|
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 | ||
|
buddhist nudist posted:I agree with you that anybody who thinks Biden is destined to fail is seriously deluded, but pre-primary polling isn't exactly ironclad and IA and NH results have an outsized impact on the rest of the primary. I agree about the impact of IA and NH, especially IA. You have to go back to 1992 to find a Democrat who won the IA caucus but didn't win the nomination and even that was because IA senator Tom Harkin was running. But Biden seems poised to win IA and it's hard to see what would lower his chances there that hasn't already been happening to him, other than maybe a new health scare.
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2019 22:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
Marxalot posted:https://twitter.com/mattkbh/status/1157324140476391426?s=20 Right when Beto announced he was running for president, he immediately hit everybody up in Texas begging for money. Seeing as how intense the 2018 race was, he had tons of people's contact information. I got 4 separate texts from different numbers in the first few days so I assume that tons of people gave him money from then.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2019 22:15
|
|
|
Armack posted:I agree about the impact of IA and NH, especially IA. You have to go back to 1992 to find a Democrat who won the IA caucus but didn't win the nomination and even that was because IA senator Tom Harkin was running. But Biden seems poised to win IA and it's hard to see what would lower his chances there that hasn't already been happening to him, other than maybe a new health scare. Fair. I haven't been following state-specific data enough to comment on his IA chances, I'm just a member of a DNC-scorned state so I know I'll get to watch the initial votes and dropouts before I have to commit. Let me hold onto ignorance and hope. It's all I've got.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2019 22:20
|
|
|
buddhist nudist posted:Fair. I haven't been following state-specific data enough to comment on his IA chances, I'm just a member of a DNC-scorned state so I know I'll get to watch the initial votes and dropouts before I have to commit. Actually you know what, I was going by old IA polls. Now that I'm looking at more recent data, Biden actually does seem to have some weakness in IA, and that is a relief. It's far from a reason to have confidence that he'll falter, but I'm gonna join you in your hope. If we can stop Biden in IA, we can stop him over time. It might take a Bernie-Warren alliance though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2019 22:27
|
|
|
Marxalot posted:https://twitter.com/mattkbh/status/1157324140476391426?s=20 He already had their email addresses. But he doesn’t have anyone else’s it seems.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2019 22:35
|
|
|
I like that if you remove Bernie from the map, the Blue turns mostly Green across the US for Warren. It seems a lot of America want them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2019 22:42
|
|
|
Terror Sweat posted:Biden is going to fall and break a hip It doens't mean he won't be the nom
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2019 22:51
|
|
|
a.lo posted:It doens't mean he won't be the nom remembering when Hillary passed out on 9/11 and people said it was too hot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
a.lo posted:John Delaney is an embarrassment to my state of Maryland Delaney is a MESS, a BIG FAT mistake.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2019 23:55
|
|
|
Zipperelli. posted:Can someone give me a quick explanation why all these rich idiots want fascism, like they wouldnt be affected in any way, which is wildly untrue? Probably because fascism is the only system left that would prevent the rich from being skinned alive for destroying anything resembling labor rights, healthcare, the welfare state, and the biosphere on this planet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 00:25
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:Eh. You wouldn't be saying this if Bernie had surged five points in these polls or something. For all the talk about "polls don't matter" and as much as I tend to agree with it: I'd prefer to have polls showing that he's whipping rear end than not. If Bernie surged 5 points in the polls the day of and the day after the debates I'd be saying ignore them even harder. Unless the debate consisted entirely of Biden literally making GBS threads himself on stage just before his dentures fell out and he confusingly stumbled around. The assumption of the various pollsters when they're making up their weighting formulas is inherently anti-Bernie. Now this could be accurate or our wildest hopes and dreams could be true and Bernie is secretly ahead by 20 points as we speak. Regardless, anything other than a sustained building of support, like Warren has been showing, is more likely to be a weird fluke than it is to be real. So poll that shows Bernie suddenly jumping 5 points in 2 days without a corresponding seismic campaign event should be taken with an even larger grain of salt than polling at this point in the race should normally be taken with. The institutional bias of the various ways in which politics penetrates the populace at this point are in opposition to Bernie both intentionally and unintentionally. And given the way in which the public is still loosely paying attention at this point in the race, Bernie is unlikely to benefit from the debates right now. Once again, I'm not saying that the polls are meaningless. There is real value in looking at the trends of support and anyone polling sub 5% almost certainly really doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of making it. The current percentages should probably just be viewed as approximate values and with an asterisk indicating that most people aren't seriously paying attention in any actual capacity at this point. Consequentially, support for the leading candidates is vulnerable to cratering in the very late fall/ early winter when most people reluctantly start following politics once again. Given the targets of voter suppression I do wonder if and how this will affect the primary. Warren and Pete voters are probably among the least likely to be affected while Biden and Bernie voters are among the most likely. Armack