SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Post Reply
User avatar
Gandalf
SD.net White Wizard
Posts: 15505
Joined: 2002-09-16 11:13pm
Location: A video store in Australia

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Gandalf » 2020-02-12 03:23pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-02-12 01:41am
What exactly constitutes a good candidate?
Electability. Most are like reruns of Hillary Clinton without the qualifications, another is a Jewish socialist in Trump's America, and there's two billionaires with no real selling points.

A lot of them would make passable presidents, Sanders would be fantastic, but after 2016 I'm less than confident that people would turn out for him in the numbers needed.
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"

- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist

"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin

User avatar
Tribble
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2778
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Tribble » 2020-02-12 06:31pm

Since GOP Senators have essentially given Trump the go ahead to do whatever it takes to win the election as its "in the public interest," how likely do you think that Trump / Republicans will:

continue to invite / threaten / coerce foreign governments to influence the election?
use state assets to influence the election?
continue and/or escalate voter suppression?
rig the results as needed?
declare massive voter fraud if they lose?
refuse to step down even if recount shows that they lost?
refuse to step down even if SCOTUS rules against them (not likely given the present makeup)?

For that matter, how would Trump / Republican supporters react to a loss, especially if Trump refuses to concede?

Somehow I feel this election isn't going to end well no matter who wins, though obviously the worst case scenario is Trump staying in office (legitimately or otherwise).
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" - The official Troll motto, as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-12 10:14pm

Gandalf wrote:
2020-02-12 03:23pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-02-12 01:41am
What exactly constitutes a good candidate?
Electability. Most are like reruns of Hillary Clinton without the qualifications, another is a Jewish socialist in Trump's America, and there's two billionaires with no real selling points.

A lot of them would make passable presidents, Sanders would be fantastic, but after 2016 I'm less than confident that people would turn out for him in the numbers needed.
Well, we'll see. "socialist" isn't half as much a bogeyman as it used to be. And the people who would vote against Sanders for being a Jew probably mostly aren't voting Democrat regardless. At least Sanders has energy and a clear vision that excites people, and his grassroots fundraising machine is a wonder to behold. His combination of strong youth support, strong labour/working class support, and strong Latino support could be a winner as well. My biggest concern is that bitter ex-Clinton supporters will stay home in large numbers if he's the nominee, which is part of why I initially backed Warren- but subsequent events have made it clear Sanders is the stronger candidate.

I think in a way having so many choices is a good thing too- it keeps the race less viciously polarized than it was in 2016.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-12 10:25pm

Tribble wrote:
2020-02-12 06:31pm
Since GOP Senators have essentially given Trump the go ahead to do whatever it takes to win the election as its "in the public interest," how likely do you think that Trump / Republicans will:

continue to invite / threaten / coerce foreign governments to influence the election?
Certain. They're doing it right now. They just blocked bills to stop foreign interference, and the DOJ instituted a new policy prohibiting any investigation of campaigns, including foreign aid, without Barr's personal assent.
use state assets to influence the election?
See above.
continue and/or escalate voter suppression?
Republicans do this as a matter of course. They've had some legal set-backs, but the Supreme Court seems to help them more than it reigns them in. Fortunately, all of this can be overcome by a sufficiently strong Democratic campaign and high turnout.
rig the results as needed?
I wouldn't put it past them, not for a second, but this is harder to do and get away with it, or at least it has been up to now.
declare massive voter fraud if they lose?
100% guaranteed Trump does this. For fuck's sake, he did it in 2016 when he won (his ego couldn't stand losing the popular vote). He'll probably try to tell the Electoral College they have to approve him because the outcome was fraudulent (which thanks to the perversity of the American Electoral system, they can constitutionally do).

I also worry about the Republican Senate refusing to certify the results, if the Electors go against Trump.
refuse to step down even if recount shows that they lost?
Trump will probably do this (his own former attorney seemed to think as much)- the only question is how many (particularly, ultimately, in the military) will back him.
refuse to step down even if SCOTUS rules against them (not likely given the present makeup)?
It'd be really interesting to see how Roberts would go in that situation. He's a Republican, clearly not big on voting rights, but he tries to at least appear to not be blatantly partisan. In the impeachment trial, he could mostly just sit back and, citing precedent, let the Senate decide (even if that defacto meant siding with Trump). In this situation, he'd have no such out. He'd have to personally be the deciding vote, likely, on whether American remains a Republic. That's probably his worst-case scenario, on a personal level.

I think if there was any plausible deniability, he'd go with Trump. But if its blatantly obvious Trump lost... I'm really not sure. I hope we don't find out, but we probably will. That said, I don't trust him at all at this point.
For that matter, how would Trump / Republican supporters react to a loss, especially if Trump refuses to concede?
Depends how much of the Congress, state governments, judiciary, and military side with him. If the answer is "a lot", then its dictatorship or civil war. If we get miraculously lucky and Trump is quickly removed, there will be a spike in domestic terrorism and probably some rioting, maybe a stand-off or two, but probably no worse, at least in the short-term.
Somehow I feel this election isn't going to end well no matter who wins, though obviously the worst case scenario is Trump staying in office (legitimately or otherwise).
Agreed. :( No matter what, its going to be likely the dirtiest race in living memory, there will almost certainly be some violence, and around a third to a half of the electorate will likely believe the outcome is fraudulent (Democrats have better reason for that belief, but its in both parties).

But pretty much nothing is worse than having a climate denier war criminal mob boss in the Presidency.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-12 10:44pm

Following Yang and Bennet's lead yesterday, Deval Patrick has dropped out.

