|
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 | ||
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Bernie did pledge to not make personal attacks on other democrats. He's following that pledge and only attacking on policy grounds. No, I mean, he literally did not sign the pledge that tweet is talking about, Bernie signed a "loyalty pledge" indicating he will run as a Democrat if he wins the nomination, very different: https://www.npr.org/2019/03/05/700524861/bernie-sanders-signs-democratic-party-loyalty-pledge-for-2020-run
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 20:53 |
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:On the climate change point, the real fight there is in the Senate. Pelosi is a progressive and she'll put forward the strongest version she thinks can pass the Senate, President Biden will sign whatever, but getting the fiftieth vote in the Senate is the real lift. That probably means getting a large enough Senate majority to be able to leapfrog Manchin and possibly Sinema, and who knows how that happens. There is exactly zero evidence that Pelosi is a "progressive" or gives two shits about any kind of structural change that would undermine capitalism. "Democrats are capitalists" -Nancy Pelosi
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:37
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:No, I mean, he literally did not sign the pledge that tweet is talking about : I was thinking of this: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rubycramer/bernie-sanders-negative-ads-pledge-2020
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
Gyges posted:The majority of Biden's support is that he's the electability candidate. He's the one that the general zeitgeist has determined has the best chance to beat Donny. The effect of this is that any weakness or faltering snowballs. This is why he's so dangerous. Outside of the work brained Democratic primaries where Electability is King he's going to be a huge liability. He's terrible at campaigning and Trump is going to eat him alive.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:40
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I was thinking of this: That's a verbal promise, not signing onto the "no attacks" pledge, I saw an article that specifically said Bernie and one other candidate were the only two to not sign it, but I'm having trouble finding it right now. Regardless, my point is that it's not stopping him from attacking Joe at the moment, so it's all immaterial anyway. quote:In his second presidential bid, Bernie Sanders will uphold a pledge from his 2016 campaign to abstain from "personal attack ads" against his opponents, but is not ruling out the possibility of ads that draw contrasts on the basis of policy “differences,” an aide said Wednesday. So he's gonna keep calling out Biden on voting and policy differences, but not attack him "personally"
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:40
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:There is exactly zero evidence that Pelosi is a "progressive" or gives two shits about any kind of structural change that would undermine capitalism. "all lives matter" -Nancy Pelosi.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:40
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:There is exactly zero evidence that Pelosi is a "progressive" or gives two shits about any kind of structural change that would undermine capitalism. B-b-but she was an early member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus! That means she can't have sold out in between then and now, right?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The really interesting thing about this is, it's just a return to pre-1980's general practice throughout the western world, including biblical laws against ursury. Wait, is this bill specifically intended to put Biden on the defensive?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:48
|
|
|
Majorian posted:B-b-but she was an early member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus! That means she can't have sold out in between then and now, right? I think it's less selling out and more that many Democrats have an extremely limited definition of "progressive" that pretty much just consists of "being relatively consistently pro-choice and pro-gay marriage." A lot of the time when people talk about politicians being "progressive" they're talking past each other, with one side interpreting "progressive" in a way that doesn't include addressing material inequality (or even addressing social injustice in a way that might require spending a lot of money and taking form the rich).
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
Fitzy Fitz posted:Wait, is this bill specifically intended to put Biden on the defensive? *taps finger to nose* Got it in one. And also it shows Bernie partnering with one of the most popular Congresswomen.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
Biden says he's the most progressive candidate in the race and I'm sure somewhere in his brain he's convinced himself that's true.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:51
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I think it's less selling out and more that many Democrats have an extremely limited definition of "progressive" that pretty much just consists of "being relatively consistently pro-choice and pro-gay marriage." True, plus if they're on twitter, chanting "Listen to black women!" but then, you know, not actually listening to black women.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:52
|
|
|
Fitzy Fitz posted:Wait, is this bill specifically intended to put Biden on the defensive? It very definitely sets up a sharp contrast on what is probably Biden's worst issue while also being objectively good policy and literally following biblical law OTOH it is entirely possible that Biden will be able to sell a "this bill would crash the Free Market! lol socialisms!" narrative depending on exactly how credulous the corporate media is on this issue Majorian posted:B-b-but she was an early member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus! That means she can't have sold out in between then and now, right? Of course not, and "progressive" for 1991 is certainly the same as progressive today
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 16:56
|
|
|
Radish posted:Biden says he's the most progressive candidate in the race and I'm sure somewhere in his brain he's convinced himself that's true. The most allowably progressive candidate!
