|
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 | ||
|
JesusSinfulHands posted:DNC is making it much harder to qualify for the 3rd debate in September by basically doubling the # of donors and polling requirements needed to qualify, and candidates need to both be polling at at least 2% in 4 polls from June 28 to August 28 and have 130,000 donors to make it: They should've done this with the second debate. Weed out the shaft as quickly as possible. By the second debate, only Harris, Bernie , Biden, Warren, Beto, Pete, Booke, and Kloubachar should be included. By the third, it should only be Biden, Bernie, Warren, Beto, Pete, and Harris. Maybe not even Pete and Beto.
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 07:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 20:25 |
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Ytlata it comes down to character anyway. Is this a moral person or not? we've already seen the things he's said (and done) and have discerned the ways of thinking those signified thing imply and they're terrible buttchug is a terrible person and he would be a terrible president, today, tomorrow, 40 years from now
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 07:22
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Ytlata it comes down to character anyway. Is this a moral person or not? If we're still talking about Pete then I would say hosing down homeless camps and evicting people so he could rsze their houses is pretty immoral
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 08:00
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Ytlata it comes down to character anyway. Is this a moral person or not? I mean, I'm a Christian Marxist myself. Values and character matter a hell of a lot to me. The way that Mayor Pete has treated the homeless population of his city doesn't strike me as terribly Christ-like OR progressive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 08:23
|
|
|
What's the morality of volunteering to occupy a foreign nation
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 08:31
|
|
|
Unoriginal Name posted:What's the morality of volunteering to occupy a foreign nation In TYOOL 2014? Not great, by my estimation. On the "negative karma" end of the spectrum, if you will.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 08:44
|
|
|
Judakel posted:They should've done this with the second debate. Weed out the shaft as quickly as possible. By the second debate, only Harris, Bernie , Biden, Warren, Beto, Pete, Booke, and Kloubachar should be included. By the third, it should only be Biden, Bernie, Warren, Beto, Pete, and Harris. Maybe not even Pete and Beto. I mean is it that surprising considering it is the DNC?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 10:47
|
|
|
I'd suppose there's nothing stopping them from adjusting the rules for the second debate along similar as well---the only one they are probably* locked in on is the first else they might draw too much overt ire for tinkering to fix at the relative last minute. Gravel's Gambit will only get more perilous from here, sadly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 13:24
|
|
|
They'll do whatever it takes to gently caress over Sanders, even if that is make the losers keep returning or possibly even not have a official dem nom if VP Racist sundowns out by 2020.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 14:00
|
|
|
When they say third debate, are they counting the two night first debate as one debate or two debates?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 14:33
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:When they say third debate, are they counting the two night first debate as one debate or two debates? One debate. Second is in July with same quals, and the new rules apply for September, which is still earlier than the first 2016 debate (October 2015).
