There's a reason I don't ask for poison for my birthday, because odds are it would kill me. That's why I ask for things like cash, because they would benefit me. Running for President and pushing for criminals to vote, thinking it will be detrimental to you or your party, would just flat out be dumb. Unless your goal is to purposely hinder yourself or your party, in which case anything you say shouldn't be taken seriously.

I agree there's a difference, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't lead to the same or worse results. I mean just look at it from a Democrats point of view. The free and innocent voted for Trump, and Bernie wants to let the guilty help pick? If the guilty would do a similar job of selecting if not better, why are they behind bars with such a logical mindset? I also don't find it coincidence the left really hate guns and Trump, especially considering how often the msm points out how Trump weaponizes things, like his words.

The first Morning Consult poll since Biden's announcement is out, and as expected Biden made a jump up by 6 points; conversely Booker, Harris, O'Rouke and Buttigieg lost 1 point, and Sanders 2. On the other hand, Warren also jumped up by 2 points, overtaking Harris for the first time in the process.

(1) "I'm going to answer this question and if you continue to misconstrue the facts"

i have done no such thing

(2) " He didn't say centralized food distribution is a good thing in itself."

his argument is that the rich hoarded the resources can we agree on this to begin with?

then he states that a solution to this("it's a good thing") is to centralise distribution, do we agree on that secondly?

(3) "He's saying it's better than no bread at all."

because without centralised distribution the rich hoard the wealth, this is the obvious conclusion of his argument

(4) "You can take the rest of your Sanders rant to the Official US Politics Thread or make one just for Sanders."

sanders isn't worth that effort, he's pretty much done since we also have him on the sexual abuse scandals within his campaigns to add to him hypocritically having millions of dollars in wealth now while demonising millionaires

Hopefully Biden's boost is only temporary and will subside after the first debate. Good for Warren though, she deserves a bit more attention.

Eric, would you mind addressing this issue in either the official US politics thread or a dedicated gun rights thread?  We're trying to get this thread back onto topic.

Update: Colorado Senator Michael Bennet has officially declared his candidacy for the Democratic Party.

We are now awaiting an official announcement from Governor Steve Bullock from Montana.  Pending announcement sometime between 5/13 and 5/19.

Update: Colorado Senator Michael Bennet has officially declared his candidacy for the Democratic Party.

We are now awaiting an official announcement from Governor Steve Bullock from Montana.  Pending announcement sometime between 5/13 and 5/19.

While it appears like a record, it's actually not even close.  There is usually a list of a few hundred actual candidates every election cycle.  These are people that have actually filed with the FEC (Federal Elections Committee) to declare their candidacy.  As of 4/29/2019, there were 236 on file.  Along with a further 87 for the Republican Party.  All told, over 700 FEC filings have been made across all parties (and unaffiliated).

That said, it might be a record for 'major' candidates.  The 1976 election had 16 major Democratic candidates and the 2016 election had 17 major Republican candidates.  It's the lack of a definition for 'major' candidate that makes it difficult to officially declare the largest field of candidates...but it's pretty safe that this will be accepted as such in due time.  We currently stand at 22 candidates but do we declare all 22 as 'major'?  If they all stay along for the ride after the first few debates, I think we can safely make that claim...and the claim of largest 'major' candidate field ever.