By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Official 2020 US Election: Democratic Party Discussion

uran10 said:
tsogud said:

Sexism exists, Biden benefits from its existence...

Not saying sexism doesn't exist, just saying people put too much emphasis on it and turn to it and other identity issues as the basis for "that's why xyz happened". Hillary vs Trump was establishment vs (fake)Populist, it was the wife of the dude who shipped the rust belt's jobs overseas vs the guy calling out those trade deals and saying he'll rip them to shreds. Its pretty obvious why Trump won and it had nothing to do with gender. The rust belt would have gone the same way simply because their main issue was the trade deal and hillary was all TPP while trump railed against it.

Biden is in a similar position to hillary being his terrible record. In fact his record is somehow even worse than hers yet he's still up there and there's a simple reason for that. Its the same thing that was boosting hillary at the start. Name recognition and default support and most aren't paying attention. At the start of 2016 I didn't care about the election, I thought hillary would be the nominee and that she was "alright". Then I educated myself on her and on Bernie and then I got very involved politically cause she was a disaster. Its the exact same process, the only difference now is that there are more people involved from the start than not, but that default older base is still there and they're bolstering up Biden just like they did Hillary. Look at Hillary's elections, and I mean all of them. She starts off high in the polls, then slides down as more people know her. Biden is in the exact same spot, the only difference is he can't afford to drop and now that people are starting to pay attention, well.... Iran happened so that may not be the case, but when people pay attention Biden will fall. It comes down to how fast he falls like I said before.

TL:DR Biden's "short comings" etc are going to come up and bite him once people start paying attention just like it did for hillary especially cause unlike her, he doesn't have that leeway. Yes Sexism exists, but you're putting way too much stock into it and not focusing on the real reason trump won 2016. More people are paying attention now and more will pay attention once Iowa hits, that's when we'll see what Biden is really made of.

Trump won because of racism and sexism. The former basically fuels the entire mindset of dozens of millions of rural White voters in the US and elsewhere (the myth of "economic anxiety" having been extensively discussed in the European Elections thread and elsewhere) while the latter might have killed her chances of flipping the 50,000 votes or so she needed to win the electoral college.

Hillary has been bombarded by the media for decades now. What happened in 2016 wasn't anything new. The very reason she seemed a fake-ish estabilishment politican was an attempt to control her image given what women and specially her have faced in the public eye since the 90s or even earlier. Not to mention that even in 2015 Trump reached heights in the polls against Hillary he hasn't matched against Biden (or even some of the other candidates) this time around. He was even ahead at some points.



 

 

 

 

 

Around the Network
haxxiy said:
uran10 said:

Not saying sexism doesn't exist, just saying people put too much emphasis on it and turn to it and other identity issues as the basis for "that's why xyz happened". Hillary vs Trump was establishment vs (fake)Populist, it was the wife of the dude who shipped the rust belt's jobs overseas vs the guy calling out those trade deals and saying he'll rip them to shreds. Its pretty obvious why Trump won and it had nothing to do with gender. The rust belt would have gone the same way simply because their main issue was the trade deal and hillary was all TPP while trump railed against it.

Biden is in a similar position to hillary being his terrible record. In fact his record is somehow even worse than hers yet he's still up there and there's a simple reason for that. Its the same thing that was boosting hillary at the start. Name recognition and default support and most aren't paying attention. At the start of 2016 I didn't care about the election, I thought hillary would be the nominee and that she was "alright". Then I educated myself on her and on Bernie and then I got very involved politically cause she was a disaster. Its the exact same process, the only difference now is that there are more people involved from the start than not, but that default older base is still there and they're bolstering up Biden just like they did Hillary. Look at Hillary's elections, and I mean all of them. She starts off high in the polls, then slides down as more people know her. Biden is in the exact same spot, the only difference is he can't afford to drop and now that people are starting to pay attention, well.... Iran happened so that may not be the case, but when people pay attention Biden will fall. It comes down to how fast he falls like I said before.

TL:DR Biden's "short comings" etc are going to come up and bite him once people start paying attention just like it did for hillary especially cause unlike her, he doesn't have that leeway. Yes Sexism exists, but you're putting way too much stock into it and not focusing on the real reason trump won 2016. More people are paying attention now and more will pay attention once Iowa hits, that's when we'll see what Biden is really made of.