The current tally, IIRC, is:

Sanders.
Buttigieg.
Biden.
Bloomberg.
Warren.
Steyer.
Klobuchar.
Russian Asset (Gabbard).

Of those, only Sanders, Buttigieg, Biden, Warren, and Klobuchar currently have delegates.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
Straha
Lord of the Spam
Posts: 8083
Joined: 2002-07-21 11:59pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Straha » 2020-02-13 12:00am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-02-11 01:17am
Bloomberg has a resume that seems tailor-made to piss off as many people as possible. Progressives hate him for being a Centrist and a billionaire. Conservatives hate his "nanny state" policies. Black voters are unlikely to look kindly on his tough policing policies as Mayor of New York. His appeal is... he's a rich centrist who's not Biden, and some Dems are still really scared of (or in the case of some Clinton supporters, bitter toward) Bernie.

He's also an utter flip-flopper (he's been a Dem, Republican, and Independent) which pretty much everybody hates.

Some cynical or desperate people seem to think that we can only win by "playing Trump's game" and running a wealthy businessman, and that he can be a "Democratic Trump" (I've seen this sort of comment on occassion online). But the thing is, the Democratic party is not the Republican party, no matter how many times the Greens and the Kremlin bots behind them insist that it is. The obsession with business, and running a businessman, holds far less appeal for the Democratic base, I suspect. And unlike Trump, Bloomberg isn't quite shameless enough to openly flaunt his worst qualities, turning them into a monstrous, perverted form of credibility. He's just a centrist hypocrite.
Bloomberg isn't a Centrist. And he's not a hypocrite. He's opportunistic Republican. One who is lying his pants off about his record.

Things New Yorkers remember about Bloomberg that the rest of the country seems to have forgotten.

- Mike Bloomberg championing a policy that stopped young black folk on the street for police detention, searched them with no probable cause, and entered their name into a police searchable database for no reason other than targeted surveillance.

- Bloomberg publicly complaining about how the policy (which disproportionately targeted Black youth) hampered too many White folk and not enough Black kids.

- Tied to that, how the rhetoric about his singular core issue, guns, was always tied to minority youths having access to them as the real problem.

- In 2004, when NYC hosted the RNC, Bloomberg thought that protesters would be unseemly. So he had them caged up and corralled blocks away in 'Free Speech Zones' from where they could actually protest anything. People who tried to resist were arrested. (This is what inspired Arrested Development's jokes about protests in cages.)

- At that same convention Bloomberg publicly endorsed George Bush, a war monger who was running on a platform of amending the constitution to ban gay marriage and privatizing Social Security.

- Bloomberg ordering the police to shut down the Occupy Wall Street camp and engage in mass arrests, including arrests of journalists, despite a court order blocking him from doing just that. Then his aggressive reshaping of Liberty Park so that it would be filled with hostile architecture to prevent anything like Occupy ever happening again.

- Mike Bloomberg's utter contempt for the homeless and poor in the city and the scoffing disregard with which he took concerns of affordability of housing or food. Coupled with the way he deliberately turned the housing market into a tool for international millionaires and billionaires to park their money as investments.

- The similar contempt he had for the conditions inside NYC's 'correctional' facilities.

- That he would fuck off to Aruba on the weekend on private jets to play golf, and get pointedly angry when people tried to discuss it as a matter of public policy.

- The rampant sexual harassment that was reported on in the Bloomberg corporation and in City Hall during his tenure.

- That he rewrote the charter of New York City so that he could get a third term as mayor despite term limits, but also made sure to amend the term limits back in so that only he could have that distinct privilege. Which underlines how reprehensible the previous stuff was. If he'd ever given a shit about any of this he could have changed it. He didn't.

- There's a lot more. His half-assed approach to education, the way he manipulated (and blocked) subway construction and improvement to help rich folk avoid the proles, the way he backtracked on every promise to avoid corporate sponsorship, etc. Honestly, the mind recoils at just how much there is to remember.

If people are willing to look at Bloomberg and declare 'Well, he's a rational centrist!' then the system is busted.

I understand, and am sympathetic to, the claim that Trump runs concentration camps where he puts children in cages and must be opposed in the general election no matter the candidate. But the people who would pick Bloomberg as their candidate are simply upset about the demeanor of the jailer, not the act of caging (or the racism, the sexism, etc. etc. etc.)

I won't vote for Bloomberg in any election. I'll add, that the theory of a Bloomberg candidacy is one where there's a vast swath of silent moderate voters wringing their hands for the goldilocks candidate to come out, and a horde of Republicans waiting to defect from Trump if only there were someone that would lead them away from the horrible orange brute. I've yet to see any evidence that they actually exist, but he's willing to throw away my vote in hopes that they do, and if that's what he and the voters of the party want to do I'm happy to oblige.


An related, but unconnected, final thought:

Image
'After 9/11, it was "You're with us or your with the terrorists." Now its "You're with Straha or you support racism."' ' - The Romulan Republic

'You're a bully putting on an air of civility while saying that everything western and/or capitalistic must be bad, and a lot of other posters (loomer, Stas Bush, Gandalf) are also going along with it for their own personal reasons (Stas in particular is looking through rose colored glasses)' - Darth Yan

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-13 12:16am

I won't equate Bloomberg to Trump, who is a special kind of monster even by the standards of American politics. I also stand by my view that "Both Sides are just as bad" narratives are lazy and disingenuous and simplistic, and serve to normalize and legitimize the worst players.

That said, I really, really, really don't want it to be Bloomberg. And I admit, the bit about him extending his term limits gives me pause. That suggests an authoritarian who's just a bit more subtle about it than Trump, and I sure as fuck don't want to take the vast expansion of executive power Trump has created and put it in the hands of another man with dictator ambitions, but who's slicker about it.

