Democrats 2020

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

And just like that, the "electability" argument crumbles to bits.

Sanders and Bloomberg rise, Biden falls, with sharp shifts in views of electability



View attachment 26201

An interesting finding is that Bernie not only leads among independents, but is considered "too conservative" by as many people as consider him "too liberal".



Bloomberg is the last real obstacle to Bernie, and it's so fitting that the final showdown in this primary tournament should be Bernie versus a billionaire who is basically indistinguishable from Trump himself. Having exhausted all the options that were conciliatory to the bankers and corporations, Bloomberg entering the race at this point is like the gleaming skeleton of the Terminator finally being revealed beneath the fleshy exterior. No McKinsey consultants, DC wonks, or business-friendly technocrats are left to conceal the ultimate motive of the Democratic establishment; now they have gone fully mask-off and are just running a billionaire who fails every test of liberal credibility imaginable and aligns ideologically further right than even Biden.

All of the former Obama and Hillary staffers have in turns tanked Pete's, Liz's, Kamala's and Joe's campaigns, and have yet to realize that their strategy needs any adjustment.

Everybody who said in 2016 "Trump can't win" and then shifted in 2019 to "Bernie can't win the primary" is now saying "Bernie can't beat Trump", and... have yet to realize that their strategy needs any adjustment.

So, what's the plan when Bernie kicks due to the next heart attack the day after inauguration? Or two years in?

I'm serious. Mean survival rate for someone in his age group with a MI is 3 years. I honestly do not see him lasting a full term. And certainly not with whatever faculties he has intact, remaining intact. Yeah, I went there because Sanders is not much good at anything beyond his talking points and he's had 40 years to rehearse them. They are practically a childhood memory.

Bloomberg's heart is even worse. He had heart procedures years earlier.

 

[PyramidHead]

So, what's the plan when Bernie kicks due to the next heart attack the day after inauguration? Or two years in?

I'm serious. Mean survival rate for someone in his age group with a MI is 3 years. I honestly do not see him lasting a full term. And certainly not with whatever faculties he has intact, remaining intact. Yeah, I went there because Sanders is not much good at anything beyond his talking points and he's had 40 years to rehearse them. They are practically a childhood memory.

All of the frontrunners for the Democratic nomination, as well as their common opponent Donald Trump, have roughly the same chance of dying of natural causes in the next decade, so yours is a moot point. The choices are among people in their 70's whether you like that or not. If you can't stomach it, don't vote.

That's not at all true, statistically speaking. Sanders has had a recent heart attack and has had a stent put in. He's 78. Mean survival for anyone in that age group to survive AFTER a heart attack is 3.1 years.

Bloomberg, who is not usually mentioned as a forerunner is about the same age as Sanders and has also had a stent. But NO heart attack. He has a statistically better chance at survival.

All else being equal, maybe. But Bernie is also unusually healthy for his age, and remains active and lucid compared to someone like Biden. Statistics don't predict individuals with the degree of accuracy you're implying. And really, let's be honest here: you're hoping for Bernie to drop dead sooner rather than later anyway

I don't like Biden's chances of making it through the first term, either. He's in his late 70's and has had serious health problems, as well.

Warren is the youngest of the 'older' candidates. She has three things going for her in terms of statistics: 1. She's younger by nearly a decade. That matters a great deal in that age group.2. She has no history of heart disease or other major medical events. 3. She's female, which means that statistically speaking, she is likely to live to an older age than Sanders, Biden or Bloomberg.

Depending on sources, Klobuchar and Buttigieg are considered front runners. Both are significantly younger than any of those who are 70+ running and as far as I know, are in excellent health. They likely have decades of healthy living ahead of them.

None of that matters, because the campaigns of Warren, Biden, Klobuchar, and Buttigieg are over and they will not win. Your choices are Bloomberg and Sanders. You may not believe me now, but in a few months you will see that I was right.

If you don't like facing reality, then I suggest you don't participate in a forum where people might ask difficult questions or question your belief system. I'm pretty sure there's a nice hole in the sand somewhere near you.

If you actually care about your candidate or the future of this country, then you will think long and hard about what the plan would be if Sanders, in whom you have invested so much devotion and energy, keels over. Because that's quite likely. Don't want to believe me? Look at Trump and his age/health. Look at Ronald Reagan, who did survive 2 terms but who was showing signs of Alzheimer's in his first term to anyone who paid attention. They didn't announce it until after he left the presidency but it was present and advancing noticeably to anyone without big blinders on.

POTUS is an extremely demanding, stressful job that demands someone who is vigorous and strong and healthy. That's not Sanders. So, what's the plan? Who would be his likely VP?

