|
Who will you vote for in 2020? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Biden |
|
425 | 18.06% |
| Trump |
|
105 | 4.46% |
| whoever the Green Party runs |
|
307 | 13.05% |
| GOOGLE RON PAUL |
|
151 | 6.42% |
| Bernie Sanders |
|
346 | 14.70% |
| Stalin |
|
246 | 10.45% |
| Satan |
|
300 | 12.75% |
| Nobody |
|
202 | 8.58% |
| Jess Scarane |
|
110 | 4.67% |
| mystery man Brian Carroll of the American Solidarity Party |
|
61 | 2.59% |
| Dick Nixon |
|
100 | 4.25% |
| Total: | 2089 votes | ||
|
Son of Thunderbeast posted:You're asking for a citation on someone sharing the subjective impression that they're getting from current events. If you are getting this impression from current events then you are purposefully deciding something that completely contradicts current events. I really do not know how you look at Biden v. Trump right now and decide "THE DUMMYCRAPS ARE THROWING THE ELECTION  "
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 18:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 12:30 |
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Don't worry, I'm sure you'll get to how this is relevant in 2020 and in this situation any day now... Huh? I was just saying you're right about there existing a way to tell when the democrats are throwing an election. This was an example of evidence that the democrats threw an election in 2018. Don't need to be so hostile about me helping your position. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 18:39
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:Huh? I was just saying you're right about there existing a way to tell when the democrats are throwing an election. This was an example of evidence that the democrats threw an election in 2018. Don't need to be so hostile about me helping your position. Dude, you have a NoJoe tag and used an example that involves Joe Biden; it's not exactly difficult to see what you were implying.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 18:41
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Dude, you have a NoJoe tag and used an example that involves Joe Biden; it's not exactly difficult to see what you were implying. Can you please share what you think i was implying?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 18:45
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Don't worry, I'm sure you'll get to how this is relevant in 2020 and in this situation any day now... I envy the ability to take every day as a new day, completely free from the far-off historical context of 2 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 19:01
|
|
|
I totally agree with Fritz Coldcockin - the Democrats aren't trying to throw the election, and they do want to win. Them winning as the "Republicans, Only More Polite" party cements their power and keeps the gravy train rolling for as long as this accursed country limps along. If Trump wins they'll have to do another 4 years of phoning it in and easy mode donation collecting before they have to actually do anything (totally dismantle the AOC campaign or whatever Berniecrat makes an attempt in 2024) and try to install, I don't know, Chelsea Clinton or whoever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 19:06
|
|
|
They have to win a certain way so the left isn't powerful enough to challenge in two years, and win in such a way the chuds don't overwhelm them in two years. They will only successfully block the left. This works for them, the Dems claw back to power and the game begins again with Republicans basically changing the country how they see fit every 4-8 years and the Dems pruning the hedges.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 19:14
|
|
|
Pentecoastal Elites posted:the Democrats aren't trying to throw the election, and they do want to win. Them winning as the "Republicans, Only More Polite" party cements their power and keeps the gravy train rolling for as long as this accursed country limps along. If Trump wins they'll have to do another 4 years of phoning it in and easy mode donation collecting before they have to actually do anything (totally dismantle the AOC campaign or whatever Berniecrat makes an attempt in 2024) and try to install, I don't know, Chelsea Clinton or whoever. Yep, I think the most likely world where we see the democrats try to throw the election in 2020 would be the one where Bernie was nominated. But, we do not live in that world. Still, it's not without precedent for Democratic leaders to throw Democratic elections simply for personal gain and then face no meaningful repercussions (such as Biden did in 2018, as mentioned earlier), so who can say for sure.  We right now are already seeing the Republicans doing it (e.g., Kasich), so to me it's bizarre to claim that not a single relevant Democrat will do it with any certainty, and that's where I disagree with Fritz Coldcockin. Ruzihm fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 19:16
|
|
|
My opinion on this is that the Democrats don't want to lose, but most of them also don't care that much about winning. They essentially view "doing politics" as a job in the same vein as being an accountant or something. They'll go through the motions of campaigning and stuff, but it's not a huge deal to them and they'd rather lose than take actions that jeopardize how lucrative their careers are (both in terms of direct money and connections that could yield internships for their children, etc).Famethrowa posted:I envy the ability to take every day as a new day, completely free from the far-off historical context of 2 years ago. Look, the Democrats aren't a monolith. This means that you can't ever conclude anything about the party. Sometimes there are bad apples, but you should always assume that the party as a whole is good and has good intentions and there is literally nothing in the world that could ever disprove this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 19:18