I agree, in light of what you've posted, that he's not a Centrist (except by the utterly skewed political spectrum someone like Trump being PotUS creates). I also don't buy that he can win over Trumpers (who by and larger are basically cultists)- but he will almost certainly cost us black turnout, massively cost us progressive turnout, and therefore probably get creamed by Trump.

Nominating Bloomberg would be a cynical calculus that we can beat Trump by running Trump lite. But we won't beat Trump by playing a watered-down version of his own game. Trump's better at it than us, and Bloomberg doesn't have the key to Trump's success, which is that he proudly flaunted his utter amorality and turned it into a perverted form of credibility. He's just a boring hypocritical asshole, who seems almost tailor-made to make as many people as possible hate him.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

houser2112
Padawan Learner
Posts: 464
Joined: 2006-04-07 07:21am
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by houser2112 » 2020-02-13 08:22am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-02-12 10:14pm
At least Sanders has energy and a clear vision that excites people, and his grassroots fundraising machine is a wonder to behold. His combination of strong youth support, strong labour/working class support, and strong Latino support could be a winner as well. My biggest concern is that bitter ex-Clinton supporters will stay home in large numbers if he's the nominee, which is part of why I initially backed Warren- but subsequent events have made it clear Sanders is the stronger candidate.
Yeah, about that bolded part...

Why Nevada’s powerful Culinary Union has issues with Bernie Sanders

These unions are really pissing me off, standing in the way of progress for all with essentially a "fuck you, I've got mine" attitude.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-14 01:53am

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote:
2020-02-12 09:30am
So I think the takeaway from NH and IA is that ... the Democratic electorate is suffering from a profound case of FOBO (fear of a better option.) Except for Andrew Yang, everyone who participated in the most recent debate (as well as some who did not) has found some justification to continue to exist until Super Tuesday comes to bury their moribund campaigns under Bloomberg's Infinite Cash Machine; except for Tulsi Gabbard, who will simply become the future Libertarian candidate for President (seriously, Gary Johnson has been reaching out to her lately) and continue to be the darling of Russian trolls and secret Trumpers; whose only interest in the world of Democratic politics is seeing it burn.

Joe Biden looked and sounded very much like a man who just got beat up for his lunch money, fleeing for supposed the safety of South Carolina and the warm embrace of its African American-heavy electorate (who are actually starting to take a shining to Tom Steyer, according to the latest polling.) Although it seems pretty clear that if you like your Biden medium-well done, you could probably get away with sticking your fork in him now.

Elizabeth Warren didn't sound like a candidate who just got solidly shellacked in the second most friendly state in the nation to her. She has the organization to keep going, and the promise of a better showing the more liberal Super Tuesday states, but her rhetoric of being a unity candidate rings about as hollow as a champagne glass during the proverbial fat lady's signature high-note. She keeps giving shout-outs to Amy Klobuchar, though; so maybe she's auditioning for a post in Klobuchar's cabinet.

Amy Klobuchar surprised, well, everyone. She's found her stride as a debater, and she's found a way to go negative against her fellow contenders without falling into the "any attention for my opponent is good attention" trap. Voters who made up their mind in the week leading up to the NH primary broke heavily for her (and Buttigieg.) However, I can't yet visualize a future where her candidacy survives beyond Super Tuesday, but I also can't really think of anything snarky to say about her.

Pete Buttigieg, on the other hand ... his three qualifications for being President are being 1) a white person in possession of 2) a penis, who is 3) not Donald Trump. Some would say that being in possession of two penises will ultimately hurt his chances with more conservative Democrats; but in a world where the alternative for moderate and conservative Democrats is Bernie Sanders, it may just mean his nine qualifications for being President are being 1) a white person, who is 2) not Donald Trump, and who has the power of 3) penis2. Yes, in the wholly-unrepresentative microcosm that is IA and NH, he's succeeded in beating up Joe Biden for his lunch money; and yes, he has the attention of big donors. But, will he survive once he leaves the kiddie pool?

So, this leaves Bernie Sanders; who seems to be less the candidate of revolution and more the candidate by default. Nationally, he's been at roughly 25% forever. But that works to his advantage; since it's a solid 25%, he's been able to get his solid quarter of the vote share and his Bernie Bros can spin it as a glorious victory when they're not busy mainlining Kool-Aid ... it's just that the "anyone but Sanders" lane is so overstuffed that its members are practically in quantum superposition. Fortunately for Sanders, the laws of physics at the macro-level prohibit the fusion of his opponents into the Lovecraftian horror known as Joetethmy Klowaridigeig; whose campaign slogan is "Donald Trump will be eaten first!"

Mind you, I recognize that the candidate by default can easily become the candidate by snowball effect, but that depends on the "anyone but Sanders" lane continuing to not converge on a candidate (those of you among the Sandernistas ought to be worried about his sphincter-clenching, razor-thin, margins of victory here,) while continuing to decline going hardcore attack mode on Sanders; and ignores the big unknown that is the effect of Mike Bloomberg and his Infinite Cash Machine will have, when people will actually get the chance to vote for him ... so contested convention (1 in 3 odds, according to FiveThirtyEight,) here we come?

And I say all this as a guy who ended up voting for Sanders yesterday; so I'm, at least, complicit in the chaos to follow ...
Contested convention, and nobody emerging as a clear leader early, were always plausible outcomes with so many big names running. I'm still hopeful we can avoid a contested convention (which is likely to be so divisive, and so delay the start of general election campaigning, that its the next worst thing to simply throwing in the towel and crowning Trump King now). But it was always going to take a while for one person to emerge from the pack. And while you can say Bernie hasn't managed to solidify the bulk of the party behind him yet, well... neither have anyone else.

