|
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 | ||
|
Pinterest Mom posted:I'm not sure! I think a possible avenue is "win the Senate, prioritize DC+PR statehood, voting rights, then burn the court system down and then see how things shake out", but I have no idea how effective that would be. It's more of a plan than "Lamar Alexander, now there's someone I like to hang out with" or "we're going to have a political revolution", but it does mean that the first few years don't deliver anything materially tangible. I don't think there are any good answers here. Ok, how do you "win the senate?" This is what is so funny to me. Bernie's plan of engaging with enough people who don't vote or at least normally don't vote democratic is somehow hopelessly naive. But the "win the senate somehow, or dazzle people with technocratic fixes," well, that is just a fully realistic, achievable plan!
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 02:33 |
|
|
joepinetree posted:Ok, how do you "win the senate?" Run as a nice Republican. Democrats have nowhere else to go and Republicans like Republican policy so you'll get 100% of the votes! Oh weird, we tried that and converted zero Republicans and Democrats stayed home rather than pick between two Republicans, that must mean we weren't Republican enough let's get a Reagan voter up there
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I don’t really get what point you’re trying to make, WampaLord. What do you think Z. autobahn is trying to do with his poll analysis? Why is it a problem? Nope, it's April of 2019. At this point in the last cycle, Jeb! was the front runner. Trying to make predictions about the ultimate fate of the primary from early polling alone is useless, and this is a point Z. Autobahn has made numerous times themselves! We all knew Biden would get an announcement bump. Let's see where the polls are in a month, or after the first debates. It's a long loving primary man, buckle up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Nope, it's April of 2019. At this point in the last cycle, Jeb! was the front runner. Trying to make predictions about the ultimate fate of the primary from early polling is useless, and this is a point Z. Autobahn has made numerous times themselves! No you don't understand, that only applies when Bernie is ahead. When someone else is ahead then it's game over everyone log off and vote for the not-Bernie front-runner ohgodohpleaseanyoneanyonebutberniedonttouchmymoney
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:23
|
|
|
Biden was always going to run and he was always going to get a bump when he announced - would have been foolish not to mentally prepare for this. There is no silver bullet. We can beat him but it's going to be through a combination of factors, not a single killing blow. He's going to trip over himself in the debates - we know that. His post-announcement bump will droop after getting in the dirt with the other candidates, and everyone has a vested interest in dragging him down. There will be more condescending speech directed at millennials, women, minorities, leftists, and social liberals - he won't be able to help himself. And of course there will be more testimonials towards his impropriety. None of these things will stop Biden but they will set the stage just so that he can be stopped.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:23
|
|
|
The blue shells of primary ratfucking are coming for Biden, there is no need to be upset
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:No you don't understand, that only applies when Bernie is ahead. Who is saying this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
I wish he just remembered his dead kid and stayed away from politics, but he was probably afraid of anyone remembering how poo poo of a VP he was.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:26
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:Biden was always going to run and he was always going to get a bump when he announced - would have been foolish not to mentally prepare for this. Yea remember two months ago Harris was going to win look at her bump, then two weeks ago it was Mayor Butt
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:26
|
|
|
i'm in the "we live in hellworld so biden wins" camp but this is where the gop primary was at this point:
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:Ok, how do you "win the senate?" The plan to win the Senate has to be "get lucky and win four of Arizona, Colorado, Alabama, Iowa, Georgia, Montana, North Carolina, and Maine, five if you need Manchin-insurance".  I'm not saying it's a great plan, but I'm saying there are ideas floating out there other than "when I'm elected, Republicans will suddenly want to compromise" or "political revolution".