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:Still, it's not without precedent for Democratic leaders to throw Democratic elections simply for personal gain and then face no meaningful repercussions (such as Biden did in 2018, as mentioned earlier), so who can say for sure. I don't disagree (with this or your larger point), but regarding: Fritz Coldcockin posted:If you are getting this impression from current events then you are purposefully deciding something that completely contradicts current events. I really do not know how you look at Biden v. Trump right now and decide "THE DUMMYCRAPS ARE THROWING THE ELECTION My take on it is that they're a little stuck here. They didn't get the candidate they probably wanted (Kamala or Petey B, I'm guessing) so they need to drag Joe across the finish line if they want, like Ytlaya mentioned, another generation of internships and make-work 300k/yr jobs for their idiot nephews. At the same time, though, Joe's brain is rapidly liquefying, which is why they're hiding him as much as possible. It'd look to the casual observer that they're throwing the election: hiding a unpopular candidate that has record-low levels of voter enthusiasm because every time he opens his mouth it's very bad for them. He's their last play and he's got to get in, which is why they're being so careful with the VP pick -- trying to shore up additional support somewhere without making anyone even more mad, don't upset the suburban R voters that might go to Biden. Really, if I was Tom Perez/Nancy Pelosi/Chuck Shumer/etc I'd be on my knees every morning thanking any god that will listen for the unbelievable blessing of COVID-19, because there's no way ol Sleepy Joe would even sniff a win otherwise. Pentecoastal Elites fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 19:29
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:Can you please share what you think i was implying? I'm not going to play this Glenn Beck shell game where you go "I'm just asking questions  ". You were clearly implying that the nomination of Joe Biden indicates that Democrats are controlled opposition and thus desire to throw the election to Donald Trump.quote:My take on it is that they're a little stuck here. They didn't get the candidate they probably wanted (Kamala or Petey B, I'm guessing) so they need to drag Joe across the finish line if they want, like Ytlaya mentioned, another generation of internships and make-work 300k/yr jobs for their idiot nephews. At the same time, though, Joe's brain is rapidly liquefying, which is why they're hiding him as much as possible. It'd look to the casual observer that they're throwing the election: hiding a unpopular candidate that has record-low levels of voter enthusiasm because every time he opens his mouth it's very bad for them. He's their last play and he's got to get in, which is why they're being so careful with the VP pick -- trying to shore up additional support somewhere without making anyone even more mad, don't upset the suburban R voters that might go to Biden. I know this is going to hurt your brain to contemplate, but Joe Biden wasn't even in my top 5 for candidate choices during the primaries. Also, I really wanna know what evidence you have for this: quote:Joe's brain is rapidly liquefying, which is why they're hiding him as much as possible. It just seems to me that y'all are mad that Joe Biden is winning in a manner that you guys find unacceptable--by instead appealing to suburban voters instead of the white rural voters that we kept hearing Bernie could totally swearsie-realsies win, guys. I wasn't on the Biden train at any point during the primaries; I was Warren first then Bernie second when she stopped being viable--but this bizarre mixture of spite-fueled wishcasting is getting really old. Fritz Coldcockin fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 20:59
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:If you are getting this impression from current events then you are purposefully deciding something that completely contradicts current events. I really do not know how you look at Biden v. Trump right now and decide "THE DUMMYCRAPS ARE THROWING THE ELECTION Well, they sabotaged their own primary in super obvious ways to put Joe Biden as their nominee. Then they told the passionate leftist base to eat poo poo and die, while throwing everything they can to convince the mythical moderate Republican to switch sides. The only way Joe is any competitive now is because of the Covid crisis.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:Well, they sabotaged their own primary in super obvious ways to put Joe Biden as their nominee. <citation needed>
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:02
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:<citation needed> Do you not have eyes to see?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:03
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:I'm not going to play this Glenn Beck shell game where you go "I'm just asking questions Ruzihm posted:Yep, I think the most likely world where we see the democrats try to throw the election in 2020 would be the one where Bernie was nominated. But, we do not live in that world.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:04
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:Do you not have eyes to see? I do. I'm just not going to pretend to see things that aren't there for the sake of manufactured outrage. Bernie lost. Maybe he wouldn't have if COVID-19 hadn't happened, maybe he wouldn't if Klob/Buttigieg/Beto/Harris hadn't simultaneously endorsed Biden right after that killshot in South Carolina--but pretending that this was some sort of "sabotage" sounds a lot like Hillary claiming that Russian interference was the sole cause of her 2016 loss. Like, the fact remains that Bernie was only going to win if the not-Bernie Democrats remained divided, much like the not-Trumps did in 2016 until it was too late. But they didn't. They united around a candidate, and Bernie's minority of support was not enough to overcome it. Does it suck that he didn't win? Yes. Was it "sabotage"? No. Fritz Coldcockin fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:05
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:You were clearly implying that the nomination of Joe Biden indicates that Democrats are controlled opposition and thus desire to throw the election to Donald Trump. edit: I do believe that Democrats are controlled opposition but that doesn't necessarily imply the latter. Ruzihm fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:11