So I wouldn't worry about a Bernie vote contributing to chaos. Chaos was coming no matter what. In fact, Bernie is the only option 538 rates as likely as a contested convention right now (both at 37%, next is Biden at 13, no one else hits double digits), so if you want to avoid chaos, its kind of Bernie or nothing at this point. Which was a big factor in me finally dumping Warren for Sanders a couple weeks back.

I do think, as a contested convention gets more and more likely, that it is tremendously selfish of candidates like Warren and Biden, who are clearly going nowhere fast, to remain in the race. Warren in particular could probably put Bernie decisively in the lead any time she chose by dropping out and endorsing him.

Ditto Gabbard, but I'm pretty sure her goal is disrupting the Democratic Party and reelecting Trump.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-14 03:20am

New poll says Bernie's now leading in Texas as well as California:

https://texastribune.org/2020/02/14/ber ... poll-says/

He's gone from 12 in October to 24 now, just edging out Biden's 22.

Meanwhile, that worthless scrotum James Carville referred to Sanders as a "communist". Getting desperate, are we?

Also of note in the above poll is that a narrow majority of Texans (52%) say they won't vote to reelect Dickless.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-15 01:37am

In other news, Trump's sole remaining primary challenger, Bill Weld, got an unexpected 9% against him in New Hampshire. That may not sound like much, but if Trump lost 9% of Republicans in several key battlegrounds...

One of the best predictors of an incumbent's defeat is whether they faced a significant primary challenge. Weld is obviously hampered by the party leadership's craven subservience to Trump (including, in some states, cancelling primaries altogether), but he may undermine Trump that crucial little bit that makes the difference.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
Knife
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15662
Joined: 2002-08-30 02:40pm
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain
Contact:

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Knife » 2020-02-15 08:51am

I'm not sure why you think the 3rd place person should drop out after only 200-300k primary votes between two states. Warren is well funded, has good infrastructure in Nevada, South Carolina, and other states. In 2016 alone, there were over 5 million votes in California for the Dems primary. Why the hell would someone drop out after such a small percentage of the Dems have voted and the candidate still have money to burn?

Now I get it if the candidate has been polling ~1-3 percent for the last year and was hoping for hail marry from NH or IA to jump start them but it didn't. But I don't see why Warren, or even Biden would drop right now. Biden has always had SC as his firewall. Biden has known for a while now that IA and NH wasn't going to break his way. But again, why would he drop when those two states are less than 300k votes and SC has almost 400k votes by itself and is more diverse and represents more of the democratic base.

If he loses SC, or gets 3rd or 4th or worse, then yeah. He should drop if he does not have the support he thought he does. He might limp through a week for Super Tuesday to make sure, but if his 'base' does not turn out like he thinks it will, he should drop. But the same with Warren. If she places high in SC or Nevada, she could wait for Super Tuesday. I'm thinking she's actually going to do very well in California. There is just no reason for any of the top 4-5 to drop right now, unless someone has serious money problems not known by the general public, which I don't think is the case.

Full disclosure, I'm a Warren person, plan to vote for her in the primary. I have nothing against Sanders, voted in the 2016 Primary for him, though ultimately held my nose and voted Clinton in the General Election. If Warren does not make it, Sanders is my strong second choice.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong

But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-15 12:22pm

Knife wrote:
2020-02-15 08:51am
I'm not sure why you think the 3rd place person should drop out after only 200-300k primary votes between two states. Warren is well funded, has good infrastructure in Nevada, South Carolina, and other states. In 2016 alone, there were over 5 million votes in California for the Dems primary. Why the hell would someone drop out after such a small percentage of the Dems have voted and the candidate still have money to burn?

Now I get it if the candidate has been polling ~1-3 percent for the last year and was hoping for hail marry from NH or IA to jump start them but it didn't. But I don't see why Warren, or even Biden would drop right now. Biden has always had SC as his firewall. Biden has known for a while now that IA and NH wasn't going to break his way. But again, why would he drop when those two states are less than 300k votes and SC has almost 400k votes by itself and is more diverse and represents more of the democratic base.

If he loses SC, or gets 3rd or 4th or worse, then yeah. He should drop if he does not have the support he thought he does. He might limp through a week for Super Tuesday to make sure, but if his 'base' does not turn out like he thinks it will, he should drop. But the same with Warren. If she places high in SC or Nevada, she could wait for Super Tuesday. I'm thinking she's actually going to do very well in California. There is just no reason for any of the top 4-5 to drop right now, unless someone has serious money problems not known by the general public, which I don't think is the case.

Full disclosure, I'm a Warren person, plan to vote for her in the primary. I have nothing against Sanders, voted in the 2016 Primary for him, though ultimately held my nose and voted Clinton in the General Election. If Warren does not make it, Sanders is my strong second choice.
Because due to the bizarre way American elections work, it is very unlikely that someone who placed lower than second in both Iowa and New Hampshire will be able to build the momentum to become nominee. At this point, its looking more and more like Sanders or Bloomberg (I am assume Buttigieg goes nowhere due to his abysmally low numbers nationwide, particularly with minority voters), and Warren dropping out and endorsing Sanders would be the fastest way to wrap this up, ensure a progressive nominee, and avoid a contested convention.

That said, it is of course Warren's right to stay in as long as she wants. She was my first choice, and if Sanders by some incredible ill-fortune dropped dead tomorrow, she'd almost certainly have my vote.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
Lost Soal
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2516
Joined: 2002-10-22 06:25am
Location: Back in Newcastle.

