|
How are u posted:That data shows women as generally slightly favorable towards Biden, and even more so as you go up through education thresholds, which is more likely to be those suburban women you believe are flocking increasingly to Trump. Yeah I was able to zoom and those are good numbers with women.
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 19:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 09:30 |
|
|
evilweasel posted:you're making an argument with statistics, sure, except the argument included that female democrats are "not enough of a portion of the bloc to swing Biden into even positive favorability right now" (he's in positive favorability with women) and that women largely dislike him (he's in positive favorability with women) so yes, you are citing your sources which is good except the sources contradict you I admit I'm factoring in stuff to come in and don't have time to dig through more polls at the moment to find one with a recent breakdown by race+sex+education level, but I've definitely not heard anything to suggest that suburban white women will, for the first time in US history, vote for the less conservative option at the top of the ticket it's not a bad gamble but it's a REALLY bad thing to make the core of your electoral strategy, especially when, and I cannot stress this enough, the nominee you're presenting to these people is a rapist who they've probably never seen or heard since 2016
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 19:55
|
|
|
I don't think there's many die hard Hillary people left, or at least I don't run into them much in my political spaces compared to a few years ago, but I can say for sure I run into more of them than die-hard Biden people, so the endorsement being a net negative despite this is still hilarious to me
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 19:57
|
|
|
Turns out blaming Russia for being a historically lovely candidate was a poor idea after all.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 19:57
|
|
|
ManBoyChef posted:I don't want to hurt people and I certainly don't want to make people feel bad. I feel bad enough already in my own life. I'm just doing what I can to stay sane and if that is checking out of a horrible process designed to ensure the rich can crush you under their boots no matter what you do, than so be it. I've seen you post endlessly about how both sides are the same and there's no hope, the only choice you have is to despair and withhold your vote. I've also seen you state that your only hope now is "the Virginia model". I hope you make the connection, friend. Incrementalism is our only choice at this moment (not forever!), and Virginia proves that it is a strategy that can pay off substantially. It requires a lot of hard work at the state and local level. We have to be in this game for the long haul. How are u fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Apr 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 19:58
|
|
|
it's worth noting that chart also shows that an endorsement from bernie sanders would be a net negative. it says any endorsement from anyone whose last name isn't obama is a net negative. i don't know how to interpret that data aside from that obama owns, and perhaps the headline conclusion is overselling things because it seems unlikely that every endorsement other than an obama endorsement is genuinely negative. my guess is that the ordering is useful, the specific number is not and the negative numbers are from that 95% of republicans will vote even harder against any democrat endorsed by another democrat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
In particular, you can see Biden did tremendously better with women than Sanders: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-are-women-less-likely-than-men-to-support-sanders/
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
How are u posted:I know we all live in our own bubbles, but there's absolutely a demographic of hardcore Hillary supporters who the Biden team would love to have engaged on behalf of Joe. A lot of the online left soured on Hillary, but we're clearly not the majority of anything. People may not dislike her personally, but she is a walking reminder of the failure of the Democratic party. Attaching yourself to the most famous political loser in America is demoralizing. Every time you bring up HRC, you cannot ignore 2016. And when you are essentially running the same playbook, you don't want to be reminded that it didn't work. It's a bad loving move.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:02
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:People may not dislike her personally, but she is a walking reminder of the failure of the Democratic party. Attaching yourself to the most famous political loser in America is demoralizing. Every time you bring up HRC, you cannot ignore 2016. And when you are essentially running the same playbook, you don't want to be reminded that it didn't work. it's an endorsement released at 3pm on a tuesday. during a pandemic. it is buried about as hard as you can get so nobody else notices it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:so how does anything change under Biden if he's already committed to filling his administration with lobbyists and billionaire Republicans? what's the elevator pitch for Why It's Different This Time, why does my vote for Biden get me any more change than my votes for Obama did (none), if the default position of the entire party is to do absolutely nothing to oppose their treasured colleagues and friends to their right you have to remember things did change under obama. People got more poor while the rich got much richer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:04
|
|
|
I don’t doubt that there is a base of Hillary supporters, but they’re all in Biden’s camp already and to most outside groups she’s a net negative
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
bobjr posted:I don’t doubt that there is a base of Hillary supporters, but they’re all in Biden’s camp already and to most outside groups she’s a net negative Who, Republicans?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:my guess is that the ordering is useful, the specific number is not and the negative numbers are from that 95% of republicans will vote even harder against any democrat endorsed by another democrat. I'm glad you feel that way but where's the evidence to support it? I don't know why they'd even chance it when ostensibly the point of alienating the entire left side of the party was to reach out to the right. But then again all of this is loving moot because Clinton's going to endorse a rapist during a women's interests town hall. As if that weren't just the absolute summary of liberalism: platitudes undermined by actions to the contrary. Solanumai fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Apr 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:07
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:it's an endorsement released at 3pm on a tuesday. during a pandemic. it is buried about as hard as you can get so nobody else notices it. Here's an idea: Don't do it at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