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:03
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Has Biden discovered the one weird trick to surviving the primary? That's what Super PACs are for, anyway
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:03
|
|
|
Oh hey remember yesterday when a single NH poll showing Bernie up 4 was treated like great news? https://twitter.com/aseitzwald/status/1126517930093678598?s=21 Even more notable: https://twitter.com/aseitzwald/status/1126518832116510721?s=21 This is now the 3rd poll in a row that shows Harris/Warren as the top 2nd choice of Biden supporters, so can we please retire that 3-month-old talking point about how Biden voters will flock to Bernie?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Oh hey remember yesterday when a single NH poll was cited as proof Bernie wasnt in trouble at all? Oh hey remember how your opinion on early polls totally fluctuates based on whether it's good for Bernie or not? April 30th: Z. Autobahn posted:That’s a disastrously bad poll, Bernie needs to be handily winning NH "This one early poll is disastrously bad" Yesterday: Z. Autobahn posted:this is a poll of new hampshire, literally the second best state for Bernie in the country, a state he won by 23 points in 2016 when he didn't even have a campaign, and he's ahead by just 4 points "This one early poll that is good for Bernie is actually bad for Bernie, too." Are early polls reliable or not, Z. Autobahn? You decide. If you're only going to consider the good Bernie polls to be outliers, I think that shows a bit of the bias you claim to lack.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:This is now the 3rd poll in a row that shows Harris/Warren as the top 2nd choice of Biden supporters, so can we please retire that 3-month-old talking point about how Biden voters will flock to Bernie? Biden hasn't been running for 3 months, and hasn't gotten seriously attacked yet. Come on dude. 
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:28
|
|
|
 Pelosi is the 48th most left-wing Democrat in the House (out of 235, so ~80th percentile) on economic issues, 59th on social issues (~75th percentile). She's not a socialist, and I'm sure her district could handle someone with a more left-wing voting record, but the problem with Pelosi isn't Pelosi, it's her institutional role in the Democratic Party which forces her to speak for the entire caucus and not just her own positions. The House passed card check under her. The ACA had a public option when it left the House. She whipped her caucus into supporting cap and trade - not a perfect bill, but the best anyone's been able to pass in either house. Those all died in the Senate, and that's not her problem. Pinterest Mom fucked around with this message at 17:32 on May 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:29
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Oh hey remember yesterday when a single NH poll showing Bernie up 4 was treated like great news? oh hey, another poll where less than a third of those polled were under 50
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:32
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:
My point was not that it’s an outlier (polling right now is so all-over-the-place), my point was that if your best poll has you +4 in your 2nd best state, that’s a really BAD result, not a good one. Especially when most other polling (including by more reputable pollsters) has you way behind. Majorian posted:Biden hasn't been running for 3 months, and hasn't gotten seriously attacked yet. Come on dude. ? I’m talking a poll from about 3 months ago that showed Bernie as the “2nd pick” of Biden supporters that gets cited all the time. We’ve now had 3 more recent polls contradict that. Not sure what him being attacked has to do with 2nd choice pick? Condiv posted:oh hey, another poll where less than a third of those polled were under 50 I have some very bad news for you about the composition of the Dem primary electorate Z. Autobahn fucked around with this message at 17:38 on May 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:34
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Okay, but how strong would the left be if Trump wins re election or if Biden wins? Wouldn’t it demoralize a lot of people and weaken the movement? Wouldn’t the general public see a Biden nomination or trump re election as a vindication that center left politics don’t work? We can't afford it but we don't have a choice. This isn't about preventing the civilizational car crash that is coming. It's too late. The crash will happen. This is about whether we have time to somehow buckle our seatbelts before the force of the crash ejects our mutilated bodies through the front windshield. Do you want a semblance of democratic governance, economic dignity and liberal pluralism to survive the next fifty to one hundred years? Get ready to fight like hell, because keeping the dream of the enlightenment project alive so that a future generation can maybe do something with it is the most realistic goal we have left. Or, to switch metaphors, strengthening the left is mostly about building life rafts in anticipation of the coming deluge. There's no realistic prospect of the left actually taking power but a well organized left could at least aim to mitigate the damage or create viable communitarian networks at the local level following a major crash. Pinterest Mom posted:
Come on man, you're definitely smarter than this. There's a robust body of academic literature describing how American politicians love to vote on or support things that they know aren't going to pass as well as several recent examples of Democrats gaining control of state houses and immediately losing interest in the bills they previously supported. The idea that you can measure a politician as being "the 4th most left-wing" based on congressional votes is cargo cult empiricism. You can't just completely ignore all qualitative data, not to mention common sense, just because it's hard to fit into a simple graph.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:39
|
|
|
