|
Who do you wish to win the Democratic primaries? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Joe Biden, the Inappropriate Toucher |
|
18 | 1.46% |
| Bernie Sanders, the Hand Flailer |
|
665 | 54.11% |
| Elizabeth Warren, the Plan Maker |
|
319 | 25.96% |
| Kamala Harris, the Cop Lord |
|
26 | 2.12% |
| Cory Booker, the Super Hero Wannabe |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Julian Castro, the Twin |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Kirsten Gillibrand, the Franken Killer |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Pete Buttigieg, the Troop Sociopath |
|
17 | 1.38% |
| Robert Francis O'Rourke, the Fake Latino |
|
3 | 0.24% |
| Jay Inslee, the Climate Alarmist |
|
8 | 0.65% |
| Marianne Williamson, the Crystal Queen |
|
86 | 7.00% |
| Tulsi Gabbard, the Muslim Hater |
|
23 | 1.87% |
| Andrew Yang, the $1000 Fool |
|
32 | 2.60% |
| Eric Swalwell, the Insurance Wife Guy |
|
2 | 0.16% |
| Amy Klobuchar, the Comb Enthusiast |
|
1 | 0.08% |
| Bill de Blasio, the NYPD Most Hated |
|
4 | 0.33% |
| Tim Ryan, the Dope Face |
|
3 | 0.24% |
| John Hickenlooper, the Also Ran |
|
7 | 0.57% |
| Total: | 1229 votes | ||
|
Calibanibal posted:There's nothing mystical about them. They're just silent - they know that if they dare dissent from the Bernie-or-bust hivemind, they'll get harassed out of the thread by rabid Bernie stans (often, but not always, white men). It's exhausting Are you actually still hooking people with this? e: lol
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 01:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 01:52 |
|
|
guestimate posted:There is no way Kamala beats Trump in 2020. Just no way, barring Trump OBVIOUSLY making GBS threads his pants during a town hall debate and tracking it all over the stage in a double figure eight pattern. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 01:46
|
|
|
Amniotic posted:Are you actually still hooking people with this? An unfortunate page snipe!
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 01:47
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:There's nothing mystical about them. They're just silent - they know that if they dare dissent from the Bernie-or-bust hivemind, they'll get harassed out of the thread by rabid Bernie stans (almost invariably, white men). It's exhausting He's my first choice but I also see him doing things that make me AAAARGH. Don't bring up a massive change to the Supreme Court in a 30 second segment of a debate. Don't let perfect revolution be the enemy of good revolution. Get in there, do what it takes, for all of us, dang. We need it and you so badly. guestimate fucked around with this message at 01:50 on Jul 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 01:48
|
|
|
Bernie!!!!! He’s the best but yeah his debate performance was lacking.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 01:50
|
|
|
i'm only here to bust
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:I support Warren Sorry you'd rather support numbers fuckstein than someone who says the system is broken, fundmentally
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:i'm only here to bust Lotta talk about Bernie or bust. That's a false choice. Cum tributes for Bernie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:04
|
|
|
guestimate posted:There is no way Kamala beats Trump in 2020. Just no way, barring Trump OBVIOUSLY making GBS threads his pants during a town hall debate and tracking it all over the stage in a double figure eight pattern. I think she would probably lose but I don't think it's impossible she wins. An energized black vote could win it for her.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:07
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:Bernie is now far from the only leftward candidate, even if his cred on "being left" is still the highest among high-information left-wing voters. He's not your only anti-big banking candidate, and he's not your only M4A candidate, at least on paper. He's not going to be able to build support by just doing the same stump speech at every campaign event and talk show. His claim to fame is being obviously preferable to Hillary. She isn't here. He didn't actually run a good campaign last time, by his own admission. Difficult to figure out how he's going to do that now when he's already getting crowded out during debates. The problem is that he has no power over the fact that 1. he's an old guy and 2. most people aren't going to be smart enough to distinguish between him and Warren (or even Harris). There isn't really any strategy he can use to magically win those people over, because the reason they don't prefer him is "they don't like the picture of him as president as much as they like the picture of these other people." Fortunately, there's a lot more to the election than debates. Sanders' goal shouldn't be to convert a bunch of people in the debates, since that's impossible. It should be to motivate his existing supporters to vote (and get random undecided people to vote through a huge GOTV/door-knocking/etc effort). And also hopefully Warren is planning on dropping out at some point, because currently she's basically pointlessly loving up Sanders's chances by confusing people into thinking he's not the only one who will do the things he supports. Warren basically represents my biggest concern in politics going forward - that Dems can easily prevent the left from gaining power by simply rhetorically expressing support for their things and then not doing them. In the past the left has benefited from the fact that Dems weren't even willing to pretend, but if they do pretend it's a problem because you can't get the average Americans to pour over a politicians' words and actions and evaluate how reliable and trustworthy they are. STAC Goat posted:I assume the logic is that Bernie's losses are less important than Biden's and if Biden collapses Bernie can overtake Harris and Warren. Like I mentioned before, I don't think there's anything Bernie can do to win over people in the debates. The issue is that the people who care about actual substance already support him, and there's no way he can appeal on the "person who makes me feel good" level like the other candidates can. It's going to mostly come down to whether his campaign can motivate enough younger people to vote (and fortunately his campaign is in a good position to make the strongest GOTV effort of all the campaigns in this election, since he has the largest motivated base). It also might help if Warren ends up dropping out, since anecdotally speaking my parents would support Sanders if she wasn't in the race, so I think she might be sucking up a lot of "people who have good intentions but aren't 'plugged in' enough to scour candidates' records and understandably find the younger, smart-sounding woman more palatable than old-looking/shouty Bernie" votes. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 02:17 on Jul 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:09
