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

Moren on 08 January 2020

I'm glad Warren is on the right side of the discussion here. A big tent is not a bad thing and it is needed to win. I wonder how the election would turn out if they simply kicked every moderate from the party?



Around the Network
Moren on 08 January 2020
SpokenTruth said:

Can we forward this tweet to every media outlet in the US?

Yeah. Along with this:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/Florida.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/Wisconsin.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/Michigan.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/Arizona.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/Pennsylvania.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/NorthCarolina.html

Or we can simply wait to see who wins more primaries in 2020.



Moren on 08 January 2020
RolStoppable said:
SpokenTruth said:

I just verified and it's actually 23.

By winning primaries it refers to how many states Sanders won during the primary period in the 2016 election. Biden never won any states during his previous presidential bids. 

I see.

Maybe Biden was the victim of racism (both actual and reverse) and that won't be an issue this time. That could be why he's considered electable.

Bernie was in what came to be a two-way race that was very ideologically defined with an unpopular opponent, and still got trounced in the end.

Biden was in a very contested primary.



Moren on 08 January 2020
RolStoppable said:
Moren said:

Bernie was in what came to be a two-way race that was very ideologically defined with an unpopular opponent, and still got trounced in the end.

Biden was in a very contested primary.

So without digging any deeper into this thread, is it fair to assume that this thread is about supporters of DNC candidates who fight each other with fudged statistics?

Hey, all of my links are professional polls and aggregates.

But yeah pretty much.

Come back in a month so we can fight about results.



Moren on 08 January 2020
SpokenTruth said:
Moren said:

Bernie was in what came to be a two-way race that was very ideologically defined with an unpopular opponent, and still got trounced in the end.

Biden was in very contested primaries.

2016:
Sanders - 23 wins
Clinton - 34 wins

1988:
Biden - 0 (Withdrew before primaries).

2008:
Biden - 0 (Withdrew before primaries).

Thanks. I've corrected my statement. Still doesn't make any of what I said false.



Around the Network
Moren on 08 January 2020
RolStoppable said:
Moren said:

Hey, all of my links are professional polls and aggregates.

But yeah pretty much.

Come back in a month so we can fight about results.

It's in a month already? I guess the winner of the primaries is supposed to get about 10 months of a real campaign.

Is your prefered candidate in a good position to win most of the 57 states?

The first caucus is soon, and then the rest of primaries extend for months.

Yes. I'm giving Biden a 65% chance of winning, versus a 35% chance for Bernie, and 0% for everyone else.



Moren on 08 January 2020
RolStoppable said:
SpokenTruth said:

I see what you did there.

I am just going to assume that Americans use a similar system as the German football associations. Germany has only 16 Bundesländer, but 21 regional associations. So basically, the USA has a few states that are so big that they contain multiple primaries.

The primaries also encompass US territories like Puerto Rico.



Mnementh on 09 January 2020
Moren said:
RolStoppable said:

It's in a month already? I guess the winner of the primaries is supposed to get about 10 months of a real campaign.

Is your prefered candidate in a good position to win most of the 57 states?

The first caucus is soon, and then the rest of primaries extend for months.

Yes. I'm giving Biden a 65% chance of winning, versus a 35% chance for Bernie, and 0% for everyone else.

Wait, you give Warren a 0% chance?



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]

Mnementh on 09 January 2020
RolStoppable said:
Moren said:

The primaries also encompass US territories like Puerto Rico.

Okay, I'll let that slide as a good enough explanation.

Although I am kinda surprised that Puerto Rico and others are eligible to vote. Is there any particular reason why they aren't recognized as proper states?

In that case they would get two seats in the senate and at least one in the house. Which would shift majorities in these chambers. And as the current majorities in the chambers vote about the issue - this is difficult.

But although they are not proper states of the US, the parties decided to let them vote in the primaries, to decide the presidential candidate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implications_of_Puerto_Rico%27s_current_political_status

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territories_of_the_United_States

Last edited by Mnementh - on 09 January 2020

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]

Moren on 09 January 2020
Mnementh said:
Moren said:

The first caucus is soon, and then the rest of primaries extend for months.

Yes. I'm giving Biden a 65% chance of winning, versus a 35% chance for Bernie, and 0% for everyone else.

Wait, you give Warren a 0% chance?

If you had asked me a few months ago, I would have called her the most likely to win the nomination.

I think her moment has passed. She isn't doing stellar with minorities, and she's having to battle with Pete for the anti-Bernie/anti-Biden voters. I think Warren is the kind of candidate who won't survive a disappointing Iowa/NH.

I think she was doing a good job trying to balance the progressive/moderate wings of the party (unlike Kamala who tried to do the same thing and failed), but it is a pretty delicate balancing act, and I think at some point in her campaign she lost it.