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 14:48
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The way that Mayor Pete has treated the homeless population of his city doesn't strike me as terribly Christ-like OR progressive. I've already been over why I disagree with the thread on the context of that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 14:53
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:One debate. Second is in July with same quals, and the new rules apply for September, which is still earlier than the first 2016 debate (October 2015). Is the second debate also gonna be two nights, or are they hoping that some of the nobodies will drop out if their numbers don't go up after the first debate?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 14:55
|
|
|
I think its cool how Buttigeg used his powers to punish and torment the poor. very old testament
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 15:01
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:I think its cool how Buttigeg used his powers to punish and torment the poor. very old testament Someone, most likely a striking union member, is going to punch Pete in the face, and the coverage of that is going to be horribly slanted.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 15:25
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:Is the second debate also gonna be two nights, or are they hoping that some of the nobodies will drop out if their numbers don't go up after the first debate? ~two nights baby~ And so is September, if it needs to be - they upped the qualification threshold but are still allowing "up to 20" candidates to debate. Pinterest Mom fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Jun 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 15:29
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1134836907903311875?s=21 Lmfaooooooooo
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 16:14
|
|
|
Oh so that's what that Game of Thrones meme was referencing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 16:17
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SenGillibrand/status/1134813384648593408 this is real good
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 16:26
|
|
|
VH4Ever posted:See, right. I don't like it. I still doubt it's as nefarious as Republicans like to make it seem. At the same time it's hard for me to disagree with CTG's "Dolezal" take on substance, I don't think it was as actively craven and done intentionally to get ahead in life? But it's too close for my comfort. IMO, it doesn't matter whether she did it to get ahead. As a well-off white woman, she was actively appropriating the identity and culture of one of the poorest and most troubled minority groups in America, while actively rejecting any engagement with the Native community and paying no attention to their issues even after she joined the Senate. She stubbornly kept on with it, even in the face of criticism and pushback, until it was time to launch a presidential campaign. That's problematic enough even if she was just doing it for fun or to make herself feel special.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 16:51
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:IMO, it doesn't matter whether she did it to get ahead. As a well-off white woman, she was actively appropriating the identity and culture of one of the poorest and most troubled minority groups in America, while actively rejecting any engagement with the Native community and paying no attention to their issues even after she joined the Senate. She stubbornly kept on with it, even in the face of criticism and pushback, until it was time to launch a presidential campaign. That's problematic enough even if she was just doing it for fun or to make herself feel special. Only thing I would quibble with here is she was not a "well off white woman" for much of her life. But yeah, she continued doing what you describe after she became well off, so.... Even if she's engaging with native communities now, hard to not see that as too little, too late I guess, that seems fair given the circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 17:15
|
|
|
How does she have that conversation and not have an answer to "When did you stop" Oh right, if shes making excuses not actually considering her actions, carry on
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 17:19
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:https://twitter.com/SenGillibrand/status/1134813384648593408 Yeah, that's admittedly pretty good and should be the absolute bare minimum standard that any candidate for the dem nomination should be held to regarding queer issues.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 17:33
|
|
|
hahaha holy poo poo how are they all so dumb.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 17:40
|
|
|
Phone posted:https://twitter.com/rewegreatyet/status/1134238071745130496?s=21 https://twitter.com/saucissonsec/status/1134259404415676416 People just outright ignore the voter data from 2016. These people need to be loving stopped or they're going to get us all killed!
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:~two nights baby~ (wolf howl)
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 17:55
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:I've already been over why I disagree with the thread on the context of that. Recap for me, I missed why it's good to drive people out of their homes and also punish people for being homeless
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:Recap for me, I missed why it's good to drive people out of their homes and also punish people for being homeless the mayor is gay and a troop, any criticism is therefore both anti-gay and anti-troop
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 19:25
