just steam roll over her with Harris. Maaaaybe if Bernie is out there stumping hard for her that could make the difference but I just have a hard time seeing it. I think Harris gets the nod, Harris beats Trump, then she makes tax cuts permanent, tries to shore up the ACA, passes some regressive carbon tax and bombs another country or 2 for the next 8 years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:57
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Honestly, I think the "if we have a divided primary, Trump wins!!!" fear is a little overblown; unless we're talking a full blown convention theft scenario, I think 95% of primary voters will end up voting for the winner, even if it's not their pick. it's balanced against the fact that a divided primary is more likely to weed out a mccain or gore or dukakis. better that eg Biden flame out now than during the campaign proper.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:57
|
|
|
Tom Guycot posted:I can't see Warren going anywhere. The left will go to Bernie, and the centrist clinton wing will be behind Harris. She'll be stuck between the two, and the recent DNA thing really soured a lot of her goodwill. If Bernie doesn't run then, yeah I can see her scooping up the left but she doesn't have the spark to fill stadiums and enthuse people like Bernie, so the clinton machine will just steam roll over her with Harris. Maaaaybe if Bernie is out there stumping hard for her that could make the difference but I just have a hard time seeing it. The irony is that if Bernie *didn't* run, I think Warren would be a clear frontrunner, because the left would back her and she's palatable to the center.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:57
|
|
|
Tom Guycot posted:I'm not going to attack you, but I would like discuss Harris. I assume so far she's your number one pick, yes? My number one pick is honestly Warren, but I don’t think she alone would win. I think Harris appeals to a larger audience, and like Obama can win. I think UHC could start to happen under Harris. I don’t think she’ll be great about Israel, I don’t know enough about Venezuela to have an opinion. As for other hot spots, I don’t think we should be the world police, but that’s going to take another decade of people like AOC being popular to push the party in the direction me and a lot of this thread want. On Wall Street, the election process is going to be a make it or break for her. She’ll need to go harder left (regulation, dealing with college debt ect ...) to win, but i think she will. As for calling Harris “well spoken” or whatever I wrote above, and somehow implying I need to be careful because it could be racist because on my wording was my point really. There’s plenty of people in the fly over states that voted for BO because he spoke a certain way, but calling them racist or sexist doesn’t help anything. Acknowledging a bias that exists in a section of the population doesn’t mean me pointing it is racist. Harris speaks with the same kind of oratory flare as BO helps her with those people. The other side of the coin is the Bernie bros that are sexist and racist will target her because of it. I haven’t called called anyone in this thread directly sexist, while if you look at their posts about her there’s plenty of underlying sexism from a few here that think they are “woke”. Bernie doing jack poo poo for the majority of his time in congress, not helping Dems and only calling himself a dem when it helps him gives me no hope that even if he did win he could actually do anything he says he’s going to do. He isn’t good at actually navigating any of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:58
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:If these emotions and arguments are what the Dem primary is going to drudge up, which I have a hard time seeing coalesce hard enough behind a single candidate, I'm looking forward to President Trump in 2020.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:58
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Obviously the concern is a repeat of 2016 where turnout is law and Trump gets another narrow victory but I'd like to believe that the last 2 years of Blue Wave and focused fight against a common enemy doesn't dry up now. Turnout in 2016 wasn't low. It was about or slightly above average. 1988 - 50.3% 1992 - 55.2% 1996 - 49.0% 2000 - 50.3% 2004 - 55.7% 2008 - 58.2% 2012 - 54.9% 2016 - 55.5%
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 04:59
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:i don't think anyone is actually saying that
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:01
|
|
|
Skippy McPants posted:Turnout in 2016 wasn't low. It was about or slightly above average. While that's true, support for Clinton cratered in the "Blue Wall" states. Driving turnout in decisive states like those ones is going to be key in 2020.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:02
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Obviously the concern is a repeat of 2016 where turnout is law and Trump gets another narrow victory but I'd like to believe that the last 2 years of Blue Wave and focused fight against a common enemy doesn't dry up now. There are few things I have 100% confidence in, but 2020 being a high turnout years is one of them. You don't have a 75-year record high midterm turnout and then a weak Presidential. Pretty much everyone is extremely amped up about politics right now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:02
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Agreed, but again there was a dude arguing really clearly earlier today that he does in fact think that if Bernie isn't the candidate that four more years of Trump is the more desired outcome than another Democrat winning. great, that's one guy on the internet you can safely ignore. who cares the argument dickeye brought up, which actually is common among sanders supporters, still holds that trump winning again is awful and immediately worse than pretty much any democrat short of like joe manchin winning
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:03
|
|
|
I really don't see Harris winning. The establishment can't stack the deck for her with superdelegates like they did for Clinton, the field is much more crowded, and Bernie is going in with way higher name recognition. Whether or not Bernie is the most or second most popular politician in America, he's up there. When the debates start and you've got Bernie proposing solid, popular policy proposals, and Warren seems like the only candidate who is actually willing to try to be more ambitious than him. Harris will just be one of a half dozen Democratic Jebs either tepidly agreeing with Bernie's policies or saying they go too far and Americans deserve worse than that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:04