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:<citation needed> The New York Times reported on Barack Obama making calls to Pete and Amy and urging them to drop out and endorse Joe Biden. It is insane that people continue to ignore this. My guess is that, when November rolls around and Trump wins re-election, it will be memory-holed in the same place that the revelations about the 2016 primary from the DNC email hack were memory-holed. Then people will wonder why more people didn't turn out for Joe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:11
|
|
|
Judakel posted:The New York Times reported on Barack Obama making calls to Pete and Amy and urging them to drop out and endorse Joe Biden. It is insane that people continue to ignore this. My guess is that, when November rolls around and Trump wins re-election, it will be memory-holed in the same place that the revelations about the 2016 primary from the DNC email hack were memory-holed. Then people will wonder why more people didn't turn out for Joe. this didn't happen hth. obama spoke with pete after he had already dropped out and tried to get him to endorse biden. and you can't seriously think that pete would have endorsed bernie otherwise
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:13
|
|
|
Judakel posted:The New York Times reported on Barack Obama making calls to Pete and Amy and urging them to drop out and endorse Joe Biden. It is insane that people continue to ignore this. My guess is that, when November rolls around and Trump wins re-election, it will be memory-holed in the same place that the revelations about the 2016 primary from the DNC email hack were memory-holed. Then people will wonder why more people didn't turn out for Joe. Do you have access to some polling information I don't? With 84 days to go, Joe Biden's lead in the polls is far more stable and comfortable than Obama 2008, Obama 2012, or Clinton 2016.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:15
|
|
|
goethe.cx posted:this didn't happen hth. obama spoke with pete after he had already dropped out and tried to get him to endorse biden. and you can't seriously think that pete would have endorsed bernie otherwise Obama absolutely put his thumb on the scale. It is irrelevant who Pete would've endorsed through his own volition if he was encouraged by anyone outside his campaign.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:17
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Do you have access to some polling information I don't? With 84 days to go, Joe Biden's lead in the polls is far more stable and comfortable than Obama 2008, Obama 2012, or Clinton 2016. The gap has been closing for a little while now and he is roughly in the same situation that Clinton was in prior to her defeat in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:18
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Do you have access to some polling information I don't? With 84 days to go, Joe Biden's lead in the polls is far more stable and comfortable than Obama 2008, Obama 2012, or Clinton 2016. Is there's a fix for the USPS issues and other attacks on mail in voting? If not then has biden beat the lawyer gap to fight off trump's inevitable claims? Defeat isn't certain but polling leads while accurate aren't going to be the only factors coming into play. Rockit fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:18
|
|
|
Judakel posted:Obama absolutely put his thumb on the scale. It is irrelevant who Pete would've endorsed through his own volition if he was encouraged by anyone outside his campaign. OK, so we're up to: 1) Democrats are controlled opposition and looking to purposefully throw the election 2) Joe Biden is totally suffering from advanced dementia 3) The Democratic Party purposefully sabotaged Bernie Sanders' campaign and the primaries 4) Barack Obama personally ordered Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar to drop out and endorse Joe Biden We got anymore baseless claims we wanna throw out there or is that it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:19
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:<citation needed> At this point, I think the citation is more needed to prove otherwise, why a Democratic Primary that hosed up its first caucus to a catastrophic extent and pushed forward in-person primaries during a pandemic should be considered legitimate. If it were the Republican Primary and the winner was Donald Trump, would you be talking the same way? I mean, please explain why the party that hosed Bernie last time to the point where they had to fire their chairwoman wouldn't gently caress them up this time. Please. How did the Democratic Party change leadership between 2016 and 2020 to prevent that from happening.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:21
|
|
|
Judakel posted:The gap has been closing for a little while now and he is roughly in the same situation that Clinton was in prior to her defeat in 2016. https://www.npr.org/2020/08/08/900338253/why-the-2020-presidential-election-is-not-2016 Probably Magic posted:At this point, I think the citation is more needed to prove otherwise, why a Democratic Primary that hosed up its first caucus to a catastrophic extent and pushed forward in-person primaries during a pandemic should be considered legitimate. If it were the Republican Primary and the winner was Donald Trump, would you be talking the same way? So because the Iowa Democratic Party made mistakes that means the other 49 contests were illegitimate? Tell me, what conditions did the Democratic Party impose on South Carolina that caused Joe Biden to wipe Bernie Sanders out by 30 points and erase all the momentum he'd gotten from Nevada? Like, I genuinely do not understand your thought process here. If we're going to insinuate that mistakes made in one state at one time invalidate the whole of the primary process, I think we're past arguing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:21