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:28
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Yea remember two months ago Harris was going to win look at her bump, then two weeks ago it was Mayor Butt With a brief inbetween visit from everyone's new favorite character, Beto! When Beto isn't around, all of the other candidates should be asking "Where's Beto?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:29
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:The plan to win to Senate has to be "get lucky and win four of Arizona, Colorado, Alabama, Iowa, Georgia, Montana, North Carolina, and Maine, five if you need Manchin-insurance". "Get lucky," the non-naive alternative to "get people who don't vote or don't vote democratic to vote democratic"
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:With a brief inbetween visit from everyone's new favorite character, Beto! Beto died on the way back to his gated community
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:The plan to win the Senate has to be "get lucky lmao this isn't even an exaggeration, it's literally their only strategy, because the only other alternative (support popular policy) would upset the money
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:32
|
|
WampaLord posted:Nope, it's April of 2019. At this point in the last cycle, Jeb! was the front runner. Trying to make predictions about the ultimate fate of the primary from early polling alone is useless, and this is a point Z. Autobahn has made numerous times themselves! Then why do you post and boost pro-Bernie polls if all polls irrelevant at this point? Will you let the thread know when it's appropriate to post polling data and make comments? Does the same rule apply for issue polling? Chances are people aren't fully engaged at this point and their opinions may change over the next 6-18 months of campaigning so it seems to be a waste of time to say they're useful in predicting any outcome.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:33
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Nope, it's April of 2019. At this point in the last cycle, Jeb! was the front runner. Trying to make predictions about the ultimate fate of the primary from early polling alone is useless, and this is a point Z. Autobahn has made numerous times themselves! I’m not making predictions, I’m saying “this is a bad poll for bernie” about a bad poll for Bernie, and explaining why (NH is a strong state for him). It is, objectively, a bad poll, and I am stating that fact (just like I have multiple times stated that a good poll is a good poll!) It’s like the most basic possible descriptive statement If you say nothing whenever I post “that’s a good poll for Bernie” but accuse me of bias every time I say “that’s a bad poll for bernie” perhaps consider that the bias is you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:34
|
|
|
Crabtree posted:I wish he just remembered his dead kid and stayed away from politics, but he was probably afraid of anyone remembering how poo poo of a VP he was. Oh Biden wants us all to remember his dead kid gently caress I really hoped he wouldn't use him as a prop so I wouldn't have to feel like an rear end in a top hat criticizing him for it but of course he couldn't resist. We'll be hearing a lot from Beau Biden by way of his dad I think.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:34
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:Then why do you post and boost pro-Bernie polls if all polls irrelevant at this point? I'm not saying all polling is irrelevant, and I post pro-Bernie polls because they're also real polls that people should be considering when they're trying to get a state of where the election is! Z. Autobahn posted:I’m not making predictions, I’m saying “this is a bad poll for bernie” about a bad poll for Bernie, and explaining why (NH is a strong state for him). It is, objectively, a bad poll, and I am stating that fact (just like I have multiple times stated that a good poll is a good poll!) Semantic argument again, you're really slipping here. "He needs to win New Hampshire" = "This poll is saying he will not win New Hampshire" Want to go back to calling stuff Fake News when it was proven real? You have no credibility to me anymore, you've been proven wrong so many times in this thread, you were the one who kept pushing for months that Bernie had a minority voter problem when data proved you wrong, and you claim to be the unbiased one? You have some nerve. Z. Autobahn posted:If you say nothing whenever I post “that’s a good poll for Bernie” I already explained why I don't do that, that's white noise posting best saved for C-SPAM, not for D&D WampaLord fucked around with this message at 17:39 on Apr 30, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:35
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:Then why do you post and boost pro-Bernie polls if all polls irrelevant at this point? because otherwise you gotta give into despair.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:The plan to win the Senate has to be "get lucky and win four of Arizona, Colorado, Alabama, Iowa, Georgia, Montana, North Carolina, and Maine, five if you need Manchin-insurance". "Get lucky" isn't even a goddamn plan JFC.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:37
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Krugman's tweets don't seem off to me. They're dumb because there is literally no basis for his claim that Sanders somehow has an "unrealistic" view of things and other candidates like Warren have a "more realistic" view. Warren's proposals (especially stuff like a wealth tax) are no more likely to be passed than Sanders', and Sanders has been in Congress far longer than Warren. This post assumes the same thing: Pinterest Mom posted:I think nihilism towards what's doable in the legislative context should lead people to Warren, though. She's the only person running who has the skills and inclination to do conduct bureaucratic trench warfare, which might be the main tool the next Democratic president has. There's no logical reason to think this. I think that people are just inferring because of various negative biases towards Sanders and positive biases towards Warren that she's somehow more generally "competent." Actually looking at the facts of the situation, Sanders has many more years of effectively working