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

According to Nate Silver, a large Sanders win with Buttigeg/Biden in second is the scenario that makes a clear winner the most likely and, accordingly, a contested convention the least likely as of now.

It couldn't be a better timed victory for Sanders, it would seem.



 

 

 

 

 

Around the Network
Hiku said:
NightlyPoe said:

It's a talking point.  Doesn't particularly mean much in the end.  I mean, Nevada's only been an early state since 2008, so it's not like this is some historic achievement.

I'm not sure they meant those three states specifically? Just that they added specifications of everything in the tweet by name.
I'm hearing first time for the first three states. But someone correct it if it's wrong.

barneystinson69 said:

Time to take Biden out back... guy is done lmfao.

"Front-runner" can't even win a state for the candidacy ffs. I'm pretty sure he was leading in Nevada just a couple weeks back?

Also, this isn't helping:

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1231415994440175616?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

I heard they were going to use an app again like in Iowa (which is great for seniors, as they are good with technology), but I'm not sure if they went through with it.

Hopefully some of the other candidates drop out in time for the good of the party, but obviously a substantial portion of the party is not on board with reducing tax breaks for the wealthiest, reducing big pharma's influence, etc.

The last I heard they used a tablet with Google Docs:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/nevada-democrats-say-theyll-replace-their-caucus-app-with-a-google-form/



DraconianAC said:
uran10 said:

Its over, lol Its pretty much over lol. Bernie winning the the first 3 states and if he goes on to win SC over Biden its over. We're so close to a Bernie Nomination. Sooo close!

Its NOT over. The corporate media establishment is not going to give him an inch; these attack dogs are going to push any narrative that will frame Sanders in a bad light. Behind the curtains, the DNC is going to work any trick possible to take national delegates from him and insure that he does not have the majority of them (a total of 1991) and push a brokered convention. If Bernie Sanders is going to win, he needs the largest possible turn out in every State to insure they can't fiddle around with the numbers.

If he manages to win the Democratic nomination, phase two will commence. Like George Magovern, Sanders will be repeatedly red-baited by the corporate media who will go into overdrive to show socialist programs will destroy the economy. The DNC will now drop the unity message and many "insiders" will come out in droves to tie the stock market to the economy, and how a Bernie Sanders presidency will destroy the currently bloated stock market that is currently in life support--courtesy of the FED. Again, he will need the largest possible voter turn out to insure that the GOP's vote suppression tactics (gerrymandering, hack-able voting machines, etc) can not steal it away from him.

I thank you all who are posting Bernie's Progress, but you can't go to sleep after feeling Bernie is winning, this is not like Obama's run (he is not bought and paid for). Bernie isn't just asking for your vote, he needs a political revolution that will help put pressure on congress to address the issues of the majority of Americans. So remember, It will never be over. IT is just beginning.

Sadly, a recession is likely to come before the election, and you know they're going to blame Sanders for it even though it's Trump's fault (well, it was coming anyway, but it'll be deeper and nastier than it had to be with less ability to do anything to fight it thanks to Trump's incompetence and discredited economic policies, and yes, the fed, as led by Trump's appointed chairman). Hopefully the public doesn't buy it, and places the blame where it belongs, but either way, we'll probably be in a recession and know it by the time of the general election.

Per a recent MIT study, it's believed there's a 70% chance of a recession in the next 6 months.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/05/70percent-chance-of-recession-in-next-six-months-study-from-mit-and-state-street-finds.html

From the study:



Jaicee said:

1.) According to the entrance polls, Sanders won the most votes among both men and (for the first time so far) women, among working class voters and union households (despite the advice of the bosses of the Culinary Workers Union)

2.) I also want to take a moment to criticize all of the other candidates for advocating a brokered Democratic convention. These candidates have all spent no shortage of time and energy voicing the danger that the current U.S. president represents to lower-case "D" democratic principles. Some of them have even advocated doing away with the Electoral College specifically on the grounds that it has repeatedly denied the winner of the popular vote the presidency (e.g. Al Gore and Hillary Clinton). It's flatly impossible to square their purported support for such principles with calls for the nomination of an unpopular candidate by a group of special electors (super delegates in this case). As much shows you their actual level of commitment to democratic principles: they are serious about such principles only when they stand to benefit and not otherwise. Apparently it takes a candidate from outside the Democratic Party to live up to the meaning of said party's name!