This is such transparent grasping, Toni. Bernie could keel over on day one and would still be the best pick for president, because I trust his judgement to nominate a VP who isn't a Clintonite ghoul or some corporate consultant from Lockheed Martin. Whoever is part of his coalition and his cabinet will fulfill the small but vital role that Bernie Sanders would have filled: foment popular pressure against the bad actors in society who are ruining our lives and our future.

He dies, VP Tammi Baldwin takes over. She gets assassinated, speaker of the house Debbie Stabenow takes over. A meteor hits her in the head, and Keith Ellison takes over. It doesn't matter who has his spot, as long as they have the same priorities as Bernie and are immune to the lure of Obama- and Clinton-era blobs whose livelihoods will take a sharp turn for the worse under his administration. This is why Bernie has to win, not because of him and what he can do, but because of his appointments, and perhaps most importantly, what he (and they) WON'T do, which is turn their backs on the working class of America like every other candidate in the race.

 

[Jarhyn]

And just like that, the "electability" argument crumbles to bits.

Sanders and Bloomberg rise, Biden falls, with sharp shifts in views of electability



View attachment 26201

An interesting finding is that Bernie not only leads among independents, but is considered "too conservative" by as many people as consider him "too liberal".



Bloomberg is the last real obstacle to Bernie, and it's so fitting that the final showdown in this primary tournament should be Bernie versus a billionaire who is basically indistinguishable from Trump himself. Having exhausted all the options that were conciliatory to the bankers and corporations, Bloomberg entering the race at this point is like the gleaming skeleton of the Terminator finally being revealed beneath the fleshy exterior. No McKinsey consultants, DC wonks, or business-friendly technocrats are left to conceal the ultimate motive of the Democratic establishment; now they have gone fully mask-off and are just running a billionaire who fails every test of liberal credibility imaginable and aligns ideologically further right than even Biden.

All of the former Obama and Hillary staffers have in turns tanked Pete's, Liz's, Kamala's and Joe's campaigns, and have yet to realize that their strategy needs any adjustment.

Everybody who said in 2016 "Trump can't win" and then shifted in 2019 to "Bernie can't win the primary" is now saying "Bernie can't beat Trump", and... have yet to realize that their strategy needs any adjustment.

So, what's the plan when Bernie kicks due to the next heart attack the day after inauguration? Or two years in?

I'm serious. Mean survival rate for someone in his age group with a MI is 3 years. I honestly do not see him lasting a full term. And certainly not with whatever faculties he has intact, remaining intact. Yeah, I went there because Sanders is not much good at anything beyond his talking points and he's had 40 years to rehearse them. They are practically a childhood memory.

Bloomberg's heart is even worse. He had heart procedures years earlier.

Not to mention there is such a thing as "vice president". As long as Bernie doesn't run alongside a token conservative, and picks a runningmate that is equally progressive ("Shock! Horror! That is just Not How It Is Done"), it's not really an issue. Of course, he COULD appoint a Buttigieg or a Klobuchar or whatever. And then... What is the fucking complaint? So everyone here crowing about what Bernie is too radical or his health or both: it doesn't fucking matter.

 

[PyramidHead]

The icing on the fucking cake: the #stillwithher caucus has finally found the clip of Bloomberg saying Bernie would have beaten Trump



Just SEETHING contempt, and I love it

 

[blastula]

Apparently Bloomberg will be in the debate tonight. I've wondered whether he had been happy not to have qualified, since he does have a lot of conservative baggage, but then the DNC ruined it for him. It's easier to have good polling numbers without a negative spotlight on you (goes for Sanders in the general too). Hopefully, he will be challenged enough tonight. It would be depressing if a Repub won the Dem nomination.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Interesting comment on NPR yesterday: At this point in the election cycle, Mondale was favored to beat Reagan.

 

[Toni]

And just like that, the "electability" argument crumbles to bits.

Sanders and Bloomberg rise, Biden falls, with sharp shifts in views of electability



View attachment 26201

An interesting finding is that Bernie not only leads among independents, but is considered "too conservative" by as many people as consider him "too liberal".



Bloomberg is the last real obstacle to Bernie, and it's so fitting that the final showdown in this primary tournament should be Bernie versus a billionaire who is basically indistinguishable from Trump himself. Having exhausted all the options that were conciliatory to the bankers and corporations, Bloomberg entering the race at this point is like the gleaming skeleton of the Terminator finally being revealed beneath the fleshy exterior. No McKinsey consultants, DC wonks, or business-friendly technocrats are left to conceal the ultimate motive of the Democratic establishment; now they have gone fully mask-off and are just running a billionaire who fails every test of liberal credibility imaginable and aligns ideologically further right than even Biden.