posted:I hope so but I want to point out how much the goalposts have moved. We went from "Biden will implode as soon as he announces" to "Biden will implode after his announcement bump fades" to "Biden will implode when the public finds out he doesn't give fuckall about women's boundaries" to "Biden will implode when he gets attacked by other candidates" to "Biden will implode when he starts sundowning at debates." While everyone has been cheering that this will be the thing that causes the Biden implosion, very little of the predictions of Biden imploding dating from before he even declared pointed to a specific point. More that the accumulated Bidenisms would cause a structural collapse of any Biden Campaign prior to voting. The most likely point where that will happen still being when most people actually start paying attention to this race instead of following it entirely based on snippets they see in the gym or on the TV at the place they go to for lunch. As for the early races, Biden has a history of getting smoked there. In 2008 he was polling in the mid to high single digits in December. In January he got less than 1% in Iowa. He's always a been a poo poo campaigner that people like in the same way that they like Generic Democrat, and when it comes time to vote they abandon him. Remember that in 200fucking8 the motherfucker ran on how great he was at foreign policy and made his judgement on Iraq a central part of his campaign. As a former total dumbfuck, now just your, simple, everyday dumbfuck, Biden was my guy at the start of the '08 campaign. If you aren't actually following politics he presents as an elder statesman who knows how to get things done. However, as soon as I actually started paying attention to things(around about his a noun, a verb, and 9/11 line) he lost my support. Because he is Joe Biden, and not only does he fail on his own merits he consistently runs against opponents who are both better than him and can run circles around him. His flaws are actually magnified in places like Iowa and New Hampshire, where the tiny rear end electorate means that pretty much everyone can talk to all the candidates and truly compare them. Electorally, Biden is kind of an inverse Bernie. His supporters are both less enthused and more likely to make it through polling screens than other candidates. His entire campaign isn't about ideas or a message, it's simply about how he's the most likely to beat Donny. That is the weakest possible campaign sell, because any hint that other people aren't buying in on the idea that he's the most electable causes a failure cascade. Gyges fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Aug 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 01:00
|
|
|
Armack posted:I agree about the impact of IA and NH, especially IA. You have to go back to 1992 to find a Democrat who won the IA caucus but didn't win the nomination and even that was because IA senator Tom Harkin was running. But Biden seems poised to win IA and it's hard to see what would lower his chances there that hasn't already been happening to him, other than maybe a new health scare. Biden has been top in the IA polling, but Bernie has been consistently second and the last poll was just a 5 point gap. Iowa being a caucus will probably also lead to Bernie overperforming his poll numbers due to the enthusiasm and organizing gap between him and Biden. Will it be enough for him to win? Who knows but I suspect it will be close. It's basically the same story with Nevada as of right now. Biden is winning in NH, but not by a large margin, and that is a strong region for Bernie. Will be interesting to see where the support shifts as candidates drop out or fade. Biden is definitely winning SC if he's not in a coma. But Bernie has been coming in second now, and may be the only other candidate that reaches viability there, which would be a win of sorts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:remembering when Hillary passed out on 9/11 and people said it was too hot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 02:07
|
|
|
Apparently I got probated for saying this so: Warren has no health plan as part of her platform. She has no clue on healthcare and is latching on to whatever's popular.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 02:11
|
|
|
Judakel posted:Apparently I got probated for saying this so: Warren has no health plan as part of her platform. She has no clue on healthcare and is latching on to whatever's popular. It really goes like this:
The media is quite adept at confusing Warren’s  plan with Bernie’s. I had some idiot in a shared Lyft ride the other day ignorantly proclaim how Warren’s entire political ideology is identical to Bernie’s, and she was shocked to learn from me that Warren was a republican until she was 46 years old.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 02:29
|
|
|
tylersayten posted:It really goes like this: You wouldn't know any of this from anything she has said when given the opportunity on the debate stage recently or from looking at her site. She is terrified of solidifying her plan in the mind of the American voter because she knows it sucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 02:43
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/GrassrootsJill/status/1155349199291969538
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 02:58
|
|
|
Reminder that he is the reason why we didn't get single payer back in the 70s
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 03:16
|
|
|
This isn’t a reveal lol this was publicly known as early as 2017 lol.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 03:18
|
|
|
Bernie is the best legit only deal over everyone in the race. Sorry but it’s truth. Everyone else is a runner up for something not as good. And he’s not the optimal candidate, but the only normal candidate in a lot of other places.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 03:34
|
|
|
Judakel posted:You wouldn't know any of this from anything she has said when given the opportunity on the debate stage recently or from looking at her site. She is terrified of solidifying her plan in the mind of the American voter because she knows it sucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 03:38