in government. People are operating off of a warped impression that the "radical left" is inherently naive and incompetent that they've absorbed from the media (thanks to countless things like that Krugman op-ed linked earlier). BrandorKP posted:He reframed this on the Daily Show yesterday (sucessfully). He's "establishing context" for the policy papers that are to come. You all know I like him. But even I think he's only got about a month for "to come" to become here they are. That's the one that "sticks" if he doesn't respond to it fully. Decision window is pretty drat short for politics, if he takes too long he'll miss it. All the other criticisms he can make go away by being in public, I don't think they stick. Personally i think this is because they are distortions that dont hold up to exposure to the actual person. He explictly talk about leadership as being-for-others, in a way the showed he really fully understands it and that the challenge is to communicate it. My wife went from Warren to Pete last night. This is kind of interesting to see because it is transparently obvious to anyone not bizarrely enamored with the guy that there is pretty much nothing that could convince you he isn't good. There have been many damning things come out about him, and nothing about his prior experience as mayor should inspire confidence. It seems like you're operating off of a sort of faith that unless someone can perceive all of the future and prove that all of Pete's actions do not lead to a good net outcome (like perhaps through some butterfly effect Pete's "all lives matter" comments in 2015 prevented nuclear war several years later), that we must assume they are all good and correct.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:38
|
|
|
The only silver lining to Biden winning the primary will be the election night comedy when all the people who smugged it up that a racist war criminal poorcrusher beat all the stupid hippie idealists melt down and rend their flesh at another Trump victory because "how could this happen we supported the worst things we possibly could". If you haven't read the D&D election thread from 2016 it's hilarious, the worst people in the world finding out they weren't as smart as they thought they were (E: then getting banned and making the forums a better place too bad they weren't permas like the mods imposed on Trump toxxers) VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Apr 30, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:39
|
|
WampaLord posted:Semantic argument again, you're really slipping here. "He needs to win New Hampshire" = "This poll is saying he will not win New Hampshire" Sanders probably does need to win New Hampshire. And the poll says if the election was held today he would not win. That's highly relevant to the current state of the 2020 democratic primary! Did anyone say the polling results can not or will not change? Z. Autobahn posted:That’s a disastrously bad poll, Bernie needs to be handily winning NH
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:42
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:
There is literally a poll out today showing that Biden is the clear preferred candidate of non-white voters which is 100% what I’ve been saying all along (nonwhite voters like Bernie just fine, they just like biden more). But please lol repost that David Sirota poll that shows Bernie is the preferred candidate of non-white voters (if, you know, you don’t include Biden)
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:47
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Semantic argument again, you're really slipping here. "He needs to win New Hampshire" = "This poll is saying he will not win New Hampshire" Can we at least try to keep a shred of logic going in our discussions, even if it stands in the way of you arguing with someone you irrationally hate?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
The polls are interesting because they show that the electorate isn't particularly committed to Sanders' vision given the attrition from 2016. If we start seeing similar things in the Midwest...
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Can we at least try to keep a shred of logic going in our discussions, even if it stands in the way of you arguing with someone you irrationally hate? Can you stop doing this tone policing civility act? It's called DEBATE and discussion, sometimes stuff gets heated a bit, we're all adults here, we can handle it. Z. Autobahn posted:There is literally a poll out today showing that Biden is the clear preferred candidate of non-white voters which is 100% what I’ve been saying all along (nonwhite voters like Bernie just fine, they just like biden more). But please lol repost that David Sirota poll that shows Bernie is the preferred candidate of non-white voters (if, you know, you don’t include Biden) You know I'm referring to the greater conversation that took place over months and not just this one minor thing. You're just as biased as I am, I'm just willing to admit my bias openly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:54
|
|
|
LinYutang posted:The polls are interesting because they show that the electorate isn't particularly committed to Sanders' vision given the attrition from 2016. If we start seeing similar things in the Midwest... A whole bunch of his votes from 2016 were from moderate to conservative dems who were protest voting against Hillary. The numbers he’s getting now are probably from the people who actually support his ideas. Hopefully as the primary goes on more people will get on board but that’s no guarantee
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:54
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Can you stop doing this tone policing civility act? It's called DEBATE and discussion, sometimes stuff gets heated a bit, we're all adults here, we can handle it. I’m not objecting to “the heat”, I’m objecting to how your drew a conclusion about his meaning that wasn’t supported by his words. You can be heated without making straw men. What is more anathema to constructive debate than refusing to acknowledge what people are saying to you? You never answered my question: what do you think Z. Autobahn is doing and why does it offend you so much?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:57