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Lost Soal » 2020-02-15 05:18pm

So right after saying that it's pointless to continue if they don't get higher than 3rd so should drop out, you think the most likely winner is Sanders or Bloomberg, who didn't even take part. That's some ass backwards thinking.
"May God stand between you and harm in all the empty places where you must walk." - Ancient Egyptian Blessing

Ivanova is always right.
I will listen to Ivanova.
I will not ignore Ivanova's recommendations. Ivanova is God.
AND, if this ever happens again, Ivanova will personally rip your lungs out! - Babylon 5 Mantra

There is no "I" in TEAM. There is a ME however.

User avatar
Straha
Lord of the Spam
Posts: 8083
Joined: 2002-07-21 11:59pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Straha » 2020-02-15 06:06pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-02-13 12:16am
I won't equate Bloomberg to Trump, who is a special kind of monster even by the standards of American politics. I also stand by my view that "Both Sides are just as bad" narratives are lazy and disingenuous and simplistic, and serve to normalize and legitimize the worst players.
This isn't a 'Both Sides are just as bad' narrative. This is a more nuanced narrative that recognizes that while the Democratic party, writ large, is fundamentally better than Trump in a number of key ways Mike Bloomberg is a piece of shit who is arguably worse than Trump in many real and quantifiable ways and the Democratic Party nominating him is a repugnant notion that should be opposed.

The notion that anyone, anywhere, would look at him and think "Yo, that guy! That guy is our saviour from a billionaire promoted out of his depth because of monetary and cultural connections." is offensive, and the fact that people will, during the primary, smile and say "Well, you know, if it's him I'll take him." is more ammunition for the accusation of the Democratic party being fucking gutless and unwilling to take a stand for anything.
'After 9/11, it was "You're with us or your with the terrorists." Now its "You're with Straha or you support racism."' ' - The Romulan Republic

'You're a bully putting on an air of civility while saying that everything western and/or capitalistic must be bad, and a lot of other posters (loomer, Stas Bush, Gandalf) are also going along with it for their own personal reasons (Stas in particular is looking through rose colored glasses)' - Darth Yan

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-16 01:02am

Straha wrote:
2020-02-15 06:06pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-02-13 12:16am
I won't equate Bloomberg to Trump, who is a special kind of monster even by the standards of American politics. I also stand by my view that "Both Sides are just as bad" narratives are lazy and disingenuous and simplistic, and serve to normalize and legitimize the worst players.
This isn't a 'Both Sides are just as bad' narrative. This is a more nuanced narrative that recognizes that while the Democratic party, writ large, is fundamentally better than Trump in a number of key ways Mike Bloomberg is a piece of shit who is arguably worse than Trump in many real and quantifiable ways and the Democratic Party nominating him is a repugnant notion that should be opposed.

The notion that anyone, anywhere, would look at him and think "Yo, that guy! That guy is our saviour from a billionaire promoted out of his depth because of monetary and cultural connections." is offensive, and the fact that people will, during the primary, smile and say "Well, you know, if it's him I'll take him." is more ammunition for the accusation of the Democratic party being fucking gutless and unwilling to take a stand for anything.
The counterargument, of course, is that we have to vote for whoever the nominee is, because if we lose to Trump, it won't matter what people think of the Democrats, because the US won't be a Republic any more and there won't be another election (other than the kind where the Dear Leader gets 90%, anyway).

I get that Bloomberg is a pile of shit. And the bit about him altering term limits really does give me pause. But there is a reason why people say "Vote Blue no matter who", and its not just mindless party loyalty. Its because we saw what Bernie or Bust's "principles" cost us three years ago, and we know that the country can't stand four more years (and neither, frankly, can the world, especially given the Climate Crisis).
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-16 01:18am

Fortunately, whether to vote for Bloomberg is probably not a choice we'll have to make, because some new polls are in, and everything's coming up Bernie:

First, Bernie's easily leading Nevada now, with Biden in second. Looks like Buttigieg's run of good fortune is about to come to an entirely predictable end.

https://vox.com/policy-and-politics/202 ... ren-steyer
A new Las Vegas Review-Journal/AARP Nevada poll shows Sen. Bernie Sanders leading the Democratic presidential field in Nevada, where the third contest of the Democratic primaries will be held in one week.

The poll found 25 percent of likely Democratic caucus-goers support Sanders, 18 percent back former Vice President Joe Biden, 13 percent favor Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and 11 percent support former hedge fund manager Tom Steyer. Both former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar have the support of 10 percent of likely caucus-goers, and 8 percent of respondents said they were undecided.

Republican polling firm WPA Intelligence conducted the telephone survey on behalf of the Review-Journal and AARP Nevada in the days after the New Hampshire primary, February 11 to 13; the poll has a margin of error of 4.8 percentage points.

It is important to note that this poll, while professionally conducted, should be taken with some caution. The results are certainly in line with recent trends — Sanders has surged in a number of national and state polls, and ahead of the Nevada caucuses, many have noted that he’s made strong investments in the state and has unrivaled support from Latino voters. But, that margin of error means Biden could actually top the field in the state; and broadly, Nevada is a state that is notoriously difficult to poll accurately.

It is so difficult that according to RealClearPolitics’s polling aggregator, there have been only three major Nevada surveys in 2020 (in contrast to more than 20 conducted in advance of the New Hampshire primary).

In both previous 2020 Nevada polls, the state seemed to be torn between Biden and Sanders. A Suffolk University/USA Today poll from early January showed Biden in the lead with 19 percent support, Sanders with 18 percent, and their nearest competitor — Warren — 8 percentage points behind. A Fox News poll taken at the beginning of January showed Biden coming in with 23 percent support and Sanders at 17 percent, with Warren and Steyer 5 percentage points behind the senator from Vermont.

