Democrats 2020

[Treedbear]

Maybe yes, maybe no.


I thought Biden looked pretty weak compared to Bernie or Warren. How many more debates are there? Ten? Biden better take his vitamins. As I recall in the last election Bernie polled very favorably against Trump among Republican voters. People voted against Hillary because they wanted change, even if that meant compromising their principles. Bernie is all about change.

You think that all those conservatives who voted for Trump will now vote for Bernie? What sources are you using to make that assumption. I'll favor whoever gets the democratic nomination. But I believe that the person who gets the most votes should be the person who gets nominated. HRC got 3.7 million votes more than Bernie in the democratic race.

I don't have current data but what I remember about 2016 was that both sides wanted change and many Republicans would have taken Sanders over Trump. They weren't the party conservatives, although many of the prominent ones said they couldn't vote for Trump and several left the party. Now more than ever Democrats will vote for the Democratic nominee, and I think the core Trump supporters are still holding their noses and would easily jump ship for a populist Democrat. Fuck, after Sanders was out I was even threatening to vote for Trump until I finally realized how depraved he really is and then voted for Hillary instead. A lot of Trump's supporters didn't find out in time and now feel they have to defend their choice as a matter of pride. But I think the shit he's always doing makes them feel less than comfortable with their choice.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Maybe yes, maybe no.


I thought Biden looked pretty weak compared to Bernie or Warren. How many more debates are there? Ten? Biden better take his vitamins. As I recall in the last election Bernie polled very favorably against Trump among Republican voters. People voted against Hillary because they wanted change, even if that meant compromising their principles. Bernie is all about change.

You think that all those conservatives who voted for Trump will now vote for Bernie? What sources are you using to make that assumption. I'll favor whoever gets the democratic nomination. But I believe that the person who gets the most votes should be the person who gets nominated. HRC got 3.7 million votes more than Bernie in the democratic race.

I don't have current data but what I remember about 2016 was that both sides wanted change and many Republicans would have taken Sanders over Trump. They weren't the party conservatives, although many of the prominent ones said they couldn't vote for Trump and several left the party. Now more than ever Democrats will vote for the Democratic nominee, and I think the core Trump supporters are still holding their noses and would easily jump ship for a populist Democrat. Fuck, after Sanders was out I was even threatening to vote for Trump until I finally realized how depraved he really is and then voted for Hillary instead. A lot of Trump's supporters didn't find out in time and now feel they have to defend their choice as a matter of pride. But I think the shit he's always doing makes them feel less than comfortable with their choice.

For Trump supporters to jump ship it had better be a worthy Democrat. Time to face it, the Democratic Party primary process is currently designed to weed out the good ones. Tulsi won't win precisely because she is good enough to deserve to win.

I particularly like how she roasted Harris at the debate. Hawaiians sure do know how to treat pigs.

 

[ZiprHead]

I don't have current data but what I remember about 2016 was that both sides wanted change and many Republicans would have taken Sanders over Trump. They weren't the party conservatives, although many of the prominent ones said they couldn't vote for Trump and several left the party. Now more than ever Democrats will vote for the Democratic nominee, and I think the core Trump supporters are still holding their noses and would easily jump ship for a populist Democrat. Fuck, after Sanders was out I was even threatening to vote for Trump until I finally realized how depraved he really is and then voted for Hillary instead. A lot of Trump's supporters didn't find out in time and now feel they have to defend their choice as a matter of pride. But I think the shit he's always doing makes them feel less than comfortable with their choice.

For Trump supporters to jump ship it had better be a worthy Democrat. Time to face it, the Democratic Party primary process is currently designed to weed out the good ones. Tulsi won't win precisely because she is good enough to deserve to win.

I particularly like how she roasted Harris at the debate. Hawaiians sure do know how to treat pigs.

She's kinda' chock-full-a-nuts.