|
|
|
Majorian posted:While that's true, support for Clinton cratered in the "Blue Wall" states. Driving turnout in decisive states like those ones is going to be key in 2020. Fair, but I don't see any of the 2020 candidates tacking as close to full Neoliberal as Hillary did in '16. I just want to avoid that narrative that people didn't show up to vote last time and that's why Trump won. It's something I hear from time to time and it doesn't really capture any aspect of what went wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:06
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:I really don't see Harris winning. The establishment can't stack the deck for her with superdelegates like they did for Clinton, the field is much more crowded, and Bernie is going in with way higher name recognition. Whether or not Bernie is the most or second most popular politician in America, he's up there. When the debates start and you've got Bernie proposing solid, popular policy proposals, and Warren seems like the only candidate who is actually willing to try to be more ambitious than him. Harris will just be one of a half dozen Democratic Jebs either tepidly agreeing with Bernie's policies or saying they go too far and Americans deserve worse than that. Bernie's got high recognition, but he's also polarizing, with unfavs slightly behind favs. His path to a win is basically Trump-On-Extreme-Difficulty: the establishment candidates attack each other, the DNC doesn't see him as a threat, and the states work out in his favor. The problem is that I think pulling that sort of a run is a lot harder with the Dems, on all levels: Trump wouldn't have won in 2016 if they'd followed Dem delegate rules, and I think the Democratic establishment is much more likely to unify in the face of a Sanders' ascendancy than the Republicans were. Like, if it's the home stretch and, say, it's a split between Bernie, Harris, and Biden, I could absolutely see Harris and Biden teaming up and agreeing on a POTUS/VP arrangement, with one dropping out and pledging their delegates to the other. It's not impossible, by any means, but he needs quite a bit of Trump's luck.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:09
|
|
|
the best thing that could possibly happen for sanders chances is a major recession before the debates, in which case all bets are off. otherwise its gonna be a lovely neolib coronation
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:11
|
|
|
Turnout was high for Republicans and low for Democrats and Democrat leaning Independents. Trump is basically about the best the current GOP can do in some ways.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:12
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:great, that's one guy on the internet you can safely ignore. who cares The post I made that you were responding to was me literally saying "I hope and think that guys like that are just a vocal fringe." Skippy McPants posted:Fair, but I don't see any of the 2020 candidates tacking as close to full Neoliberal as Hillary did in '16. I will concede that I made a lazy and incomplete at best statement calling it a "low turnout" (or "law turnout" such as it was).
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:12
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:I really don't see Harris winning. The establishment can't stack the deck for her with superdelegates like they did for Clinton, the field is much more crowded, and Bernie is going in with way higher name recognition. Whether or not Bernie is the most or second most popular politician in America, he's up there. When the debates start and you've got Bernie proposing solid, popular policy proposals, and Warren seems like the only candidate who is actually willing to try to be more ambitious than him. Harris will just be one of a half dozen Democratic Jebs either tepidly agreeing with Bernie's policies or saying they go too far and Americans deserve worse than that. Bernie's high name recognition is actually his biggest problem. At this point, you're either onboard with him or you hate him. Maybe the people onboard already are enough to win the primary on their own, but unless he makes serious attempts to win over the people who hate him, his numbers aren't going to move much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:14
|
|
|
Pylons posted:Bernie's high name recognition is actually his biggest problem. At this point, you're either onboard with him or you hate him. Maybe the people onboard already are enough to win the primary on their own, but unless he makes serious attempts to win over the people who hate him, his numbers aren't going to move much. Bernie's pretty well positioned to dunk on Trump, that could do it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:17
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Bernie's pretty well positioned to dunk on Trump, that could do it. It might seem kinda weird if Bernie spends most of the primary dunking on Trump, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:21
|
|
|
LionArcher posted:Bernie doing jack poo poo for the majority of his time in congress This is a total lie by the by, and the fact that you just uncritically repeated it without even checking if it was accurate because it matched what you wanted to believe, should be an indication that you need to take a step back and examine your biases
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:21
|
|
|
I think I’m going to rank candidates on a two-fold scale: how horrible of a climate future are they promising us and how horrible of a climate future do they have explicit plans to achieve. What more do I need to know?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:21
|
|
|
Pylons posted:It might seem kinda weird if Bernie spends most of the primary dunking on Trump, though. Why? It should be the main thing for every candidate in the primary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:22
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Bernie's pretty well positioned to dunk on Trump, that could do it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:22