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:everyone has a vested interest in dragging him down. The other centrist candidates have a greater incentive not to attack Biden. They'll want the VP slot, a cabinet position, or some other favor from the guy likely to be the most powerful man in the party. Every non-Biden centrist has a minuscule chance of winning of nomination. But if Biden wins, those same centrists have a good chance at extracting something from him provided they've played nice with him throughout the campaign. Not to mention, the centrists in the party are the first to clutch pearls about decorum, circular firing squads, "save the attacks for Trump" and so on. Expect Warren to attack Biden. Maybe Bernie will too (although he famously hates going negative). But don't expect Harris, Beto, Booker, Klobuchar or Buttigieg to lay a glove on Biden.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 17:59
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:the people all-in on mayor pete are way weirder to me than the biden backers. I know a few people who are all in for Pete. They're all exactly his demographic: 30s and 40s, white, male, successful, intelligent, married, and gay.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 18:00
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:what do you think Z. Autobahn is doing and why does it offend you so much? I have made it perfectly clear. It's obvious I'm biased for Sanders. Z. Autobahn tries to set themself as apart from me as being totally unbiased and data driven, but is more than happy to scandalize one early poll to make an anti-Bernie post while claiming to be unbiased and not obsessed with early poll movement. Combined with their post history over months in this thread, it's become clear to me that Z. Autobahn is equally as biased as I am, just for not-Bernie. I would like them to acknowledge their own confirmation bias in play and not try to act like the only objective one in the room. WampaLord fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Apr 30, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
LinYutang posted:The polls are interesting because they show that the electorate isn't particularly committed to Sanders' vision given the attrition from 2016. If we start seeing similar things in the Midwest... The moderate anti-Hilary vote in 2016 is really undersold. My mom and many of her coworkers hated Hilary and voted for Bernie because they hated her. My mom is sticking with Bernie this time, but her friends are getting distracted by other shiny objects.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 18:03
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:He reframed this on the Daily Show yesterday (sucessfully). He's "establishing context" for the policy papers that are to come. You all know I like him. But even I think he's only got about a month for "to come" to become here they are. That's the one that "sticks" if he doesn't respond to it fully. Decision window is pretty drat short for politics, if he takes too long he'll miss it. All the other criticisms he can make go away by being in public, I don't think they stick. Personally i think this is because they are distortions that dont hold up to exposure to the actual person. He explictly talk about leadership as being-for-others, in a way the showed he really fully understands it and that the challenge is to communicate it. My wife went from Warren to Pete last night. I gotta admit I'm liking Buttigeg a lot more after watching that. He demonstrated an understanding of the real structural impediments that face us as a nation, Calling for election reform, judicial reform/court packing and elimination of the electoral college. Because without that, we can forget about addressing Climate Change or MFA. Which puts him ahead of the rest of the pack in that respect. I'm still gonna vote Bernie when Texas comes around (unless he craters in which case it will be Warren) but I wouldn't see a Buttigeg presidency as the disaster that many itt are predicting if this is what's going on in his head. I mean yeah he's poo poo on Israel but he's hardly unique in that respect.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 18:05
|
|
|
Skex posted:I gotta admit I'm liking Buttigeg a lot more after watching that. He demonstrated an understanding of the real structural impediments that face us as a nation, Calling for election reform, judicial reform/court packing and elimination of the electoral college. Because without that, we can forget about addressing Climate Change or MFA. Which puts him ahead of the rest of the pack in that respect. His court reform plan is moronic Sorkin-poisoned garbage
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 18:07
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:"Get lucky" isn't even a goddamn plan JFC. But if Republicans exclusively run open pedophiles wearing tiny cowboy hats and vests then Democrats could win those seats in a coin flip. Well at least until older Republicans die out and channers are the dominant voting bloc in the Republican party. Demographics are destiny after all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 18:07
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I know a few people who are all in for Pete. They're all exactly his demographic: 30s and 40s, white, male, successful, intelligent, married, and gay. I'll never understand how someone could see his response to the heckler a while ago and not instantly disavow Mayor Pete.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 18:13
|
|
|
I don't understand how anyone can look at anything that's come up about him and not instantly disavow Mayor Pete.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 18:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 02:33 |
|
|
joepinetree posted:As opposed to what? The belief that a really detailed policy brief will get people to your side? I think this is a decent critique of Krugman. Krugman tends to default to party orthodoxy and the reaffirmation of base assumptions when he's speaking outside his expertise. He therefore likes Warren because She's Got A Plantm but sees Bernie's plan to engage the disengaged as impractical, even though Bernie's plan has a chance of working and the warren-esque "bureaucratic trench warfare" plan doesn't unless by "trench warfare" you literally mean "bayonet all Republicans."
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 18:18
|
|