• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Democrats 2024

Cheerful Charlie

Contributor
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
6,998
Location
Houston, Texas
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Who runs depend on party preferences and savvy. Preferences are political leanings. Savvy is understanding of underlying political motives versus electability fears.

Democrats are what I call a mob party, left leaning government service influenced, issue group issue oriented capturing most of what remains after the white capitalistic believers cooped and dominated by Republicans.

Both parties are moderate or slightly right of center mostly as residue of the last political struggle of the nineteen-thirties where the imprint of Communism vs Nazism movements drove us far closer to agrarian roots.

My current perspective is democrats are slightly collectivist but fearful of Communist lumping. Republicans are the current racist white minority showing strong hints of nationalism.

Collectivist? Bwahahaha! You mean GOP creeping theocracy isn't "collectivist"?
 

Politesse

Lux Aeterna
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
9,215
Location
Chochenyo Territory, US
Gender
nb; all pronouns fine
Basic Beliefs
Jedi Wayseeker
Since when are "agrarian roots" not collectivist, for that matter? Traditional farming communities tend to have strong collectivist structures built into their culture, rational maintenance of the commons is arguably necessary to prevent over-exploitation of the environment.

Republicans talk a big game about "tradition", I know, but they also oppose history education on principle, so... it's not reality that they're nostalgically looking back on. Democrats have the opposite problem, perpetually waffling on about "progress" and positive change, but usually fighting furiously to maintain the status quo in practice, until absolutely forced by social action on the minority groups to acknowledge one of their inherent hypocrisies.
 

fromderinside

Mazzie Daius
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
15,945
Location
Local group: Solar system: Earth: NA: US: contiguo
Basic Beliefs
optimist
My current perspective is democrats are slightly collectivist but fearful of Communist lumping. Republicans are the current racist white minority showing strong hints of nationalism.

Collectivist? Bwahahaha! You mean GOP creeping theocracy isn't "collectivist"?
No. They aren't collectivists in the Russia, US Roosevelt, traditions. They are clearly racist, Isolationist, ultra-capitalist. They don't practice theocracy. Rather the mouth segregationist theocracy in the name of white superiority ala KKK.
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
20,808
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Hanna Trudo on Twitter: "NEWS: @PeteButtigieg is going to NEW HAMPHIRE
He’ll keynote the New Hampshire Democratic Party’s Elenor Roosvelent Dinner on Sept. 24" / Twitter

Eleanor Roosevelt, wife of FDR, activist, and feminist when feminism was in eclipse.

One has to be suspicious of politicians who show a great fondness for Iowa and New Hampshire. What is in these states that is especially worth visiting? Other than being early-primary states.

It got this response:
Jessica (Ka) L. Burbank, MPA on Twitter: "The Dem party never ceases to amaze me with their lack of awareness of public opinion. They either know and don’t care, or just decided to never try." / Twitter
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
20,808
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist

Politesse

Lux Aeterna
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
9,215
Location
Chochenyo Territory, US
Gender
nb; all pronouns fine
Basic Beliefs
Jedi Wayseeker
I guess he should be avoiding looking like he's campaigning for president, so it won't look like he's campaigning for president? Is that the thought? I think everyone knows that Mayor Pete would like to be president if possible.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
22,677
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
tBecause of what such a trip seems like on the surface. Why this odd interest in New Hampshire? Iowa?
Mayor Pete is obviously feeling out another presidential run.
I doubt he would run against Biden, but if Biden announces he will not seek reelection, it pays to be prepared.
 

Swammerdami

Squadron Leader
Staff member
Joined
Dec 16, 2017
Messages
3,313
Location
Land of Smiles
Basic Beliefs
pseudo-deism
That video helps explain why some Ds are their own worst enemy and what they need to change to have a chance in upcoming elections.
I agree. I'm still watching Maher, even when I don't agree with all of his points. I think he's right about a lot of things.

Is this the default thread for appreciation of Bill Maher?
This video does a hilarious job of explaining how dreadfully un-woke Hollywood becomes in its quest for extreme wokeism.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
22,677
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Unless both Biden AND Harris bow out, it will be no contest. Biden if he runs, Harris if he doesn't. Everything else is light speculation.
If Biden bows out, I do not think it will be a Kamala coronation, and neither should it be. She should prove herself in a competitive primary, something she failed to do in 2020.
 