|
|
|
guestimate posted:There is no way Kamala beats Trump in 2020. Just no way, barring Trump OBVIOUSLY making GBS threads his pants during a town hall debate and tracking it all over the stage in a double figure eight pattern. What is the basis for this, the 10% of Democrats that care that she's a cop?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:10
|
|
|
If the DNC was smart, which they aren't, they would encourage everyone to stay in as long as possible. If there's 20 fuckers on the stage and Bernie only gets to talk in 30 second increments, that really fucks him over.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:10
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:If the DNC was smart, which they aren't, they would encourage everyone to stay in as long as possible. If there's 20 fuckers on the stage and Bernie only gets to talk in 30 second increments, that really fucks him over. Ironically the DNC are the ones increasing the requirements for the September debate and ensuring that he will have more talk time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:13
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The supposed Warren and Harris supporters on this forum are largely mythical. We don't have Warren "supporters" here, we just have bernie-or-busters and then a (shrinking) group of people willing to discuss second choice options and/or trying to discuss the practicalities of who might win rather than the moralities of who should. I have yet to see anyone actually post "I think Harris should win" just a few tentative steps towards "I fear Harris might win" which usually get shouted down. Nah, there are a bunch of Warren supporters on this subforum, even if they don't post often in this specific thread (and you'll see them occasionally pop up, but they mostly post in the USPol thread). I think Warren has a lot of support among people with lefty/progressive sentiment, but without the level of political engagement where debating whether she's actually best has any appeal to them. Part of the challenge as a Sanders supporter is that it's hard to really persuade them to change their minds without them perceiving you as overly combative (this is why I dislike the whole perception that arguing against Warren is somehow "the left fighting itself" or whatever - those arguments need to be made!). Like, the pro-Sanders argument relies on casting aspersions towards Warren's record and history, since the pro-Warren argument is that Warren is just as likely to do the things Sanders supports. And that's a hard sell when Warren supporters strongly like Warren as a person (and are probably more attached to her personally than Sanders supporters are to him).
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:40
|
|
|
I like both Warren and Bernie quite a lot. I think Warren has been significantly more outspoken on the need to abolish the filibuster and has been more willing to consider packing the supreme court, while I also think that her foreign policy is too much in line with the Clinton/Obama style interventionism. I think they'd both be great presidents who would work to reshape and fix many of the problems facing this nation
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:44
|
|
|
That seems like a small merit for Warren, and an enormous demerit
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:50
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/virgiltexas/status/1145867828731490304
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:50
|
|
|
Bernie explicitly saying "no" to court-packing was a disappointment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:52
|
|
|
Arturo Ui posted:What is the basis for this, the 10% of Democrats that care that she's a cop? And the ? I don't know the percentage? Of racist and sexist Americans but its really goddamn high as we have been observing to our horror.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:57
|
|
|
There's only room for one Colorado loser in this race and Hickenlooper failed The Bennet Challenge
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:58
|
|
|
Arturo Ui posted:What is the basis for this, the 10% of Democrats that care that she's a cop? Yeah this is a dumb argument. The gently caress Trump enthusiasm alone can (and will imo) push this to a victory.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
We'll, if he runs against Gardner for Senate...he's slightly less awful than Romanoff. Granted, it's like comparing a Train B-Sides collection to a Dishwalla B-Sides collection. Does anyone else feel like they're shopping for soup, but half the cans are blank and the ones that aren't all have a crazy flaw? Biden is expired beef stock. Bernie is chicken noodle soup that has to be used TODAY or it will expire. Buttigieg is just water. Beto is an empty can. Warren is some kind of weird microwaveable fish soup that tastes OK but will get you in trouble with your boss because of the smell.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 03:44
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:And also hopefully Bernie is planning on dropping out at some point, because currently he's basically pointlessly loving up Warren's chances by confusing people into thinking she's not the only one who will do the things she supports. There. Fixed your post to represent our actual reality. I mean: https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1145784302384214016 https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1145785812933496832
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 03:56
|
|
|
The hilarious thing is that this will swing back Bernie's way when they remember they fear women candidates now. Maybe they will stop at Pete first but oh no he is gay! These people are morons.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 03:58
|
|
|
oxsnard posted:Yeah this is a dumb argument. The gently caress Trump enthusiasm alone can (and will imo) push this to a victory. How confident are you of that? As confident as you were that Hillary was going to win in 2016 blackmet posted:Bernie is chicken noodle soup that has to be used TODAY or it will expire. Bernie is the guy who thinks I should be able to go to the doctor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 03:58