Shere posted:I'm glad you feel that way but where's the evidence to support it? I don't know why they'd even chance it when ostensibly the point of alienating the entire left side of the party was to reach out to the right. my evidence to support it is that the poll lists the endorsement of every person other than obama as a net negative, a thing that transparently people don't believe. again, it lists the endorsement of bernie sanders as a net negative for any presidential candidate. do you believe that's true?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:12
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Here's an idea: The establishment candidate is ticking his boxes. Outside of spaces like this, it is so irrelevant politico isn't even putting it on the front page.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:12
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Here's an idea: To be fair he probably had to kiss the ring in order to appease the remaining Hillbots within the party structure
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:12
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:it's an endorsement released at 3pm on a tuesday. during a pandemic. it is buried about as hard as you can get so nobody else notices it. hmm yes good point, i doubt the press will even bother to pick this up and who even reads the news during a pandemic anyway? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:13
|
|
|
Pick posted:The establishment candidate is ticking his boxes. Outside of spaces like this, it is so irrelevant politico isn't even putting it on the front page. People hate Hillary Clinton so much that they'd rather vote for Donald Trump. For a lot of people, she's the reason they voted for Donald Trump. If you want Donald Trump to win, there really isn't a better rallying flag.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:18
|
|
|
is pepsi ok posted:hmm yes good point, i doubt the press will even bother to pick this up and who even reads the news during a pandemic anyway? ok, pretend i posted the like eight million sites not putting it anywhere near the front page instead of whatever that is
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:20
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:People hate Hillary Clinton so much that they'd rather vote for Donald Trump. For a lot of people, she's the reason they voted for Donald Trump. If you want Donald Trump to win, there really isn't a better rallying flag. I literally cannot imagine the person who would not vote for Joe Biden based on getting an endorsement from Hillary Clinton, mostly because it should be already factored in, since it's completely expected to the point most people probably assume it already happened.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:20
|
|
|
the people who would be turned off by a mere endorsement are the people who believe that Hillary Clinton shapeshifts into every other Democrat anyway
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:21
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:People hate Hillary Clinton so much that they'd rather vote for Donald Trump. For a lot of people, she's the reason they voted for Donald Trump. If you want Donald Trump to win, there really isn't a better rallying flag. A rallying flag for you, or for Republicans? I think Republicans, by and large, already were pretty certain that they want Donald Trump to win.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:21
|
|
|
Pick posted:I literally cannot imagine the person who would not vote for Joe Biden based on getting an endorsement from Hillary Clinton, mostly because it should be already factored in, since it's completely expected to the point most people probably assume it already happened. and its not like anyone who wanted to run an ad tying biden to clinton would be short on material anyway or would decline to run it because the endorsement wasn't explicitly made there's probably little to no benefit to this endorsement - but there are certainly people who biden could turn off if he snubbed clinton instead of being polite and accepting the endorsement (and no, the people who would cheer are gonna still pull the lever for trump)
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:23
|
|
|
Are you suggesting you can find photos of the Vice President *squints* talking to the contemporaneous Secretary of State?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:25
|
|
|
Hillary endorsing rapist Biden is an obviously ploy by the establishment media to get Tara Reade’s latest evidence of rape out of the news cycle. It’s Hillary destroying yet another rape victim for political power. She’s had experience doing this to her husband’s victims for decades, after all.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:25
|
|
|
How are u posted:A rallying flag for you, or for Republicans? I think Republicans, by and large, already were pretty certain that they want Donald Trump to win. I think it could motivate Republicans who might otherwise stay home.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:29
|
|
|
A4R8 posted:Hillary endorsing rapist Biden is an obviously ploy by the establishment media to get Tara Reade’s latest evidence of rape out of the news cycle. It’s Hillary destroying yet another rape victim for political power. She’s had experience doing this to her husband’s victims for decades, after all. Its this too I imagine if this poo poo really hits the fan or if there is another credible allegation that blows up Biden will probably drop the VP announcement to drown it out
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:my evidence to support it is that the poll lists the endorsement of every person other than obama as a net negative, a thing that transparently people don't believe. again, it lists the endorsement of bernie sanders as a net negative for any presidential candidate. do you believe that's true? I mean, yeah. Lots and lots of people have been saying that Bernie is a racist sexist who wants to march the rich into central park and kill them. I hope those people would also consider it a net negative if Bernie suddenly endorsed their guy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:31
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:my evidence to support it is that the poll lists the endorsement of every person other than obama as a net negative, a thing that transparently people don't believe. again, it lists the endorsement of bernie sanders as a net negative for any presidential candidate. do you believe that's true? I'm referring to your assertion that the "net negative" part is all republicans who will vote super hard against Hillary. An assertion you conjured from nothing. While we're making baseless assertions: Why yes I would easily believe MSM has poisoned Bernie with enough Castro-apologist/etc. bullshit that his endorsement isn't worth as much because a bunch of liberals can't stand how he wants to improve the country.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:35