Tulsi Gabbard: Mueller’s No Collusion Finding Helped Us Avert Civil War

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) released a statement Monday night telling Americans to “put aside our partisan interests” in the wake of the Mueller report and be happy that President Trump was “not guilty of conspiring with a foreign power.” Gabbard—a 2020 presidential candidate who came under fire earlier this year for her history of anti-gay statements—tweeted that while she “strongly supported” special counsel Robert Mueller's two-year investigation into allegations that Trump colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 elections, Mueller’s findings suggest voters should move on. “What we know is that Mueller reported that his investigation revealed no such collusion,” she wrote. “Now we all need to put aside our partisan interests and recognize that finding the president of the United States not guilty of conspiring with a foreign power to interfere with our elections is a good thing for America

 

[ZiprHead]

REPUBLICANS ON EDGE AS MORE LAWMAKERS THROW IN THE TOWEL

The Republican exodus that preceded last year’s “blue wave” appears to be repeating itself, as a growing number of GOP lawmakers and moderate lawmakers announce their retirement from Congress. The figure has yet to reach 2018 proportions, when 39 Republicans did not run for reelection, and 41 Democrats won new seats, but the number is substantial: eight congressional Republicans have already announced their retirement this year, including a member of the leadership team, and as several Capitol Hill outlets are reporting, the trend seems likely to get worse for the GOP. Over the past two weeks alone, five House Republicans have announced that they will not run for reelection next year, including two representatives who are aiming for the Senate or a governorship instead, and three who are in moderate swing districts.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

She's kinda' chock-full-a-nuts.

Tulsi Gabbard: Mueller’s No Collusion Finding Helped Us Avert Civil War

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) released a statement Monday night telling Americans to “put aside our partisan interests” in the wake of the Mueller report and be happy that President Trump was “not guilty of conspiring with a foreign power.” Gabbard—a 2020 presidential candidate who came under fire earlier this year for her history of anti-gay statements—tweeted that while she “strongly supported” special counsel Robert Mueller's two-year investigation into allegations that Trump colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 elections, Mueller’s findings suggest voters should move on. “What we know is that Mueller reported that his investigation revealed no such collusion,” she wrote. “Now we all need to put aside our partisan interests and recognize that finding the president of the United States not guilty of conspiring with a foreign power to interfere with our elections is a good thing for America

Saying foreign war is bad, that's crazy. Saying domestic war is bad, that's also crazy.

It's almost as if you think saying any war is bad is a crazy thing.

 

[ZiprHead]

She's kinda' chock-full-a-nuts.

Tulsi Gabbard: Mueller’s No Collusion Finding Helped Us Avert Civil War

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) released a statement Monday night telling Americans to “put aside our partisan interests” in the wake of the Mueller report and be happy that President Trump was “not guilty of conspiring with a foreign power.” Gabbard—a 2020 presidential candidate who came under fire earlier this year for her history of anti-gay statements—tweeted that while she “strongly supported” special counsel Robert Mueller's two-year investigation into allegations that Trump colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 elections, Mueller’s findings suggest voters should move on. “What we know is that Mueller reported that his investigation revealed no such collusion,” she wrote. “Now we all need to put aside our partisan interests and recognize that finding the president of the United States not guilty of conspiring with a foreign power to interfere with our elections is a good thing for America

Saying foreign war is bad, that's crazy. Saying domestic war is bad, that's also crazy.

It's almost as if you think saying any war is bad is a crazy thing.

That's what you got out of that?

 

[Patooka]

Saying foreign war is bad, that's crazy. Saying domestic war is bad, that's also crazy.

It's almost as if you think saying any war is bad is a crazy thing.

That's what you got out of that?

Yeah, I think implying civil war could occur depending on Mueller's findings is a tad not-sane. Also, are people not aware that the report was not focused on Trump and his alleged collusion, but Russian interference in the 2016 election? I guess they didn't read the title. So if this is the hill to die on for starting the next revolution, that's pretty batshit crazy.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

It has gone from "yeah we're finally gonna get him we're gonna impeach bad orange man" to "it's no big deal".

 

[laughing dog]

I watched some of the debates, and I finally put my finger on why I don't think either Sanders or Warren - both of them seem to me that they believe that they and only they know what to do and neither of them is even willing to listen to anyone else. I find that attitude frightening.

 

[Patooka]

It has gone from "yeah we're finally gonna get him we're gonna impeach bad orange man" to "it's no big deal".

For people like Bill Maher, absolutely. I've always been skeptical of "it was that one thing" rationalizations.

 

[angelo]

And what do you propose will pay for all that largess? I know, tax the rich, wring them dry of the last drop of their blood, or perhaps print more money. I wouldn't trust you to run a chook raffle let alone run the treasury of a boy scouts club!

Get rid of subsidies for fossil fuels - because that's socialism.
Repeal the idiotic tax cuts voted in last years and hold the 1% accountable to paying their fair share.
Eliminate emergency discretionary spending for military projects going straight to the state level without review or oversight. In other words, keep it federal.