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:I do. I'm just not going to pretend to see things that aren't there for the sake of manufactured outrage. Bernie lost. Maybe he wouldn't have if COVID-19 hadn't happened, maybe he wouldn't if Klob/Buttigieg/Beto/Harris hadn't simultaneously endorsed Biden right after that killshot in South Carolina--but pretending that this was some sort of "sabotage" sounds a lot like Hillary claiming that Russian interference was the sole cause of her 2016 loss. Denying the ratfuckery going on in the Democratic Primaries is some primo ignoring reality. It's up there with Flat-Earthers. There's Iowa. There's the rampant voter suppression. There's the weird exit poll discrepancies that only favoured Biden. There were the rules fuckery. There was the killing people to vote for Biden and as soon as Bernie dropped out they started paying attention to Covid. There the Centrist Voltron. There's the Warren stuff. And that's just off the top of my head. None of this was hidden. This wa sblatant and in your-face. We had weeks of coverage of Democratic establishment saying they were ready to damage the party to defeat Bernie. dn guess what, they did! By nominating Biden they ensured that the Democratic Party will not survive the next few years! They pissed off everyone who isn't a corrupt rear end in a top hat or an ignorant boomer, poisoning the party for generations. They puleld the same bullshit that caused the 68 DNC Riots! And let's not forget the fact that the party is on record as not having to run fair elections in their Primaries because they're a private corporation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:21
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:OK, so we're up to: 2, 3 and 4 are widely documented as true. 1 is impossible to tell, but would not be any different if it were true.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:23
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:https://www.npr.org/2020/08/08/900338253/why-the-2020-presidential-election-is-not-2016 Gonna ignore those plague primaries, I noticed. It was four sentences, you could at least take the effort to read my entire post before responding.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:24
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:2, 3 and 4 are widely documented as true. 1 is impossible to tell, but would not be any different if it were true. You and I have a very different idea of what "widely documented" means, because when I say it I don't mean "two assholes on Twitter with roses in their profile names". (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:25
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:You and I have a very different idea of what "widely documented" means, because when I say it I don't mean "two assholes on Twitter with roses in their profile names". Yup, you're a Flat Earther. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:26
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:OK, so we're up to: Who says they're willing to purposefully throw the election? Incompetence is an option. Of course Joe Biden is not mentally competent. When you hear him speak, do you find yourself thinking that this is a healthy person? Do you think Trump is healthy when you hear him speak? Pay attention to what you're saying here. The Democratic Party and the media. Waht was the party message when Sanders was leading? The party decides. What was the media narrative around Sanders through the primary? That he was not electable. Despite exit polls showing that people who did not vote for Sanders due to the perception that he was not electable favored his policies and had favorable views of him as a person. That is manufacturing consent. This is only possible because Demcorats have an overwhelming trust in the media, as opposed to Republicans. A takeover of the Republican party is far easier than a takeover of the Democratic Party. And absolutely to that last point. These aren't baseless claims. They're empirically correct based on the available information that we can all observe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:26
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:https://www.npr.org/2020/08/08/900338253/why-the-2020-presidential-election-is-not-2016 I don't need to read an op-ed to read polls.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:27
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Don't worry, I'm sure you'll get to how this is relevant in 2020 and in this situation any day now... So are you going to even attempt to justify this claim that something has changed in the last 2 years that makes it necessarily true that evidence of a democrat throwing an election wont appear in 2020?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:27
|
|
|
I don't think democrats are trying to lose so much as they're prioritizing trying to win the internal power struggle between labor and third way democrats as the latter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:29
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:So are you going to even attempt to justify this claim that something has changed in the last 2 years that makes it necessarily true that a democrat won't throw an election in 2020? One can't prove a negative and what he's objecting to is more narrow than what you're actually saying so no.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:29
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:Yup, you're a Flat Earther. I'm not the one inventing Tom Clancy-style fanfiction to explain why Bernie Sanders lost the primaries.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:31
|
|
|
Rockit posted:One can't prove a negative and what he's objecting to is more narrow than what you're actually saying so no. My claim is "we can sometimes see evidence when a democrat throws an election", and my evidence was "in 2018 we saw evidence that a democrat threw an election," and he objected to that evidence because it was 2 years old.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:31
|
|
|
You can't bring up stuff Joe Biden did in 2018 as evidence of his true beliefs, how can stuff he's incapable of remembering affect his beliefs
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 12:30 |
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:https://www.npr.org/2020/08/08/900338253/why-the-2020-presidential-election-is-not-2016 Other 49 contests? How many states actually voted before Bernie dropped out again? Because it was nowhere near the full total of over 50. And then of those contests that were held, how many weren't plagued by discrepancies or literal plague?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 21:32
|
|