1.) Yeah that was interesting. I guess they know that they don't have less choices with Medicare For All, in spite of their union reps best efforts.




2.) I have to say I'm mainly disappointed in Warren here. But only because I held her to a higher standard than the rest. I didn't expect better from them. But Warren had been very outspoken against money's influence in politics. Just a few months ago she said this:

But now she did a 180:

And of course her comment about a brokered convention.
So now I'm not so sure she would drop out of the race even if she loses her home state. Unfortunately at this point it's probably about either helping Sanders, or doing whatever they can to stop him, even if that means a Bloomberg nomination.

Last edited by Hiku - on 23 February 2020

Hiku said:
Jaicee said:

1.) According to the entrance polls, Sanders won the most votes among both men and (for the first time so far) women, among working class voters and union households (despite the advice of the bosses of the Culinary Workers Union)

2.) I also want to take a moment to criticize all of the other candidates for advocating a brokered Democratic convention. These candidates have all spent no shortage of time and energy voicing the danger that the current U.S. president represents to lower-case "D" democratic principles. Some of them have even advocated doing away with the Electoral College specifically on the grounds that it has repeatedly denied the winner of the popular vote the presidency (e.g. Al Gore and Hillary Clinton). It's flatly impossible to square their purported support for such principles with calls for the nomination of an unpopular candidate by a group of special electors (super delegates in this case). As much shows you their actual level of commitment to democratic principles: they are serious about such principles only when they stand to benefit and not otherwise. Apparently it takes a candidate from outside the Democratic Party to live up to the meaning of said party's name!

1.) Yeah that was interesting. I guess someone informed them that they don't have less choices with Medicare For All, in spite of their union reps best efforts.

2.) I have to say I'm mainly disappointed in Warren here. But only because I hold her to a higher standard than the rest. I didn't expect better from them. But Warren had been very outspoken against money's influence in politics. Just a few months ago she said this:

But now she did a 180:

And of course her comment about a brokered convention.
So now I'm not so sure she would drop out of the race even if she loses her home state. Unfortunately at this point it's probably about either helping Sanders, or doing whatever they can to stop him, even if that means a Bloomberg nomination.

I'm just gonna point out, the writing has been on the wall for Warren doing this since 2016. Red flag and more Red flags. I still see people using the word "progressive" for her when time and time again she's proven she's not. I'll start with the most simple and most disqualifying thing about Warren. Big Money. She took it, transferred it into her campaign from her senate race, said she'd take in the general, swore off super pacs until her money ran dry cause now she needs the super pacs to stay competitive. She's just a player in a the game. She's not a progressive, but a standard dem.

I've called her a snake for a long time, way before others caught up cause you believe actions not words. That's why when she keeps stabbing the movement, calling us hateful people, attacking us, telling blatant lies on Bernie and his supporters, I can't understand how people still think she'll put delegates with him. I don't understand it. I've seen this Denial so hard with Warren that I can't understand. Its like someone who keeps going back to their abusive ex because they claimed they change just for them to turn around and do the same thing again, yet they keep going back.

Warren is literally only running at this point, is to try hurt Bernie to push a contested convention. Warren aint it, never has been, never will be and I'm looking forward to her senate re-election campaign. I'm sure we can find a real progressive to replace her.



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

Around the Network
HylianSwordsman said:
NightlyPoe said:

Saying "I know you are, but what am I?" isn't exactly the most persuasive argument.

Re-read your own TED talk.  Every other sentence is about more Latino or black support in certain states.  I didn't say it, you did.  Furthermore, I was around during the Obama administration, it was the expressed plan of the Democrat party throughout that entire era.

Regardless, it remains fantasy that the whole country will follow only one party forever.  Especially, as you maintain, that it is a party led in a radical direction indefinitely.