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:There. Fixed your post to represent our actual reality. CNN polls are extremely good. Also, Warren is practically spineless.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:01
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:I like both Warren and Bernie quite a lot. I think Warren has been significantly more outspoken on the need to abolish the filibuster and has been more willing to consider packing the supreme court, while I also think that her foreign policy is too much in line with the Clinton/Obama style interventionism. I think they'd both be great presidents who would work to reshape and fix many of the problems facing this nation The issue is mostly that, even if you trust Warren, Sanders 1. can be relied upon more to not cave under pressure from other Democrats on things and 2. gives a heavy emphasize to building an enduring movement to continue applying pressure during his presidency (which will be necessary, since both his and Warren's main policies won't pass currently). Sanders would also generally represent a departure in terms of hiring staff from outside the current Democratic Party structure, which is a huge deal that would finally help end a status quo that will never create real change, even if a well-intentioned person is at the helm. It's frustrating because I can't magically prove what the outcome will be, while still being 100% certain that a Warren administration wouldn't end up that different from Obama's (and that she'd absolutely quickly cave on stuff like M4A, and that's assuming she even maintains a consistent view on it during the entire primary and general, which I doubt). The way I've put it is that while Warren is better than all the other non-Bernies, she's closer to them than she is Bernie himself in terms of what the actual outcome of a Warren presidency would be.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:01
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:Bernie is now far from the only leftward candidate, even if his cred on "being left" is still the highest among high-information left-wing voters. He's not your only anti-big banking candidate, and he's not your only M4A candidate, at least on paper. He's not going to be able to build support by just doing the same stump speech at every campaign event and talk show. His claim to fame is being obviously preferable to Hillary. She isn't here. He didn't actually run a good campaign last time, by his own admission. Difficult to figure out how he's going to do that now when he's already getting crowded out during debates. He absolutely is the only one who will actually follow through on any of that. Warren is throwing things at the wall to see what sticks. Once he gets across from Warren, he absolutely needs to point out how much more structural his changes are than hers. He cannot rely on anyone knifing her from the Left.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:02
|
|
|
Judakel posted:Also, Warren is practically spineless. What makes you say that?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:02
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:What makes you say that? The fact that she waffled on M4A, mainly. Co-sponsor, but not part of your platform? You are "open to other options" in your first town hall then once your numbers are up you are "all for it because it is a human right"? Give me a break. I see her as Hillary/Obama 2.0 and I am not buying it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:06
|
|
|
Judakel posted:The fact that she waffled on M4A, mainly. Co-sponsor, but not part of your platform? You are "open to other options" in your first town hall then once your numbers are up you are "all for it because it is a human right"? Give me a break. I see her as Hillary/Obama 2.0 and I am not buying it. Didn't she raise her hand when asked if she would be open to banning for-profit insurance companies?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:07
|
|
|
guestimate posted:There is no way Kamala beats Trump in 2020. Just no way, barring Trump OBVIOUSLY making GBS threads his pants during a town hall debate and tracking it all over the stage in a double figure eight pattern. he would still win handily
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:08
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:How confident are you of that? As confident as you were that Hillary was going to win in 2016 I called a Trump win in 2016 fwiw
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:08
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Didn't she raise her hand when asked if she would be open to banning for-profit insurance companies? Yes. She has said that she's open to it before. She's also said she's open to other things, like a public option or lowering the Medicare age
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:09
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Didn't she raise her hand when asked if she would be open to banning for-profit insurance companies? Where does that fall in the timeline I just described? Exactly. The end of that timeline. Gripweed posted:Yes. She has said that she's open to it before. She's also said she's open to other things, like a public option or lowering the Medicare age Being "open to alternatives" is just code for "no".
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:09
|
|
|
So the argument is that she cannot be trusted because she wasn't balls-to-the-wall about M4A from the beginning?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:11
|
|
|
blackmet posted:We'll, if he runs against Gardner for Senate...he's slightly less awful than Romanoff. Granted, it's like comparing a Train B-Sides collection to a Dishwalla B-Sides collection. Sounds like the perfect time to crack open Bernie's can and drink up what's inside
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:12
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:So the argument is that she cannot be trusted because she wasn't balls-to-the-wall about M4A from the beginning? The argument is that you go with the person that has the most reliable track record.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:12
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:So the argument is that she cannot be trusted because she wasn't balls-to-the-wall about M4A from the beginning? Correct. Also she doesn't support it now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 01:52 |
|
|
I remember when Obama was open to a public option
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 04:13
|
|