After the 2004 election, the state switched from holding primaries to caucuses, and was pushed much earlier on the primary calendar as part of an effort to make the primary system more inclusive of the Democratic Party’s demographic make-up. (Nevada’s population is almost a third Latino.)

While this change did make the Democratic primary more diverse, it also introduced new uncertainties into the polling and candidate selection process. This has made pollsters’ work more difficult in that respondents aren’t always familiar with the ins-and-outs of caucusing, and because decades of caucusing data isn’t available to help build models or make assumptions.

And as FiveThirtyEight’s Clare Malone has reported, part of the difficulty of Nevada polling is that’s it’s simply harder to talk to people. The state has a disproportionate amount of people who work odd hours, and a relatively transient population.

That all being said, the poll’s findings don’t seem surprising given how Sanders is trending across the nation, and given the demographics of the Democratic electorate in Nevada.

A recent national poll conducted by Morning Consult, for example, shows Sanders is dominant among Latino voters, with more than double the support of any other candidate. In 2019, Sanders received more financial support from Latino donors than any other 2020 hopeful, snagging up over a third of the roughly $24 million that Latinos donated to Democratic presidential candidates.

Following his New Hampshire win, Sanders is on the rise in other polls as well
Sanders has leaped from third place to second place in the past month in South Carolina, according to an East Carolina University poll released Friday. The university’s pollsters found Biden has 28 percent support in the state, Sanders has 20 percent, and Steyer has 14 percent. South Carolina has been considered Biden’s “firewall” in the primaries — his path to the presidency relies on heavy support from black voters — but his support there has been declining.

Sanders also has been looking strong in key states that will vote on Super Tuesday, a day when more than 33 percent of the race’s national delegates will be up for grabs.

In particular, as Vox’s Dylan Scott reported on Friday, Sanders is surging in Texas and in California, the most delegate-rich state to vote on March 3:

A new University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll shows a Sanders surge, with the Vermont senator increasing his support by 12 points since last fall, up to 24 percent and ahead of former Vice President Joe Biden at 22 percent. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts is in third place at 15 percent in the poll, which was taken January 31 to February 9 and has a margin of error of 4 percent. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg gets 10 percent. Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota are in single digits.

Earlier this week, a Capitol Weekly poll of California taken February 6 to 9 gave Sanders a healthy 13-point lead over Warren, well beyond the margin of error, with 29 percent of the vote. Biden, Buttigieg, and Bloomberg were clustered below 15 percent in the poll.

The Sanders surge in the polls is a pretty clear phenomenon, and a victory in Nevada seems quite possible. The key question there — and in other states where he’s leading — is whether he can pull off the sorts of decisive victories needed to ensure he’s positioned to win a majority of pledged delegates before the Democratic National Convention in July. And as of right now, that’s far from a sure thing.
Meanwhile, Texas centrists are shitting themselves.
https://politico.com/news/2020/02/15/te ... ket-110524
AUSTIN, Texas — Bernie Sanders’ staying power atop the 2020 field has Democratic insiders in Texas on edge: They’re worried nominating the Vermont senator would kneecap their hard-fought campaign to flip the Texas state house.

Putting a self-proclaimed democratic socialist at the top of the ticket would squander a prime opportunity to seize statehouse seats — and congressional districts — that have long been out of reach, robbing the party of a hand in next year’s crucial redistricting process, more than a half-dozen Democratic candidates, activists and political consultants said in interviews.

"There is overall uncertainty which is growing. The real fear for Texas D’s remains Sanders," Bill Miller, a longtime Austin lobbyist who has worked with both Democrats and Republicans, said of a Sanders ticket. “'We’d be fucked' — that’s what they’re saying. The drain at the top goes down to the bottom.”

Texas may not be a presidential battleground, but a wave of GOP retirements in Congress, shifting demographics and Donald Trump’s lightning-rod presidency offer Democrats a shot at real power after two decades of Republican dominance. And to insiders like Miller, plans to nationalize the health care and electricity sectors will spook voters and weigh down local Democrats who are trying to thread a needle in this still deeply conservative state.

“The R’s are on their knees praying every day for Bernie,” Miller said.

The real fear for Texas D’s remains Sanders. We’d be fucked' — that’s what they’re saying. The drain at the top goes down to the bottom.”

- Bill Miller, a longtime Austin lobbyist

State-level Democrats across the country are also starting to weigh what each contender will mean for down-ballot races in the aftermath of the first two Democratic contests, which saw Joe Biden's star power wane, Pete Buttigieg notch a muddled first place finish in Iowa and Sanders eke out a victory in New Hampshire — a place he dominated four years ago. The uncertainty also clouds the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee's $50 million effort to flip state chambers in places like Arizona and North Carolina, where operatives have to fine-tune the party's message in swing states.

Sanders’ rising progressive agenda and the leftward march of Democrats like Elizabeth Warren has divided the party here about how to succeed and what lessons to divine from years of electoral losses born out of deploying untested strategies they hope will transform Texas into a battleground state.

“Sanders is a complete disaster and Warren is a complete-disaster-lite,” said Texas-based campaign consultant Jeff Hewitt, who has been working in Democratic politics since he served on Clinton-Gore’s campaign team in the 1990s. “At the end of the day, most of us want to win.”

A Buttigieg victory is “not helpful” to the party's goals in Texas, he said. But “he doesn’t hurt them as much” as Sanders.

While Democrats lost all statewide elections in 2018, they notched modest gains down ballot. They were able to flip two congressional seats and more than a dozen state House and Senate seats, putting them just nine seats away from taking control of the state House.