Publishing weighted polls are designed to undermine and dishearten people into making those polls a self fulfilling prophecy.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:39
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:My point was not that it’s an outlier (polling right now is so all-over-the-place), my point was that if your best poll has you +4 in your 2nd best state, that’s a really BAD result, not a good one. Especially when most other polling (including by more reputable pollsters) has you way behind. Okay, lol, sure. Is this what you really want to do for the next few months, play witch doctor with early polls and post all the ones that show good things for non-Bernies and criticize all the ones that look good for Bernie? Z. Autobahn posted:Oh hey remember yesterday when a single NH poll showing Bernie up 4 was treated like great news? Also, this isn't what happened, I was specifically using it to counter your argument about the #NeverBernie people being a serious thread, I in no way said "this is great news! FOR BERNIE!" and I'm not going to let you redefine the reality of what happened yesterday. Please stop trying to gaslight on an Internet forum where I can literally read all of your posts.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:41
|
|
|
the poll cited last that z.autobahn doesn't like has only 54% of those polled 50 or older, as opposed to ~69.89% of those polled in the monmouth poll being 50 or older also, the poll cited last has a moe of +/-3.3% while z.autobahn's poll has a moe of +/-5.1% finally, the poll z.autobahn frowns upon has 864 respondents while the monmouth poll he's pushing has a mere 376 Condiv fucked around with this message at 17:52 on May 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:41
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:There were communist street fighters in Germany but it was generally a reactionary thing (in the literal sense), they were contesting fascist brownshirts. Just remember the old activist saw from the 60s and 70s, the one advocating to break the law is usually the NARC.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:42
|
|
|
Reminder that the only thing that polls tell you this far out is who the current three to four frontrunners are and that it can change rapidly. So far your takeaway shouldn't be that polls are good for Bernie or bad for Bernie or good for Biden or bad for Biden; that's just a bunch of noise based on an electorate that's paying only cursory attention. The takeaway should be that the consistent frontrunners are Biden and Sanders and that Butt, Warren, and Harris are all very much in the race. And while it's possible that younger voters are being underpolled it's not ridiculous for pollsters to assume that young people won't turn out to the polls since that's usually what happens. Edit: I would also argue that if a poll has a sample size under 1,000 it's usually kind of poo poo, and as noted above pretty much every one of these polls has a low sample size.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:43
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:I have some very bad news for you about the composition of the Dem primary electorate 44% of those who voted in the 2016 nh dem primaries were 44 or younger z.autobahn next time check exit polls for 2016's primaries before you declare that your very obviously flawed poll isn't flawed Condiv fucked around with this message at 17:49 on May 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
turns out if you poll exclusively with Democratic backers who own their own home and are in the same job they've had for the past forty years in mid management or above they are very interested in the old man with obvious plugs and fake teeth that says the status quo is fine. This is Bad for Bernie.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:48
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Come on man, you're definitely smarter than this. There's a robust body of academic literature describing how American politicians love to vote on or support things that they know aren't going to pass as well as several recent examples of Democrats gaining control of state houses and immediately losing interest in the bills they previously supported. I'll grant that EFCA (card check) was an easy vote, but my recollection is that the House leadership whipped hard and had to struggle to get to 218 on the ACA+public option, and definitely forced people to take hard votes on the cap and trade bill. Those two weren't "31 votes to repeal Obamacare" symbolic situations, those were real bills with compromises and tradeoffs that members had to go back and defend in 2010, many of who ate poo poo because of it. DW-Nominate is imperfect, ofc, but it's the best measure we got, and I think one has to be willfully blind to not see that Pelosi has consistently been a force pulling the party to the left. Not as fast, or as far, as people might want, and she's obviously compromised in all the ways that someone holding a leadership position in a political party for 15 years will be, and she' s done a terrible job of grooming the next generation of Democratic leadership, but I think she's a lot more often than not on the right side in the fights that matter.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:50
|
|
|
Helsing posted:We can't afford it but we don't have a choice. This. We're basically fighting a rearguard action against capitalist-driven climate change and the rise of fascism. The best we can do now is mitigate and hope to ride it out. Pembroke Fuse fucked around with this message at 18:11 on May 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:52
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I, too, can't see how concerted opposition from the Dem leadership and megadonors may have played a role in this. Trump managed to overcome this without several years of lead time to sell voters on his candidacy.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:54
|
|
|
LinYutang posted:Trump managed to overcome this without several years of lead time to sell voters on his candidacy. did you forget that trump ran in 2012??