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1157402155206270977 Looks like my prediction for poll movements was correct. A good chunk of Biden people that went to Harris after the first debate largely came back to him, and that's about it. Ugh, there's a 75% chance that the nominee is Biden, isn't there?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 03:43
|
|
|
The numbers didn't go up. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 04:01
|
|
|
Roluth posted:Looks like my prediction for poll movements was correct. A good chunk of Biden people that went to Harris after the first debate largely came back to him, and that's about it. Ugh, there's a 75% chance that the nominee is Biden, isn't there? No, Biden does not win 3 times out of 4 even if we're all wrong and Joe3030mentum is real. The best odds of any single candidate winning at this point is probably less than 30%. There are epochs of political time between now and when people actually start voting, and so very much can happen. At this point in 2008: Giuliani was the unbeaten leader in polls and second place was noted delegate vault, Fred Thompson. Hillary was polling in the 40s and Obama was doing just a little better than Bernie is now. At this point in 2012: We were just about to enter the great "Oh god, anyone but Mitt" phase of the Republican poo poo show. At this point in 2016: We just learned that JEB! wasn't real, and we all road the escalator to hell. Meanwhile Hillary was polling in the mid 50s and Bernie was slightly above where he is now. This rodeo isn't anywhere near finished, Biden is assured of nothing, and we can still get a President who still believes he can fly if he waives his arms around enough.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 04:06
|
|
|
No one on earth is an enthusiastic Biden supporter. What someone says in response to a poll doesn't matter. What matters if they actually care enough to go vote for their candidate
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 04:14
|
|
|
I think a lot of people in this thread treat the primary as more ideological than it is. Most democrats are prioritizing "can beat Trump" over any policy preference. Biden will fall if (well, I think *when*, in my opinion) it becomes clear that he's a weaker candidate than his name recognition and proximity to Obama would indicate. Of course "Democratic primary voters" as a group are dumb as all gently caress and I wouldn't put it past them to nominate Biden, they nominated Hillary after all. But Joe isn't looking so hot in these debates. I'm a little terrified he's in the early stages of dementia (the slurring, etc) and that that will become obvious after he gets the nomination (if he does). Bernie's a few years older but sounds 20 years younger.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 04:18
|
|
|
I wonder if we're gonna have a debate with all the candidates at once before voting starts
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 04:20
|
|
|
buddhist nudist posted:Biden is going to challenge Tump to how many hips they can break while falling live on stage. That's correct, the only way a bipartisan debate will ever impact a voter is if one of the candidates trips and falls on them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 04:24
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:I wonder if we're gonna have a debate with all the candidates at once before voting starts Probably the next one. 2 percent in polls will knock out a lot of the who?s and the 130,000 donors will do a lot to take out the rest. So far 5 candidates are definitely going to the September debate, and I doubt more than 4 more of these chucklefucks make the requirements.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 04:37
|
|
|
We really just need to reduce the roster to Warren, Pete, Beto, Biden, Harris, and Bernie. Then people will start getting exposed more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 04:58
|
|
|
Judakel posted:We really just need to reduce the roster to Bernie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 05:34
|
|
|
Preach the truth reverend. I love the gospel. Bernie
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 06:23
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:No one on earth is an enthusiastic Biden supporter. What someone says in response to a poll doesn't matter. What matters if they actually care enough to go vote for their candidate The closest i've heard anyone come to being an enthusiastic biden supporter are people who just say they want someone safe who can beat trump
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 06:23
|
|
|
Was Hillary a safe bet?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 07:26
|
|
|
a.lo posted:Was Hillary a safe bet?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 08:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1157709379321454592?s=20
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 09:27
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Probably the next one. 2 percent in polls will knock out a lot of the who?s and the 130,000 donors will do a lot to take out the rest. So far 5 candidates are definitely going to the September debate, and I doubt more than 4 more of these chucklefucks make the requirements. Biden, Bernie, Warren, Harris, Pete, Beto, Booker, and Klobuchar have already qualified, and Yang/Castro are very likely to. That's already 10, Gabbard has an outside shot, if she qualifies and makes 11 they plan on splitting the debates into 2 groups again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 10:31
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Probably the next one. 2 percent in polls will knock out a lot of the who?s and the 130,000 donors will do a lot to take out the rest. So far 5 candidates are definitely going to the September debate, and I doubt more than 4 more of these chucklefucks make the requirements. 8 candidates have qualified for the next debate already.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 12:44
|
|
|
The fact that Klobuchar and Gabbard are qualifying or close to qualifying is evidence that the requirements are too low. Same with Beto and Castro, arguably Booker too. These people are barely polling at 2%, gtfo lol.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 12:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
Old white man supports old white man, more news at 11
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2019 13:17
|
|