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,532
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
Unless both Biden AND Harris bow out, it will be no contest. Biden if he runs, Harris if he doesn't. Everything else is light speculation.
If Biden bows out, I do not think it will be a Kamala coronation, and neither should it be. She should prove herself in a competitive primary, something she failed to do in 2020.
I would be surprised if it were not her. She is heir apparent. Yes, she should prove herself in a competitive primary, but if Biden bows out I expect the Harris primary to be as competitive as the Clinton 2016 primary.
 

blastula

Contributor
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
8,517
Gender
Late for dinner
Basic Beliefs
Gnostic atheist
Democrats adopt Biden’s new 2024 nomination plan - Wapo

Democratic leaders voted Friday to adopt the transformative early 2024 presidential nominating schedule proposed by President Biden, giving South Carolina the leadoff position, followed by a joint primary day for New Hampshire and Nevada, with later primaries by Georgia and Michigan.

The chosen states were given until Jan. 5 to demonstrate that they can hold their primary contests on their assigned dates or risk losing their positions in the calendar.
Under the adopted rules, South Carolina would vote on Feb. 3, 2024, followed by a joint primary day in New Hampshire and Nevada three days later on Feb. 6. The Georgia primary would be Feb. 13, and the Michigan primary would be Feb. 27. The rest of the country would be free to set primaries between March 5 and June 4.

The calendar is not expected to be adopted by all the affected states, likely forcing further revisions next year before the full Democratic National Committee ratifies the schedule. New Hampshire Democrats have said they will refuse to follow the new calendar, since their state law requires New Hampshire to hold its presidential nominating contest one week before any other state primary. The Georgia secretary of state, a Republican, has not yet said he will allow the Democratic primary to move earlier.

So surprising that Biden wants the first state he won to be first. But it'd be better than Iowa/NH.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
22,677
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
So surprising that Biden wants the first state he won to be first.
Yeah. It's pretty on the nose. It would also help his Veep Kamala in either 2024 or 2028.
But it'd be better than Iowa/NH.
Why? Iowa/NH are better suited for retail politics. NH (1M) because it is small, and Iowa (3M) (being bigger than NH but still smaller than either mean (6.6M) or median (4.5M) state population) has the more participatory caucus which reduces the advantage better known and heeled candidates have in a primary system. It is no coincidence Obama and Bernie outdid uninspiring establishment candidate Hillary in the states that had cauci.
The currently proposed schedule Dem leadership does away with this tradition of retail politics, favoring establishment favorites. I do not think either Bill Clinton or Obama would have been nominated using this calendar. There would be even more uninspiring candidates like John Kerry and Hillary.

I think making SC first, and following it up with largeish states like GA and MI is a horrible idea on multiple levels.

I know the selling point of South Carolina is that it has a lot of black people. The idea being that more black people --> better, no matter what, which is just racist nonsense of course. While "only" about 1/4 of South Carolinians are black, more than half of all the Democrats are. That makes SC very lopsided compared to nationwide electorate that any candidate must appeal to in the general election. Democratic electorate is more black than general election electorate, obviously, so a candidate having support among SC primary voters is not telling you that much. Contrast that with Iowa, which is ~5% black, which would put Iowa Democrats at ~10% black or close to that. That is not far off from ~13% black share of US population. So Iowa is much better reflection of the overall electorate than SC.
At least for Democrats. Republicans are the opposite. They should want states with many blacks to go early, because then their early primary voter pool would closer resemble national electorate than if states like Iowa and NH go first. I.e. the wrong party is making this move.

SC is also a very Republican state. Trump carried the state with 55% both times and last time the state was carried by a Dem was 1976. There is also only one Dem in their congressional delegation - Jim Clyburn - for whose support it seems Biden is still making payments.

Another thing - Obama barely winning Iowa and coming very close in NH showed everybody that he is a viable general election candidate and that his race would not be a detriment. If SC went first, I do not think he would have won that state, and even if he did it would not have sent the message it did simply because how vastly different SC Dem electorate is from US demographics at large.
 
Top Bottom