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:I think it could motivate Republicans who might otherwise stay home. Republicans turned out in droves to vote for Trump in the primaries where he is effectively running unopposed; lack of motivation is not a problem they have this cycle
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:36
|
|
|
Shere posted:I'm referring to your assertion that the "net negative" part is all republicans who will vote super hard against Hillary. An assertion you conjured from nothing. my assertion is the net negative for all candidates polled is caused by that effect; that for every potential endorser most republican voters said it would be more likely to make them vote against the person. it's an assertion conjured from a passing familiarity with republican voters that is shared by everyone in this thread. how valuable an endorsement would be matters only for how much it's going to change someone's vote. the response of someone who will vote for the democratic candidate or the republican candidate, pretty much no matter what, are not useful. but that poll is obviously including those responses. we can also tell from the significant gap between bernie and AOC (which is clearly caused by AOC being a well-known hate figure on the right, and not nearly as well known as bernie on the left) and as a reminder: that poll was conducted in october, so well before any "the media poisoned people against bernie" and also the idea that a bernie endorsement is a net negative is incompatible with the idea bernie is a strong GE candidate who can beat trump, so keep that in mind.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:42
|
|
|
is this the thread where i yell about the virtual town hall and biden just rambling with hillary?? because oh boy i like how he just said "i thank the question for that important question" Lazy_Liberal fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Apr 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:44
|
|
precious
|
What’s happened in the town hall?  E: oh boy, trotting out access to affordable healthcare and a public option and lowering the Medicare age 
PenguinKnight fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Apr 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:47
|
|
|
PenguinKnight posted:What’s happened in the town hall? Joe promised Medicare For All, but only for COVID cases, and rent amnesty, but only for select individuals
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:50
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:my assertion is the net negative for all candidates polled is caused by that effect; that for every potential endorser most republican voters said it would be more likely to make them vote against the person. it's an assertion conjured from a passing familiarity with republican voters that is shared by everyone in this thread. Oh yes silly me I forgot that the media only started turning people against Bernie 6 months ago. Sorry, I keep forgetting that. There definitely doesn't exist a completely accepted and normalized "Never Bernie" portion of the Democratic Party. Nope. We didn't spend the last 3 years blaming him for Trump being elected, no way. gently caress off. AOC is loathed by liberals: she's being primaried by her own party! You're just making poo poo up! e: yes, I will concede that Bernie Sanders isn't a very good GE candidate anymore because the media spends endless amounts of time doing things like reporting on private conversations he may or may not have had with another candidate and zero time reporting on Joe Biden's rapes. You got me there! Solanumai fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Apr 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:51
|
|
|
PenguinKnight posted:What’s happened in the town hall? it's live streaming on youtube right now. it's mostly biden rambling thru scripted responses to prepared questions. hillary being like "joe is so cool and has been fighting for women forever and we should focus on how great of a president he's gonna be!!" also Michelle Kwan is around for some reason?? biden has touched his face like a dozen times and i'm honestly spacing out because of all the boring platitudes
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:53
|
|
|
Rastor posted:Joe promised Medicare For All, but only for COVID cases, and rent amnesty, but only for select individuals They quite literally listed out a bunch of arguments for medicare for all and said it is a moral failing to not provide healthcare for everyone. Except it was to defend the ACA and covering COVID cases. I guess it's not a moral failing if you can't afford cancer treatment? No clue why.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:54
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:ok, pretend i posted the like eight million sites not putting it anywhere near the front page instead of whatever that is lol "just pretend that i'm right" anyway i checked a bunch of MSM sites and every one mentioned the endorsement on the front page
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 20:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 09:30 |
|
|
Shere posted:Oh yes silly me I forgot that the media only started turning people against Bernie 6 months ago. Sorry, I keep forgetting that. There definitely doesn't exist a completely accepted and normalized "Never Bernie" portion of the Democratic Party. Nope. We didn't spend the last 3 years blaming him for Trump being elected, no way. gently caress off. aoc among people who know who she is is viewed as roughly the same as sanders (either positively or negatively). among the right wing, she's about as well known as sanders because she's a fox news boogeyman; among democrats she's a congresswoman, a relatively popular one but not on the news they watch/consume nightly like Sanders is or people are talking about AOC on fox. i don't even get why this is such a controversial point and why you are flipping out over it, like seriously. this is basic interpretation of data and going "huh this looks odd and there's probably an error here, but this part looks like useful data" the poll is likely correct about an endorsement from hillary clinton being worth much less than biden/bernie/obama/bill clinton/elizabeth warren. the conclusion that the poll accurately reflects where the breakpoint is between an endorsement being a negative and a positive is very unlikely to be true: the design of the study suffers from an obvious flaw for drawing that conclusion, and the results of the study also show that it is unlikely that is true. you would need a much more carefully designed poll to draw that conclusion. none of that should be remotely controversial and the bizarrely angry response you're giving me literally makes no sense to me. i get why people get upset at some of the things i post because they contradict basic things people want to be true. a basic, obvious point about a poll that should not be remotely controversial is not one of them. nobody's worldview depends on that poll accurately measuring where an endorsement becomes a net negative.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2020 21:01
|
|