Keep on projecting. Again, it's not identity, it's just a demographic description. And again, what are you doing in this thread if you think that the "expressed plan of the Democrat party" is that evil and crazy?

I'm in the thread because I have interest in politics.

And if you think your party's expressed plan is that evil and crazy, maybe you should take a step back and rethink your support for them?

As for my "projecting", I refused to support the Republican nominee when I saw Trump employing the same exact tactics the Obama-era Democrat party attempted in reverse.  I also advocated against the Bush-era lighter attempts at such politics from Karl Rove.  I'm clean on that count.  So we're back to you.  Why do you support politics that just divide Americans up and then try to make them vote as members of a tribe instead of as individuals?



uran10 said:
Hiku said:

Warren is literally only running at this point, is to try hurt Bernie to push a contested convention. Warren aint it, never has been, never will be and I'm looking forward to her senate re-election campaign. I'm sure we can find a real progressive to replace her.

Funny that you mention something like this, when leftist Ed Markey is looking likely to be replaced by centrist Joe Kennedy III for the other Massachusetts senate seat.

You probably won't like the latest nationwide CBS/YouGov poll as well:

Sanders 28%
Warren 19%
Biden 17%
Bloomberg 13%
Buttigieg 10%
Klobuchar 5%
Steyer 2%
Gabbard 1%

Although this one is post-debate, pre-Nevada.



 

 

 

 

 

If we're already seeing this kind of turnout in the primaries, then that bodes well for the general election where it's easier to vote, and generally more people are interested in voting.

Last edited by Hiku - on 23 February 2020

HylianSwordsman said:
DraconianAC said:

Its NOT over. The corporate media establishment is not going to give him an inch; these attack dogs are going to push any narrative that will frame Sanders in a bad light. Behind the curtains, the DNC is going to work any trick possible to take national delegates from him and insure that he does not have the majority of them (a total of 1991) and push a brokered convention. If Bernie Sanders is going to win, he needs the largest possible turn out in every State to insure they can't fiddle around with the numbers.

If he manages to win the Democratic nomination, phase two will commence. Like George Magovern, Sanders will be repeatedly red-baited by the corporate media who will go into overdrive to show socialist programs will destroy the economy. The DNC will now drop the unity message and many "insiders" will come out in droves to tie the stock market to the economy, and how a Bernie Sanders presidency will destroy the currently bloated stock market that is currently in life support--courtesy of the FED. Again, he will need the largest possible voter turn out to insure that the GOP's vote suppression tactics (gerrymandering, hack-able voting machines, etc) can not steal it away from him.

I thank you all who are posting Bernie's Progress, but you can't go to sleep after feeling Bernie is winning, this is not like Obama's run (he is not bought and paid for). Bernie isn't just asking for your vote, he needs a political revolution that will help put pressure on congress to address the issues of the majority of Americans. So remember, It will never be over. IT is just beginning.

Sadly, a recession is likely to come before the election, and you know they're going to blame Sanders for it even though it's Trump's fault (well, it was coming anyway, but it'll be deeper and nastier than it had to be with less ability to do anything to fight it thanks to Trump's incompetence and discredited economic policies, and yes, the fed, as led by Trump's appointed chairman). Hopefully the public doesn't buy it, and places the blame where it belongs, but either way, we'll probably be in a recession and know it by the time of the general election.

Per a recent MIT study, it's believed there's a 70% chance of a recession in the next 6 months.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/05/70percent-chance-of-recession-in-next-six-months-study-from-mit-and-state-street-finds.html

From the study:

This is the only reason why I sometimes want the republicans to win. Trumps policies made a crash inevitable, yet if the democrats win, they will get blamed for it. Just look what they tout about Obama despite the crash he had to clean up coming from Bush.



uran10 said:

Its over, lol Its pretty much over lol. Bernie winning the the first 3 states and if he goes on to win SC over Biden its over. We're so close to a Bernie Nomination. Sooo close!

Just a reminder how Democrats can play this game:



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

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019

Predictions: Switch / Switch vs. XB1 in the US / Three Houses first quarter