There you go, no extra taxes required.

Does that include ending all subsidies to alternative power sources like solar wind and build more fossil fueled power generation like China, India and most other third world nations are doing, because existing fossil fueled power generators are not, repeat, NOT being subsided by taxpayers'? By the way, that 1% that you claim aren't held accountable for paying their way are in all likelihood paying much more tax than the next 40-60% of salary earners.

 

[angelo]

It has gone from "yeah we're finally gonna get him we're gonna impeach bad orange man" to "it's no big deal".

For people like Bill Maher, absolutely. I've always been skeptical of "it was that one thing" rationalizations.

Bill Maher would rather see the country in ruins with thousands of bankruptcy and the millions of unemployed that would ensure if only that would get rid of the Trumpet. Mr Nice guy your Bill Maher.

https://gellerreport.com/2019/08/antitrump-bill-maher-wants-recession.html/

 

[Patooka]

It has gone from "yeah we're finally gonna get him we're gonna impeach bad orange man" to "it's no big deal".

For people like Bill Maher, absolutely. I've always been skeptical of "it was that one thing" rationalizations.

Bill Maher would rather see the country in ruins with thousands of bankruptcy and the millions of unemployed that would ensure if only that would get rid of the Trumpet. Mr Nice guy your Bill Maher.

https://gellerreport.com/2019/08/antitrump-bill-maher-wants-recession.html/

Maybe I wasn't clear. I agree that Bill Maher has changed his stance with regards to the Special Counsel over the last three years. The guy is a dick who can dish it out but not really take it. I've never believed in the silver bullet mythology like "Mueller will expose Trump as the criminal he is" or "Trump will make America great again!" or "The Liberals stopped the boats!". Real life is more intricate and nuanced than that. Going back to what Jason Harvestdancer posted, the point I was trying to make is the Mueller Report means jack shit, largely because the one thing Trump has accomplished since being president is that everyone has already made up their mind about him be it positive or negative. Meuller's testimony didn't sway anyone one way or the other.

And yes I could see Maher advocating recession. The guy is a thin skinned clueless arsehole.

 

[lpetrich]

Democratic debate: Sanders, Warren know what 2020 primary voters want

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, activist Marianne Williamson, Montana Gov. Steve Bullock and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren stood out. Former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke is done. South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg didn’t have it for most of the night but has the money to fight on. Former Maryland Rep. John Delaney gets far too much time for a candidacy with such non-existent chances; he impressively butted in to nearly every exchange. Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper were largely non-factors.

The Second Democratic Debate In 5 Charts | FiveThirtyEight
Joe Biden was the most talkative, followed by Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, Bernie Sanders, and the rest. The more talkative ones were also the higher-polling ones.


Meet the Marianniacs - Marianne Williamson's followers.

Marianne Williamson, the self-help guru who spiritually advises Oprah, might just be the most interesting person running for president. Her platform highlights what a political outsider she is—her proposals include building a US Department of Peace, paying reparations for slavery, and combating the mistreatment of animals, which she believes is “damaging to the American soul.” Like the current president, she doesn’t have any prior political experience, but in many ways, she’s the anti-Trump, her campaign waged on ideas of love instead of hate. After the second CNN debate, during which she made a case that she is the best candidate “to deal with this dark psychic force of the collectivized hatred that this president is bringing up in this country,” people from Donald Trump Jr. to Ezra Klein lauded her performance.

Her platform is sort of like AOC's platform with a lot of New-Agey woo-woo.

 

[angelo]

Democratic debate: Sanders, Warren know what 2020 primary voters want

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, activist Marianne Williamson, Montana Gov. Steve Bullock and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren stood out. Former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke is done. South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg didn’t have it for most of the night but has the money to fight on. Former Maryland Rep. John Delaney gets far too much time for a candidacy with such non-existent chances; he impressively butted in to nearly every exchange. Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper were largely non-factors.

The Second Democratic Debate In 5 Charts | FiveThirtyEight
Joe Biden was the most talkative, followed by Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, Bernie Sanders, and the rest. The more talkative ones were also the higher-polling ones.


Meet the Marianniacs - Marianne Williamson's followers.