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:55
|
|
|
LinYutang posted:Trump managed to overcome this without several years of lead time to sell voters on his candidacy. You're right, he was a totally unknown public figure who didn't have a highly rated reality show that made him look like America's Bestest Boss, he really had no "lead time" at all.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:56
|
|
|
Pretty short sighted of Bernie to not be a high profile reality TV celebrity for several decades. I think that strategic oversight might cost him the nomination.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1126521205081759745 This is definitely aimed straight at Biden.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 17:58
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SeanMcElwee/status/1126521850232700928 We were all wondering yesterday how big the "anti-Bernie" contingent is in the primary - he's got the biggest "not considering" score in the field, but hey you don't need 70% to win. Warren's looking really good on here, too. (I'm shocked that so many people have an opinion about BdB, and that they know they hate him)
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 18:02
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1126521205081759745 Oh hey the bill also includes postal banking. Wish more people were pushing that concept.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 18:04
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:Publishing weighted polls are designed to undermine and dishearten people into making those polls a self fulfilling prophecy. Wait, are we already moving from "Let's unskew these results to include more young voters" to "Polls are a conspiracy to suppress the vote"? Feels a little early in the cycle to go from bargaining to denial, but I guess things move fast in 2019. Condiv posted:the poll cited last that z.autobahn doesn't like has only 54% of those polled 50 or older, as opposed to ~69.89% of those polled in the monmouth poll being 50 or older Monmouth has an A+ rating while Change has a C+; if you had to pick one, you're better off trusting Monmouth More importantly, it's not about just picking one poll, which is my entire point. You have to take the aggregate. If you're going to cite good polls, you have to also acknowledge bad polls, and the only remotely meaningful thing is to take in the sum of them. I'm not citing the Monmouth poll as the be-all end-all "this one is right", I'm citing it because we just had a discussion of NH polling and this is a counter-example to the narrative that was being pushed. If we just do the recent two, +4 and -18 aggregates to Biden +7. If we want to include the last month's results, I see Biden +18 Bernie +4 Biden +8 Bernie +12 Biden +7 We get Biden +3.4. Which is an *extremely bad result* for Bernie's 2nd best state. WampaLord posted:Also, this isn't what happened, I was specifically using it to counter your argument about the #NeverBernie people being a serious thread, I in no way said "this is great news! FOR BERNIE!" and I'm not going to let you redefine the reality of what happened yesterday. Please stop trying to gaslight on an Internet forum where I can literally read all of your posts. Can you explain to me how that poll demonstrates "#NeverBernie people are not a serious threat" in a way that doesn't hinge on "this is a good poll for Bernie"? Wicked Them Beats posted:Reminder that the only thing that polls tell you this far out is who the current three to four frontrunners are and that it can change rapidly. So far your takeaway shouldn't be that polls are good for Bernie or bad for Bernie or good for Biden or bad for Biden; that's just a bunch of noise based on an electorate that's paying only cursory attention. The takeaway should be that the consistent frontrunners are Biden and Sanders and that Butt, Warren, and Harris are all very much in the race. Yeah, I very explicitly do NOT think polls right now are remotely reliable predictive of the final result. What I think polls ARE useful for is telling us the state of the battlefield *right now*. They're not giving us our destination, they're giving us our current location. And that's a useful thing to have because it shows you the terrain, the battlefield, and the relative movement of the players. My takeaway from the polls is not "Biden gonna win!", it's "Biden is proving to be a pretty formidable threat" I'm pretty dismissive of the "young people are being underpolled" argument because people have been saying that since at least '08 and it's never proven true. Could this finally be the year? Maybe. But it feels safer to assume it isn't and the polls are accurate. Z. Autobahn fucked around with this message at 18:14 on May 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 18:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 20:53 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/SenGillibrand/status/1126534256136728576
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 18:09
|
|