All of the former Obama and Hillary staffers have in turns tanked Pete's, Liz's, Kamala's and Joe's campaigns, and have yet to realize that their strategy needs any adjustment.

Everybody who said in 2016 "Trump can't win" and then shifted in 2019 to "Bernie can't win the primary" is now saying "Bernie can't beat Trump", and... have yet to realize that their strategy needs any adjustment.

So, what's the plan when Bernie kicks due to the next heart attack the day after inauguration? Or two years in?

I'm serious. Mean survival rate for someone in his age group with a MI is 3 years. I honestly do not see him lasting a full term. And certainly not with whatever faculties he has intact, remaining intact. Yeah, I went there because Sanders is not much good at anything beyond his talking points and he's had 40 years to rehearse them. They are practically a childhood memory.

Bloomberg's heart is even worse. He had heart procedures years earlier.

Bloomberg's health is probably better: his stent was put into place to prevent a heart attack. Sanders’ was put in to prevent ANOTHER heart attack. Subtle difference but heart attacks always cause some damage. I think they are both too old but I think Bloomberg’s health is likely better.

 

[Toni]

That's not at all true, statistically speaking. Sanders has had a recent heart attack and has had a stent put in. He's 78. Mean survival for anyone in that age group to survive AFTER a heart attack is 3.1 years.

Bloomberg, who is not usually mentioned as a forerunner is about the same age as Sanders and has also had a stent. But NO heart attack. He has a statistically better chance at survival.

I don't like Biden's chances of making it through the first term, either. He's in his late 70's and has had serious health problems, as well.

Warren is the youngest of the 'older' candidates. She has three things going for her in terms of statistics: 1. She's younger by nearly a decade. That matters a great deal in that age group.2. She has no history of heart disease or other major medical events. 3. She's female, which means that statistically speaking, she is likely to live to an older age than Sanders, Biden or Bloomberg.

Depending on sources, Klobuchar and Buttigieg are considered front runners. Both are significantly younger than any of those who are 70+ running and as far as I know, are in excellent health. They likely have decades of healthy living ahead of them.


If you don't like facing reality, then I suggest you don't participate in a forum where people might ask difficult questions or question your belief system. I'm pretty sure there's a nice hole in the sand somewhere near you.

If you actually care about your candidate or the future of this country, then you will think long and hard about what the plan would be if Sanders, in whom you have invested so much devotion and energy, keels over. Because that's quite likely. Don't want to believe me? Look at Trump and his age/health. Look at Ronald Reagan, who did survive 2 terms but who was showing signs of Alzheimer's in his first term to anyone who paid attention. They didn't announce it until after he left the presidency but it was present and advancing noticeably to anyone without big blinders on.

POTUS is an extremely demanding, stressful job that demands someone who is vigorous and strong and healthy. That's not Sanders. So, what's the plan? Who would be his likely VP?

Have you actually read anything PyramidHead has said? He is a communist, he's hardly devoted to Sanders, because Sanders is too far to the right for his tastes, Sanders is his compromise candidate.

He’s an anarchist. Perhaps with communist leanings. I think he should advocate for the overthrow of some other country and see how far that gets him.

 

[Toni]

Bloomberg's heart is even worse. He had heart procedures years earlier.

Not to mention there is such a thing as "vice president". As long as Bernie doesn't run alongside a token conservative, and picks a runningmate that is equally progressive ("Shock! Horror! That is just Not How It Is Done"), it's not really an issue. Of course, he COULD appoint a Buttigieg or a Klobuchar or whatever. And then... What is the fucking complaint? So everyone here crowing about what Bernie is too radical or his health or both: it doesn't fucking matter.

The POTUS cannot appoint a VP nor can a candidate. The candidate can select one but it has to get party approval or be confirmed if after election. See Agnew/Ford.

 

[J842P]

That's not at all true, statistically speaking. Sanders has had a recent heart attack and has had a stent put in. He's 78. Mean survival for anyone in that age group to survive AFTER a heart attack is 3.1 years.

Bloomberg, who is not usually mentioned as a forerunner is about the same age as Sanders and has also had a stent. But NO heart attack. He has a statistically better chance at survival.

I don't like Biden's chances of making it through the first term, either. He's in his late 70's and has had serious health problems, as well.

Warren is the youngest of the 'older' candidates. She has three things going for her in terms of statistics: 1. She's younger by nearly a decade. That matters a great deal in that age group.2. She has no history of heart disease or other major medical events. 3. She's female, which means that statistically speaking, she is likely to live to an older age than Sanders, Biden or Bloomberg.