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:Recap for me, I missed why it's good to drive people out of their homes and also punish people for being homeless Because using the wisdom of consulting Pete didn’t actually measure racial impacts while he was kicking people out of their homes so he can have plausible deniability that he knew the policy had racially biased impacts. Being a leader is hard, and if he just forgot to check if stealing homes over uncut grass would have negative impacts, I just know his heart was in a good place and it was just an ooopies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:yeah abortion is about men. how does it affect men? that is whats truly important. Very cool bernie Bernie actually has the totally correct take here, although maybe by accident. Trans men and afab nonbinary people exist and abortion is relevant to them as it is to women, so yeah it's not a "women's issue" If you want to die go read Twitter comments on the Alabama abortion law there are a million loving terfs throwing trans people under the bus and even blaming them for the law
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 19:33
|
|
|
Mince Pieface posted:Bernie actually has the totally correct take here, although maybe by accident. Trans men and afab nonbinary people exist and abortion is relevant to them as it is to women, so yeah it's not a "women's issue" Actually, no. This is not what Bernie means. Some things are universal, and just because you aren't personally or directly affected, that doesn't mean you shouldn't support it. It's a universal, societal good for people to have control over their own bodies, even if a specific situation doesn't apply to you. Or, in another context, just because you don't make minimum wage doesn't mean you should oppose minimum wage increases, because the greater good is helped by having that. The biggest way that boomers have been divided is constantly being told that they shouldn't stand together, and always being fed ignorant points about simply hating their neighbor for maybe getting better instead of coming together and both advancing. Bernie is fighting against that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 19:54
|
|
|
Gillibrand’s LGBT thing is fine but I can’t stop loling at her “I’ve supported LGBT people my whole career *only mentions senate stuff*” lmao
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 21:12
|
|
|
https://streamable.com/4eh33 Bernie chants break out as Barbara Lee is shilling for Kamala during a general panel. Skip to 2:35 to get the full effect.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
IMO the primary will turn on these factors: 1) How stupid and apolitical are Democratic Primary Voters? If they're stupid Bernie may be in good shape: I think most people here would agree Kamala and Peter Butt are vastly closer to Biden than to Bernie politically, but if the average Democrat perceives them as vaguely non-establishment for reasons of identity or youth or whatever Bernie may actually benefit more from the narrowing field than Biden. 2) How much of Bernie's performance in 2016 was fueled by sheer unadulterated Hillary Hate? Despite Hillary probably being more progressive than Biden, I think she is a uniquely unlikable and uncharismatic politician who seems to personify the notion of "the Establishment". Depending on the strength of this effect, Democrat voters may be less fed up with lovely Third Way Politics than would be suggested by the 2016 primary. 3) How scared of Trump are Democrats? The desire for "elect-ability" and a "return to normalcy" may warp a significant amount of voter behavior.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 21:33
|
|
|
Judakel posted:https://streamable.com/4eh33 it was such a bummer when lee endorsed harris.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 21:49
|
|
|
porfiria posted:IMO the primary will turn on these factors: w/r/t 2), there's data saying that a lot of bernie's 2016 support was from conservative/moderate democrats who didn't like hillary and protest voted for bernie. they then went on to vote trump in the general
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 21:55
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:it was such a bummer when lee endorsed harris. There are no heroes, debase yourself and face to bloodshed. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 21:55
|
|
|
goethe.cx posted:w/r/t 2), there's data saying that a lot of bernie's 2016 support was from conservative/moderate democrats who didn't like hillary and protest voted for bernie. they then went on to vote trump in the general how does that square with the data that says bernie->trump voters were ~10% of his primary voters (10% definitely isn't "a lot")
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 22:07
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:I've already been over why I disagree with the thread on the context of that. Part of the reason I'm harping on this is because I really can't understate how bizarre it is to me. I would understand it if you explicitly said that you didn't support left-wing goals, but this guy has made the fact that his politics are not left-wing repeatedly explicit. He does not support M4A, he does not support the GND, we know he's extremely lovely on Israel/Palestine (which likely implies bad foreign policy in general), he gave some wishy-washy non-response to someone asking if he supported AOC's 70% marginal tax (which is a very easy win for anyone who isn't very concerned with appeasing the wealthy), and that's not getting into his actual actions as mayor, which also give no reason to inspire faith. It isn't a coincidence that virtually no one who claims to be left-wing, or even "very liberal" on this subforum still supports him. Basically, it is completely ludicrous for anyone on the left to support this guy. He is a reasonable choice for someone with centrist politics, but I get the impression you're not trying to take this angle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 23:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 20:25 |
|
|
goethe.cx posted:w/r/t 2), there's data saying that a lot of bernie's 2016 support was from conservative/moderate democrats who didn't like hillary and protest voted for bernie. they then went on to vote trump in the general Ehhhh this isn't really what the data says. There was an X percent of Bernie voters who voted Trump, but the number isn't a lot (10-15% depending on which exit poll you look at) but also many of them weren't EVER democrats, but independents who were uniquely interested in Bernie.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2019 00:58
|
|