“For control of the state legislature and how the congressional delegation is drawn over the next decade, it’s very important that we do all we can to win the statehouse now so both parties have a seat at the table,” said state Rep. Chris Turner, chair of the Texas House Democratic caucus and who has endorsed former Vice President Joe Biden.

But progressive activists argue that bold ideas like those championed by Sanders and Warren will bring out new voters, and others say ideology matters less than ground game. It’s a debate that’s playing out across the country, but the stakes are especially high in Texas this year where Democrats at the state level have a shot at redrawing the election maps that will keep them competitive.

“You gotta be realistic and practical about issues that are facing people in rural areas,” said Rep. Henry Cuellar, a conservative Democrat whose district stretches from the Southern border to San Antonio. If Sanders is at the top of the ticket, he said, Democrats in Texas will have to distance themselves from his far-left ideas to win over moderate voters in potential swing districts.

“Can you please name all the liberal seats that Republicans are in so we can go after that?” Cuellar said.

The party divide in Texas has also become even wider as Democrats still chew on Beto O’Rourke’s ill-fated 2018 Senate campaign against Ted Cruz, drawing a litany of different lessons about whether his 2.5-point loss was a victory or a missed opportunity.

Hewitt said O’Rourke’s loss reveals that far-left ideas don’t bring out enough people to flip seats. “The idea that more people will come out to vote if a progressive is on the ballot, that’s fools gold,” he said.

But some Democratic operatives in Texas point to two decades of Republican dominance and argue O’Rourke's popularity in the state as proof the party needs to differentiate itself from the right.

“We should be more worried about a moderate candidate in a highly polarized environment,” said Tory Gavito, co-founder and president of Way to Win, a group that organizes progressive donors and strategists. “We have the deepest well of young voters and voters of color — who is the best candidate that can turn them out?”

Texas Republicans, facing competitive elections for the first time in decades, say that regardless of who wins the nomination, Sanders candidacy puts Democrats on the defensive.

“The reality is that every Democratic president candidate has happily endorsed socialist policies,” Texas GOP Chairman James Dickey said.

Polls have offered little guidance. Biden is still a favorite among establishment figures and led a poll of Texas voters before Iowa but Sanders surged after the caucuses and Michael Bloomberg is on the rise.

“It’s still a very fluid race,” said Joshua Blank, research director for the Texas Lyceum poll. Blank believes that most voters in the state are still making up their minds, but that given the state’s sheer size and diversity Democrats need to focus on building a party infrastructure that’s been lacking.

“It would be silly to say that it doesn’t matter who is at the top of the ticket, but I’m not sure what we’re seeing isn’t more structural than about any individual candidate,” he said.

Some progressive entrants to Texas politics agree, saying it’s more about packaging ideas in a way that appeals to the state’s voters.

“When we are introducing these policy ideas, I don’t start off with Medicare for All,” said Jessica Cisneros, a progressive who is challenging Cuellar in the Democratic primary. We talk about “this idea of having health care as a right, so we wouldn’t have to lose a loved one.”

Despite their clashes over ideology, Democrats in Texas do agree on at least one point: the top of the Republican ticket will motivate many voters.

“Texas is obviously not the Bronx,” said George Shipley, a Democratic operative in Austin, who was once an adviser to Gov. Ann Richards. “Texas is very resistant to the type of social programs Bernie offers, but the devil is not Bernie, the devil is Trump.”
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
aerius
Charismatic Cult Leader
Posts: 14621
Joined: 2002-08-18 07:27pm
Location: YHM

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by aerius » 2020-02-16 01:25am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-02-16 01:02am
Straha wrote:
2020-02-15 06:06pm
This isn't a 'Both Sides are just as bad' narrative. This is a more nuanced narrative that recognizes that while the Democratic party, writ large, is fundamentally better than Trump in a number of key ways Mike Bloomberg is a piece of shit who is arguably worse than Trump in many real and quantifiable ways and the Democratic Party nominating him is a repugnant notion that should be opposed.

The notion that anyone, anywhere, would look at him and think "Yo, that guy! That guy is our saviour from a billionaire promoted out of his depth because of monetary and cultural connections." is offensive, and the fact that people will, during the primary, smile and say "Well, you know, if it's him I'll take him." is more ammunition for the accusation of the Democratic party being fucking gutless and unwilling to take a stand for anything.
The counterargument, of course, is that we have to vote for whoever the nominee is, because if we lose to Trump, it won't matter what people think of the Democrats, because the US won't be a Republic any more and there won't be another election (other than the kind where the Dear Leader gets 90%, anyway).

I get that Bloomberg is a pile of shit. And the bit about him altering term limits really does give me pause. But there is a reason why people say "Vote Blue no matter who", and its not just mindless party loyalty. Its because we saw what Bernie or Bust's "principles" cost us three years ago, and we know that the country can't stand four more years (and neither, frankly, can the world, especially given the Climate Crisis).
So let me get this straight. Bloomberg is a fucking shitbag who is arguably worse than Trump, but if he ends up being the Democrat nominee y'all have a duty to vote for him because he isn't Trump. Are you serious?

Let me be blunt here. If the Democrat party nominates Bloomberg as its presidential candidate, it's so completely fucking broken that it must be destroyed. And if you're not willing to do so then you are part of the problem.
Image
aerius: I'll vote for you if you sleep with me. :)
Lusankya: Deal!
Say, do you want it to be a threesome with your wife? Or a foursome with your wife and sister-in-law? I'm up for either. :P

User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3828
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am
Contact:

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by loomer » 2020-02-16 01:57am

You lot really need preferential voting.
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-16 04:18am

aerius wrote:
2020-02-16 01:25am
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-02-16 01:02am
Straha wrote:
2020-02-15 06:06pm
This isn't a 'Both Sides are just as bad' narrative. This is a more nuanced narrative that recognizes that while the Democratic party, writ large, is fundamentally better than Trump in a number of key ways Mike Bloomberg is a piece of shit who is arguably worse than Trump in many real and quantifiable ways and the Democratic Party nominating him is a repugnant notion that should be opposed.