Depending on sources, Klobuchar and Buttigieg are considered front runners. Both are significantly younger than any of those who are 70+ running and as far as I know, are in excellent health. They likely have decades of healthy living ahead of them.


If you don't like facing reality, then I suggest you don't participate in a forum where people might ask difficult questions or question your belief system. I'm pretty sure there's a nice hole in the sand somewhere near you.

If you actually care about your candidate or the future of this country, then you will think long and hard about what the plan would be if Sanders, in whom you have invested so much devotion and energy, keels over. Because that's quite likely. Don't want to believe me? Look at Trump and his age/health. Look at Ronald Reagan, who did survive 2 terms but who was showing signs of Alzheimer's in his first term to anyone who paid attention. They didn't announce it until after he left the presidency but it was present and advancing noticeably to anyone without big blinders on.

POTUS is an extremely demanding, stressful job that demands someone who is vigorous and strong and healthy. That's not Sanders. So, what's the plan? Who would be his likely VP?

Have you actually read anything PyramidHead has said? He is a communist, he's hardly devoted to Sanders, because Sanders is too far to the right for his tastes, Sanders is his compromise candidate.

He’s an anarchist. Perhaps with communist leanings. I think he should advocate for the overthrow of some other country and see how far that gets him.

No, he is a communist. You are thinking of untermensche, who was the anarchist. PH has explicitly criticized anarchists (as communists are wont to do).

 

[laughing dog]

That is an exercise in measurement without meaning, since the only valid measure occurs when it is head to head.

From Emerson:
View attachment 26204

All of those differences are within the margin of error, so I am unimpressed.

He is actually much, much worse. Trump is cowardly and scatterbrained, Bloomberg is calculating and single-minded. Their priorities are the same: increase and protect their personal wealth, marginalize and oppress people of color, shrink the welfare state. Bloomberg has the advantage of a media empire with his name on it, and enough connections that the major networks won't scrutinize him as closely as they do Trump's every move. His ruthlessness in business dealings and with subordinates far outstrips the elementary school bullying of Trump. If Bloomberg wins the presidency, there will be no more non-billionaire presidents, because the narrative will be that to beat a rich person, only another rich person who makes the right noises about cultural issues can do it. Basically, if you think Bloomberg would be better than Trump, you're probably also the kind of person who thinks removing Trump from office (and thus elevating Mike Pence to the presidency) would be an improvement too. For you, the biggest problem with Trump isn't his conservative, right wing, pro-corporate, racist, sexist agenda, but his uncouth attitude. You could cast a vote for a New York billionaire who harasses women, brutalizes minorities, and supported Republicans across the country until last year, provided he seems to know what he's doing and reminds you of your favorite West Wing character.

Wow, the Bernie Bro kool-aid is stronger than I imagined.

President's need a streak of ruthlessness in them - nothing wrong with that. Yes, Bloomberg would be better than Trump because he has some semblance of the notion of the public good. I doubt he would effectively dismantle the EPA or nominate terrible candidates for the federal judiciary for example.

BTW - I saw two episodes of the West Wing and found it it to be a fantasy, I have no idea what you are babbling about.

 

[blastula]

Bloomberg's position on climate change alone makes him better than Trump. I'd easily vote for him over Trump. I still hope he's not the nominee, but I do hope he gives lots of money to Dems.

 

[Copernicus]

All polls have biases that reflect polling methodologies. Because of the way samplings skew demographics, those who answer surveys are given greater or lesser weights in terms of scoring. Why is Emerson College polling so popular among Trump and Sanders partisans? I believe that it still fails to weigh a respondent's education. That means that it will tend to favor younger, college-educated voters, who tend to take more extremist positions. Sanders and Trump tend to have more enthusiastic followers among the extremes in their bases, so polls biased towards extremes will appear more desirable in clickbait battles.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3655

February 20 Qunnipiac Poll

HE 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

Among all registered voters, Democratic candidates lead President Trump in general election matchups by between 4 and 9 percentage points, with Bloomberg claiming the biggest numerical lead against Trump:

• Bloomberg tops Trump 51 - 42 percent;
• Sanders defeats Trump 51 - 43 percent;
• Biden beats Trump 50 - 43 percent;
• Klobuchar defeats Trump 49 - 43 percent;
• Warren wins narrowly over Trump 48 - 44 percent;
• Buttigieg is also slightly ahead of Trump 47 - 43 percent.

President Trump's favorability rating is underwater, as 42 percent of registered voters have a favorable opinion of him, while 55 percent have an unfavorable view of him. However, it is his best favorability rating since a March 7th, 2017 poll, when his favorability rating was a negative 43 - 53 percent.

