2020 Democratic Party primary thread

[Doctor Cringelord]

Uh, don't you remember when liberals were overjoyed when Trump won the nomination because they thought he couldn't win? Not that I mind if you vote for him, it just may not have the effect you intend.

I had a sneaking suspicion he'd win way back in 2015. Everyone thought he'd drop out way before the primaries. He didn't. Then they thought one of the other GOP contenders would beat him, but he kept winning primary after primary. Then they thought there'd be a massive resistance of never-Trumpers who would usurp and replace him with Mitt or Kasich. Didn't happen. Then they thought Hillary would defeat him with ease. Didn't happen.

Actually I also remember liberals saying Dubya didn't have a chance in hell. People thought McCain would defeat him with ease in the 2000 primaries. Then they thought Gore could coast into victory in the general.


Point being never underestimate candidates, especially the ones most easily painted as crazies or out-of-touch old socialists, as Trump and Bernie have been, respectively. I'd warn [MENTION=20113]Tellenbach[/MENTION] to be very, very careful what he wishes for. For that matter, the dem seniors who supposedly hate Bernie...well, there's always a chance that loss in votes in a general election might be mitigated/compensated for by some surprise demographic nobody would expect to have supported Bernie in mass numbers. Not unprecedented, not impossible, not even implausible.

 

[Maou]

The Jame O'Keefe tweet? Although I do think it's funny that you fake news! or it's a joke! when it comes to Trump and the stories his minions post but this - OMG TRUE!

Is James O’Keefe Good Now? | The New Republic

Lmao, ofc its the same for both parties. Do you deny that any time people post damming evidence, that its dismissed as fake news? Its almost as if it doesn't matter either way.

I only posted it to share the story and see how many people would reply against it.

 

[ceecee]

Lmao, ofc its the same for both parties. Do you deny that any time people post damming evidence, that its dismissed as fake news? Its almost as if it doesn't matter either way.

I only posted it to share the story and see how many people would reply against it.

I'm sure you did.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Does anybody follow the Iowa Electronic Markets? IIRC they've correctly predicted the winners in every presidential election since the 1988. Caveat, they predicted Gore in 2000 and Clinton in 2016, however they did technically win more popular votes than their opponents.

Prediction markets aren't always right, but they tend to be more accurate than polling, especially in the last 10 or so years that we've seen traditional polling become increasingly unreliable.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

‘Middle Class’ Joe Biden has a corruption problem – it makes him a weak candidate | Zephyr Teachout | Opinion | The Guardian

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

‘Middle Class’ Joe Biden has a corruption problem – it makes him a weak candidate | Zephyr Teachout | Opinion | The Guardian

Great article. Low turnout/enthusiasm has always benefitted republican candidates over their opponents. Nominating Biden will be a grave error.

This is like watching a slow motion train wreck.

 

[Jaguar]

‘Middle Class’ Joe Biden has a corruption problem – it makes him a weak candidate | Zephyr Teachout | Opinion | The Guardian

Sanders Apologizes to Biden for Surrogate’s Critique
The opinion piece by Zephyr Teachout accused Joe Biden of having “a big corruption problem.”

Sanders Apologizes to Biden for Surrogate’s Critique - The New York Times

Great article.

It was a hit piece by one of Bernie's surrogates.
“It is absolutely not my view that Joe is corrupt in any way. And I’m sorry that that op-ed appeared,” Mr. Sanders told CBS News.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Sanders Apologizes to Biden for Surrogate’s Critique
The opinion piece by Zephyr Teachout accused Joe Biden of having “a big corruption problem.”

Sanders Apologizes to Biden for Surrogate’s Critique - The New York Times



It was a hit piece by one of Bernie's surrogates.
“It is absolutely not my view that Joe is corrupt in any way. And I’m sorry that that op-ed appeared,” Mr. Sanders told CBS News.

How does that invalidate the opinions expressed in that piece? If you've studied Trump's MO, you ought to know the strategy mentioned in that piece is likely what he'll use against Biden in the GE

In your own words, please.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

How does that invalidate the opinions expressed in that piece? If you've studied Trump's MO, you ought to know the strategy mentioned in that piece is likely what he'll use against Biden in the GE

In your own words, please.