The notion that anyone, anywhere, would look at him and think "Yo, that guy! That guy is our saviour from a billionaire promoted out of his depth because of monetary and cultural connections." is offensive, and the fact that people will, during the primary, smile and say "Well, you know, if it's him I'll take him." is more ammunition for the accusation of the Democratic party being fucking gutless and unwilling to take a stand for anything.
The counterargument, of course, is that we have to vote for whoever the nominee is, because if we lose to Trump, it won't matter what people think of the Democrats, because the US won't be a Republic any more and there won't be another election (other than the kind where the Dear Leader gets 90%, anyway).

I get that Bloomberg is a pile of shit. And the bit about him altering term limits really does give me pause. But there is a reason why people say "Vote Blue no matter who", and its not just mindless party loyalty. Its because we saw what Bernie or Bust's "principles" cost us three years ago, and we know that the country can't stand four more years (and neither, frankly, can the world, especially given the Climate Crisis).
So let me get this straight. Bloomberg is a fucking shitbag who is arguably worse than Trump, but if he ends up being the Democrat nominee y'all have a duty to vote for him because he isn't Trump. Are you serious?

Let me be blunt here. If the Democrat party nominates Bloomberg as its presidential candidate, it's so completely fucking broken that it must be destroyed. And if you're not willing to do so then you are part of the problem.
Bloomberg is scum. Yes. But I do not say that he is "arguably worse than Trump". That's Straha's argument, not mine. And while I would have deep misgivings about Bloomberg, I would also be very, very hesitant to choose Trump over him (which is what not voting amounts to, in practice), because we have been down this fucking road before. I heard the exact same arguments from every Bernie or Buster in 2016: "Don't vote for the lesser of two evils", "Both Sides are just as bad (but really we mean that the Democrats are worse)", "You're part of the problem". It was stupid and infuriating then, but now, when we've had three years to see just how vile and destructive Trump is? Its evil. You want to tell people that the highest priority is the destruction of the Democratic Party? Okay. Australia burning? That's on you. Heather Heyer run over in Charlottsville? That's on you. Dead little children in cages? That's on you. And everything that comes after will be on you too. And yeah, you can say you're not American, you can't vote, its not your fault, blah blah blah- but when you advocate an action that you know will have destructive results, you bear partial responsibility for those results.

And its funny, isn't it, how the "anti-establishment" crowd's hostility is always directed primarily or soley at the Democratic "establishment"? Just as its telling that the people screaming that the Democrats are just as bad as/worse than the Republicans are always the same people who engage in endless apologetics for Trump/Russia.

Frankly, I fully expect that if Bernie is the nominee instead of Bloomberg, you'll find a reason why he needs to lose, the Democratic Party needs to be destroyed, and anyone who votes for Bernie is part of the problem. You've already started, when you attacked the entire Democratic field as weak.

Honestly, I'd respect you just a tiny bit more if you just admitted that you want Trump to win to spite the Democrats.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
mr friendly guy
The Doctor
Posts: 11020
Joined: 2004-12-12 10:55pm
Location: In a 1960s police telephone box somewhere in Australia

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by mr friendly guy » 2020-02-16 04:32am

loomer wrote:
2020-02-16 01:57am
You lot really need preferential voting.
You mean preferential voting for selecting the democrat candidate for POTUS?
Never apologise for being a geek, because they won't apologise to you for being an arsehole. John Barrowman - 22 June 2014 Perth Supernova.

Countries I have been to - 14.
Australia, Canada, China, Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, USA.
Always on the lookout for more nice places to visit.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-16 04:41am

mr friendly guy wrote:
2020-02-16 04:32am
loomer wrote:
2020-02-16 01:57am
You lot really need preferential voting.
You mean preferential voting for selecting the democrat candidate for POTUS?
I assume so?

I'd be interested to see the outcome of that race, for sure. I think it would probably favor the progressives- Bernie and Warren are a LOT of peoples' second choice.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-02-16 04:58am

In other news, New York Mayor and former minor Presidential candidate Bill De Blasio has endorsed Bernie Sanders.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3828
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am
Contact:

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by loomer » 2020-02-16 05:18am

mr friendly guy wrote:
2020-02-16 04:32am
loomer wrote:
2020-02-16 01:57am
You lot really need preferential voting.
You mean preferential voting for selecting the democrat candidate for POTUS?
Or just generally, really.
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A

User avatar
mr friendly guy
The Doctor
Posts: 11020
Joined: 2004-12-12 10:55pm
Location: In a 1960s police telephone box somewhere in Australia

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by mr friendly guy » 2020-02-16 06:19am

loomer wrote:
2020-02-16 05:18am
mr friendly guy wrote:
2020-02-16 04:32am
loomer wrote:
2020-02-16 01:57am
You lot really need preferential voting.
You mean preferential voting for selecting the democrat candidate for POTUS?
Or just generally, really.
It won't help with the my candidate or no candidate crowd though. I heard some of Andrew Yang's base has this attitude and we can't forget the Bernie or bust people either.
Never apologise for being a geek, because they won't apologise to you for being an arsehole. John Barrowman - 22 June 2014 Perth Supernova.

Countries I have been to - 14.
Australia, Canada, China, Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, USA.
Always on the lookout for more nice places to visit.

Post Reply