----

We can all cherry pick polls to "prove" anything. Sanders here beats Orango the clown by 8% Real Clear has Bernie ahead of Trump by 4.6% as of 2-19-20.

 

[Elixir]

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3655

February 20 Qunnipiac Poll

HE 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

Among all registered voters, Democratic candidates lead President Trump in general election matchups by between 4 and 9 percentage points, with Bloomberg claiming the biggest numerical lead against Trump:

• Bloomberg tops Trump 51 - 42 percent;
• Sanders defeats Trump 51 - 43 percent;
• Biden beats Trump 50 - 43 percent;
• Klobuchar defeats Trump 49 - 43 percent;
• Warren wins narrowly over Trump 48 - 44 percent;
• Buttigieg is also slightly ahead of Trump 47 - 43 percent.

President Trump's favorability rating is underwater, as 42 percent of registered voters have a favorable opinion of him, while 55 percent have an unfavorable view of him. However, it is his best favorability rating since a March 7th, 2017 poll, when his favorability rating was a negative 43 - 53 percent.

----

We can all cherry pick polls to "prove" anything. Sanders here beats Orango the clown by 8% Real Clear has Bernie ahead of Trump by 4.6% as of 2-19-20.

National poll preferences would matter if people of both persuasions were scattered evenly throughout each state/electoral zone.

 

[lpetrich]

Mike Bloomberg's new plan to crack down on Wall Street echoes those of Bernie Sanders and AOC | Markets Insider

• Mike Bloomberg rolled out a plan to crack down on Wall Street that mirrors proposals from Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, notably with its inclusion of a financial-transactions tax.
• Bloomberg's plan calls for tougher oversight of the largest Wall Street banks and for strengthening consumer-protection laws.
• It's a reversal from Bloomberg's past stance on financial regulation. While he was New York City's mayor in 2010, he warned Democrats against taking "punitive actions" toward Wall Street that could harm the economy.

Cute.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Bloomberg. Wow.

When the Democrats started predicting the rise of Fascism due to Trump's election, I never dreamed that they were saying they'd make it happen as a reaction to Trump's election.

 

[angelo]

Would the " quite Americans " really vote for America's version of Jeremy Corbyn who only months ago achieved the worst Labour vote in nearly a century?

https://cms.frontpagemag.com/fpm/20...ews-vote-american-jeremy-corbyn-ari-lieberman

In December, British citizens overwhelmingly rejected the Marxist ideology of Britain’s Labor Party boss, Jeremy Corbyn, and sent him and his Momentum movement packing. It was Labor’s worst showing since before World War II. Among the concerns looming in the minds of the voters were Corbyn’s explicit antisemitism and his honeymoon with known radical terrorist elements like the Muslim Brotherhood’s Raed Saleh, Sinn Fein’s Gerry Adams and convicted IRA operatives Linda Quigley and Gerry MacLochlainn. Polls conducted prior to the election showed that at least 40 percent of British Jewry considered emigrating had Corbyn won and an astonishing 80 percent of Britain’s Jews as well as all of Britain’s leading Jewish newspapers from across the political spectrum saw Corbyn as an existential threat.

 

[Patooka]

Would the " quite Americans " really vote for America's version of Jeremy Corbyn who only months ago achieved the worst Labour vote in nearly a century?

https://cms.frontpagemag.com/fpm/20...ews-vote-american-jeremy-corbyn-ari-lieberman

In December, British citizens overwhelmingly rejected the Marxist ideology of Britain’s Labor Party boss, Jeremy Corbyn, and sent him and his Momentum movement packing. It was Labor’s worst showing since before World War II. Among the concerns looming in the minds of the voters were Corbyn’s explicit antisemitism and his honeymoon with known radical terrorist elements like the Muslim Brotherhood’s Raed Saleh, Sinn Fein’s Gerry Adams and convicted IRA operatives Linda Quigley and Gerry MacLochlainn. Polls conducted prior to the election showed that at least 40 percent of British Jewry considered emigrating had Corbyn won and an astonishing 80 percent of Britain’s Jews as well as all of Britain’s leading Jewish newspapers from across the political spectrum saw Corbyn as an existential threat.

Just keep telling yourself...four legs good two legs bad. Although I do admire the chutzpah required for a David Horowitz owned bile generator to accuse anyone else on the planet for being bigoted.

 

[PyramidHead]

He’s an anarchist. Perhaps with communist leanings. I think he should advocate for the overthrow of some other country and see how far that gets him.

Beg your pardon, but I am not an anarchist. I am a Marxist-Leninist