According to him, Biden is a shoo-in because he's the most qualified since he has the most experience. Because that always works.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

According to him, Biden is a shoo-in because he's the most qualified since he has the most experience. Because that always works.

No one cares about experience. That's an absolute, obviously some do, but not enough to sway elections. I'm not saying they shouldn't. But they generally vote on emotions and warm feelings.

Lack of experience didn't stop people from supporting W in 2000, or Palin on the McCain '08 ticket, or Obama in '08, or Trump in 2016.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I had a sneaking suspicion he'd win way back in 2015. Everyone thought he'd drop out way before the primaries. He didn't. Then they thought one of the other GOP contenders would beat him, but he kept winning primary after primary. Then they thought there'd be a massive resistance of never-Trumpers who would usurp and replace him with Mitt or Kasich. Didn't happen. Then they thought Hillary would defeat him with ease. Didn't happen.

Actually I also remember liberals saying Dubya didn't have a chance in hell. People thought McCain would defeat him with ease in the 2000 primaries. Then they thought Gore could coast into victory in the general.


Point being never underestimate candidates, especially the ones most easily painted as crazies or out-of-touch old socialists, as Trump and Bernie have been, respectively. I'd warn [MENTION=20113]Tellenbach[/MENTION] to be very, very careful what he wishes for. For that matter, the dem seniors who supposedly hate Bernie...well, there's always a chance that loss in votes in a general election might be mitigated/compensated for by some surprise demographic nobody would expect to have supported Bernie in mass numbers. Not unprecedented, not impossible, not even implausible.

In addition:

Well, I know some senior citizens who won't vote for him in the primary (and it has more to do with "electability" and also a feeling that he's responsible for Hillary losing than socialism per se), but certainly would vote for him in the general over Trump.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

In addition:

Well, I know some senior citizens who won't vote for him in the primary (and it has more to do with "electability" and also a feeling that he's responsible for Hillary losing than socialism per se), but certainly would vote for him in the general over Trump.

My grandmother said she would. The same grandmother who used to listen to Rush Limbaugh and railed on about big government socialists. She couldn't stomach Trump and pulled the lever for Hillary. The same grandmother who hated the Clintons back in the 90s. I'm shocked by the number of supposedly conservative older people I've run into expressing enthusiasm for Bernie since he became a household name.

A lot of middle American conservative types, we forget, used to be democrats back when the party actually talked about unions and labor, OR they're at least old enough to remember their working class parents being democrats back in the 30s or earlier.

I think Bernie reminds a lot of these older people about that unicorn that used to be the old school pro-labor democrat.


He's sort of a modern day William Jennings Bryan.



ON THE FLIP OF THIS


I think that former Republicans who feel all giddy about Biden like him because he reminds them of the old school Republicans like Dewey and Ike who their affluent suburban parents voted for.

Even if the class divide ends up not being spoken of much in 2020 by the pundits, I have a feeling it will play a huge role in deciding the coming election.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

No one cares about experience. That's an absolute, obviously some do, but not enough to sway elections. I'm not saying they shouldn't. But they generally vote on emotions and warm feelings.

That should be obvious to anyone paying attention to at least past 20 years of politics. But maybe that's just because we lack the expertise of the political consultants like the ones who ran Hillary's (and currently run Biden's) campaign.

 

[Jaguar]

How does that invalidate the opinions expressed in that piece? If you've studied Trump's MO, you ought to know the strategy mentioned in that piece is likely what he'll use against Biden in the GE

Use what against Joe - taking donations? Wow! "Corruption!"

No one cares about experience.

I do. Do you think they let just any asshole off the street be the CEO of a major oil company? Of course not. Then why should any asshole off the street be the CEO of a 'company' called The USA?
Hiring a real estate agent for POTUS has not worked out well.

 

[Jaguar]

any time people post damming evidence, its dismissed as fake news?

Sure. Donnie boy does it all the time. "FAKE NEWS! FAKE NEWS! FAKE NEWS!"

 

[Maou]

Sure. Donnie boy does it all the time. "FAKE NEWS! FAKE NEWS! FAKE NEWS!"