Marianne Williamson, the self-help guru who spiritually advises Oprah, might just be the most interesting person running for president. Her platform highlights what a political outsider she is—her proposals include building a US Department of Peace, paying reparations for slavery, and combating the mistreatment of animals, which she believes is “damaging to the American soul.” Like the current president, she doesn’t have any prior political experience, but in many ways, she’s the anti-Trump, her campaign waged on ideas of love instead of hate. After the second CNN debate, during which she made a case that she is the best candidate “to deal with this dark psychic force of the collectivized hatred that this president is bringing up in this country,” people from Donald Trump Jr. to Ezra Klein lauded her performance.

Her platform is sort of like AOC's platform with a lot of New-Agey woo-woo.

The art of being a good politician is the ability to be able to talk for at least an hour and say nothing, or to leave an audience completely confused.

 

[PyramidHead]

That's what I'm taking away from the map, the polls, and the debates as well. Doesn't matter who is in what spot, together they would crush Trump and energize a new sector of the base.

This ticket would concede the middle to Trump. Trump would win in a landslide. Sorry to be the party pooper, but Trump only needs about 42% of the voters to win. The dems must find a ticket that can appeal to the vast majority.

If he didn't threaten your interests, you'd have the guts to acknowledge that Bernie is obviously the only one who can accomplish that. But instead, you're contributing to the meme that most voters are part of "the middle" and that appealing to them is a viable political strategy, when reality shows the opposite. It's funny how the candidate with the broadest base of individual donors by a mile, the highest favorability rating, high polling performance versus Trump in key states that were lost in 2016, and policy positions that have defined virtually the entire political conversation in the primary is mysteriously disqualified for you, a business owner whose taxes will almost certainly be raised if he wins. You might fool some people with your pretend concern about electability, but eventually you and the rest of the managerial/consultant class will have to confront the fact that socialism isn't as scary to the majority of voters as it is to you.

 

[PyramidHead]

 

[Elixir]

Sorry to be the party pooper, but Trump only needs about 42% of the voters to win. The dems must find a ticket that can appeal to the vast majority.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Trump only needs about 28% to claim that he won - and he will.
He is counting on those 28% having more guns and being willing to use them on their neighbors.
He is almost certainly right about the first part.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

That's what I'm taking away from the map, the polls, and the debates as well. Doesn't matter who is in what spot, together they would crush Trump and energize a new sector of the base.

This ticket would concede the middle to Trump. Trump would win in a landslide. Sorry to be the party pooper, but Trump only needs about 42% of the voters to win. The dems must find a ticket that can appeal to the vast majority.

If he didn't threaten your interests, you'd have the guts to acknowledge that Bernie is obviously the only one who can accomplish that.

He lacks political capital... the stuff that Pres. Johnson had that allowed him to get the Civil Rights Act and Medicare through Congress.

But instead, you're contributing to the meme that most voters are part of "the middle" and that appealing to them is a viable political strategy, when reality shows the opposite. It's funny how the candidate with the broadest base of individual donors by a mile, the highest favorability rating, high polling performance versus Trump in key states that were lost in 2016, and policy positions that have defined virtually the entire political conversation in the primary is mysteriously disqualified for you, a business owner whose taxes will almost certainly be raised if he wins.

It is sad, but it is true. Sanders' positions most likely do have the support of the super-majority of Americans. Unfortunately, enough of that super majority can easily be persuaded to vote for the serial molester.

Also, Sander is too damned old!

You might fool some people with your pretend concern about electability, but eventually you and the rest of the managerial/consultant class will have to confront the fact that socialism isn't as scary to the majority of voters as it is to you.

John Kerry was a decorated war veteran. Remember how much that helped him in '04?

 

[PyramidHead]

Political capital isn't what got the Civil Rights Act through Congress; massive public pressure from a mobilized base of citizens did. Social change doesn't start with politicians passing legislation, it ends there.

It is sad, but it is true. Sanders' positions most likely do have the support of the super-majority of Americans. Unfortunately, enough of that super majority can easily be persuaded to vote for the serial molester.

That's an empirical claim that has never been demonstrated and is absurd on its face. You know this. The candidate running for President with the least in common with Trump, policy wise, is and always has been Sanders. If there is one person on the face of the earth who supports him but "can be easily persuaded" to vote for the literal antithesis of everything he fights for, that person should not be the focus of our politics, they should be in a mental institution.

John Kerry was a decorated war veteran. Remember how much that helped him in '04?

Kerry was exactly the type of candidate the Harry's of the world think we should be running in 2020: moderate, statesmanlike, checks all the right boxes, looks "presidential". He's a perfect example of what not to do when trying to unseat a stupid, racist, gaffe-prone Republican incumbent.