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Bernie's got high recognition, but he's also polarizing, with unfavs slightly behind favs. His path to a win is basically Trump-On-Extreme-Difficulty: the establishment candidates attack each other, the DNC doesn't see him as a threat, and the states work out in his favor. The problem is that I think pulling that sort of a run is a lot harder with the Dems, on all levels: Trump wouldn't have won in 2016 if they'd followed Dem delegate rules, and I think the Democratic establishment is much more likely to unify in the face of a Sanders' ascendancy than the Republicans were. Like, if it's the home stretch and, say, it's a split between Bernie, Harris, and Biden, I could absolutely see Harris and Biden teaming up and agreeing on a POTUS/VP arrangement, with one dropping out and pledging their delegates to the other. I just don't see any other candidate being able to really build up steam against Bernie. With the possible exception of Warren, every other candidate is going to be offering Bernie's policies, but at least slightly worse. Once he actually announces I'm pretty confident he's going to continue doing what he has been doing, introducing new and even more aggressive policies. Which all the other candidates will have to respond to. I know that the Democrat establishment has put all of their chips on a brokered convention with no single candidate getting a majority on the first ballot so the Superdelegates can pick the winner. But I genuinely think there's a decent chance Bernie just wins
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:23
|
|
|
I think its reasonable to argue in theory that Bernie's popularity/fame can be both a positive and a negative at this stage. I think the big thing will be if 1 or 2 other candidates step out as clear front runners challenging him or if its becomes a divided mess. Harris seems to have more steam than Warren, Gillibrand, or Castro but its entirely possible the three of them just screwed up announcing in the middle of the shutdown so they lost their news cycles. We'll see how it shapes up when things really start up. I figure there's 3 ways it plays. 1) The "2012 Romney" where Bernie is the frontrunner and everyone else gets a chance to take him down. 2) The "2016 Trump" where Bernie holds a plurality as everyone else divides their numbers. 3) One or 2 people really jump ahead of the pack early making it a 2 or 3 person race with Bernie. The first two I think probably result in a Bernie win. The third I think is a toss up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:23
|
|
|
SeANMcBAY posted:Why? It should be the main thing for every candidate in the primary. It seems a bit presumptuous, to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:25
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Lol I’m not saying my experiences are predictive of the election, I’m just responding to the recurring idea that the anti-Bernie sentiment is some pure online phenomenon and doesn’t exist IRL. Kind of depressing second-hand anecdote: My friend, who works at a book store (so these aren't even affluent people) and says his coworkers are generally pretty left-y, was just telling me that all his coworkers, who are younger than him (we're both 33, so I'm guessing he means in their 20s), don't want Sanders to run because of his age (my friend does, though). That's actually the first anecdote I've heard of that which isn't referring to fairly affluent/professional people. I feel like there's been a lot of effort at pushing that talking point, and that it might gain some traction with low-info voters just because there isn't the benefit of the only alternative being Hillary (who was well known as not being reliably left-wing) this time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:26
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Bernie's got high recognition, but he's also polarizing, with unfavs slightly behind favs. Pylons posted:Bernie's high name recognition is actually his biggest problem. At this point, you're either onboard with him or you hate him. Maybe the people onboard already are enough to win the primary on their own, but unless he makes serious attempts to win over the people who hate him, his numbers aren't going to move much. I was wondering about this, so I looked into it. Depending on what poll you look at, Bernie's unfavorable rating is somewhere in the high 30s or low 40s. Not great, but to be expected in our super polarized politics. But that's among all registered voters. So I'm wondering what his favorabilty/unfavorability rating is among Democrats. According to the first thing I found with those numberes, this Vox article from last month, it's 74-13 Bernie gonna win
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:29
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:I just don't see any other candidate being able to really build up steam against Bernie. With the possible exception of Warren, every other candidate is going to be offering Bernie's policies, but at least slightly worse. Once he actually announces I'm pretty confident he's going to continue doing what he has been doing, introducing new and even more aggressive policies. Which all the other candidates will have to respond to. If "best policies" determined the primary, Bernie would've won 2016 in a landslide. Gripweed posted:Bernie gonna win That article literally shows Biden as more popular than Bernie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:29
|
|
|
Yeah, I think there's a very easy argument to make that Hillary devoted much of her campaign focusing on Trump and it didn't work but many of the Democrats who have had success in the Blue Wave have focused more on policy and let the Trump hate speak for itself. I think we could very well see a field of Democrats who largely dismiss Trump from the conversation with snide comments about how we know what a monster and joke he is. And full on attacks only become the thing you do when you're desperate or really tanking the ship. I assume that's a big part of what people are talking about when they question Warren's skill as a candidate. She's proven a bit too likely to bite at Trump's bullshit and you never really end up coming away looking better when you do that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:29
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:I was wondering about this, so I looked into it. Depending on what poll you look at, Bernie's unfavorable rating is somewhere in the high 30s or low 40s. Not great, but to be expected in our super polarized politics. But that's among all registered voters. So I'm wondering what his favorabilty/unfavorability rating is among Democrats. According to the first thing I found with those numberes, this Vox article from last month, it's 74-13
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 22:15 |
|
|
The reason I don't buy the "Well, Hillary focused on Trump and it didn't work, thus it's a losing tactic!" is that it's ignoring the fact that literally everyone assumed Trump didn't have a shot, including the media which broadcast "Hillary's got 99% chance to win!" all the time. Like, the utter certainty everyone had of Hillary's victory was a HUGE factor in 2016 (hell, it's why Comey released his letter which ultimately tipped the balance). A campaign of "Well, I'm better than the other guy" doesn't work if everyone's convinced the other guy doesn't stand a chance, but it's totally different when "the other guy" is actually in power.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2019 05:32
|
|