Trump won because of racism and sexism. The former basically fuels the entire mindset of dozens of millions of rural White voters in the US and elsewhere (the myth of "economic anxiety" having been extensively discussed in the European Elections thread and elsewhere) while the latter might have killed her chances of flipping the 50,000 votes or so she needed to win the electoral college.

Hillary has been bombarded by the media for decades now. What happened in 2016 wasn't anything new. The very reason she seemed a fake-ish estabilishment politican was an attempt to control her image given what women and specially her have faced in the public eye since the 90s or even earlier. Not to mention that even in 2015 Trump reached heights in the polls against Hillary he hasn't matched against Biden (or even some of the other candidates) this time around. He was even ahead at some points.

Yes, sure those racist and sexist 2 time obama voters who shifted the rust belt to Trump. Yes, that's totally what happened.



Follow my Gaming and Graphics Business on facebook and on Twitter:

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=101878997952596&ref=br_rs

https://twitter.com/KellyGGWD

Another interesting article: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-decades-of-primary-polls-tell-us-about-the-2020-democratic-presidential-race/

About the discussion: Sure, questions of identity do influence voters. But in the current discussion too much focus lies there, because other factors also influence voters, like policies, how the voters feel the character is, how energizing the campaign is and many other factors. So gender and race aren't without influence, but other things clearly can overshadow it. For Obama for instance the campaign had a really energizing messaging with hope and change. And Clinton had also negative influence by the feeling she transpired about not caring about the simple people while caring about powerful people. Trump really knew how to use that impression, by stating he himself once donated to Hillary Clinton. I see these factors clearly overshadow the identity factor.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

Bernie's worst fundraising quarter beats the best quarter of every other candidate. No super PAC. It was an inconceivable idea to reject corporate funds until few years ago. Talk about changing the game. 



That's a shame.

I dislike Yang, but he's an important voice and has earned a spot.

I disagree with his anti-DNC rethoric, but the debates really should have been a week later.



Around the Network

Castro endorses Elizabeth Warren. He is the third former 2020 candidate to endorse another, after Tim Ryan endorsed Joe Biden and Hickenlooper endorsed Michael Bennet. This might be a big boost for Warren: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/julian-castro-endorses-elizabeth-warren-for-president/ar-BBYFk1R

And apparently people close to Obama dislike the candidacy of Sanders but are unable to stop him: https://www.thedailybeast.com/obamaworld-hates-bernie-sandersand-has-no-idea-how-to-stop-him?ref=home



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

the-pi-guy said:
I've noticed there's a lot more confidence for Sanders lately.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/1/7/21002895/bernie-sanders-2020-electability

A lot of that piece was just bagging on/focusing on his supporters, cheapening what it would mean if he got elected, and falsely stating Sanders is not really different from Biden and the rest. The author thought the Iraq war would shake up the establishment ???? How? The only way to shake anything up is to threaten someone's paycheck i.e. going after big money in politics. If you don't, it's always going to be the same old same old no matter who is in the oval office. The author doesn't seem to grasp that Sanders (and Warren to some extent) are the only ones that threaten that status quo of special interests in our democracy. There was some good portions in there but overall a bad take by the author, too subjective in a lot of areas.

You could bet Biden, Buttigieg, and even Warren's articles in this series will be glowing compared to this luke warm piece.

Last edited by tsogud - on 07 January 2020

 

the-pi-guy said:
I've noticed there's a lot more confidence for Sanders lately.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/1/7/21002895/bernie-sanders-2020-electability

It also shows up in the polls. New polls where he leads in Iowa and New Hampshire, and on the national front, he gained 2 points in the latest Morning Consult poll and reached 23% - the highest he got since Biden announced his campaign (24%) and not far behind his highest point in this poll for these primaries (27%)

Last edited by Bofferbrauer2 - on 07 January 2020

Bofferbrauer2 said:
the-pi-guy said:
I've noticed there's a lot more confidence for Sanders lately.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/1/7/21002895/bernie-sanders-2020-electability

It also shows up in the polls. New polls where he leads in Iowa and New Hampshire, and on the national front, he gained 2 points in the latest Morning Consult poll and reached 23% - the highest he got since Biden announced his campaign (24%) and not far behind his highest point in this poll for these primaries (27%)

Is that so? So it is time to bring impeachement proceedings forward, so that the sitting senators (Sanders, Warren) get called back and have to sit in long hearings, while Biden and Buttigieg can campaign without competition.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

For the next month, foreign policy is going to become center to the electoral discussion. It's going to make for an interesting debate.