Trump may have coined the term in its popular state, but it has always existed. Therefor nothing new, just no one had the audacity to call it out. My point is that both sides do it, so its pointless to bring it up in conversation. As it tends to go nowhere, nor provide anything to the conversation. People tend to spend more time debating the validity of the article, rather than what it says. Sure, an article might be completely false, and the writer might be a piece of shit. But that doesn't mean that that same writer can't produce a work of fact, or that a completely credible source can produce fake news. All and all, it comes down to the ability to see through the farces and know what pieces are in play. And honestly, the news isn't what you should be looking at period.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

Trump may have coined the term in its popular state, but it has always existed. Therefor nothing new, just no one had the audacity to call it out. My point is that both sides do it, so its pointless to bring it up in conversation. As it tends to go nowhere, nor provide anything to the conversation. People tend to spend more time debating the validity of the article, rather than what it says. Sure, an article might be completely false, and the writer might be a piece of shit. But that doesn't mean that that same writer can't produce a work of fact, or that a completely credible source can produce fake news. All and all, it comes down to the ability to see through the farces and know what pieces are in play. And honestly, the news isn't what you should be looking at period.

It was actually coined by the Washington Post who published a story about a new website just after the 2016 election called ProporNot. It listed a bunch of non MSM journalists and websites as fake news propaganda outfits linked to Russia, none of which was true. The article was quickly retracted and Trump took the "fake news" line and dumped it all over the MSM hacks.

How many times did they say, "The Walls are closing in" or such garbage? How many times did they breathlessly claim Trump was done and they finally got him, only to fail once again?

The MSM has really been the Wiley E. Coyote to Trump's roadrunner for the last 4 years.

 

[Jaguar]

Trump may have coined the term in its popular state, but it has always existed. Therefor nothing new, just no one had the audacity to call it out. My point is that both sides do it, so its pointless to bring it up in conversation. As it tends to go nowhere, nor provide anything to the conversation. People tend to spend more time debating the validity of the article, rather than what it says. Sure, an article might be completely false, and the writer might be a piece of shit. But that doesn't mean that that same writer can't produce a work of fact, or that a completely credible source can produce fake news. All and all, it comes down to the ability to see through the farces and know what pieces are in play. And honestly, the news isn't what you should be looking at period.

Actually, he stole it from CNN and used it on them in retaliation for three years and counting. And if you ever turned on the TV and watched what was happening in the world, you would even know what day it was and why a CNN reporter called Donnie's news conference with stacks and stacks of blank pieces of paper piled up on a table, "fake news." Seeing through farces is what some of us did decades ago dear, that's how long Donnie has been bullshitting people in business and ripping them off. It's what grifters do to get ahead when they possess no real talent. One way or another they go after what they want, even if it means trying to steal a house from a little old lady in the 90's in order to turn it into a parking lot. Good thing she won. Donnie lost.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Use what against Joe - taking donations? Wow! "Corruption!"

No. Telling a room of wealthy investors "nothing will change for you if I'm elected". While not necessarily indicative of corruption, it will be taken as indicative of a desire to maintain the economic status quo, something that isn't going to sit well with your average middle or lower class voter who will be likely to look at Biden's long service in the government and wonder what he's done to take the strain off their shoulders while a few fat cats continued to get richer benefitting from laws passed on his watch.

that's the sort of crap that hurt Romney in 2012. Remember the leaked phone video that bartender or waiter dude took?

I do.

As do I, but my point was that I don't think most voters do care about experience. A look at recent past elections should make this obvious. GOP base voters who cared about experience would not have gone apeshit gaga for Palin as VP nominee, nor would they have backed Trump or even George W Bush in such large numbers. Or Reagan, if you go back a little further. Or go even further back and populist war hero Andrew Jackson was more liked than JQ Adams, despite Adams being the smarter, more experienced candidate. Same goes for voters who currently support Mayor Pete, or those who supported Obama. Warm feels always "trump" experience and length of candidates' resumes.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

Shaky Joe Biden, Billionaire Bloomberg, and the Global Race to the Bottom | Black Agenda Report

...
U.S. oligarchs have begun to panic at the prospect that they will lose control of the other half of the American electoral duopoly. With the GOP in Donald Trump’s unreliable hands, the Democrats four years ago became the de facto ruling class party, and thus the favored brand of the national security state and most of the corporate media. Although there is not even one genuine anti-imperialist among congressional Democrats – certainly not Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren -- the party’s popular base is in revolt against a 40-year domestic austerity regime that offers nothing but ever-declining real wages, non-existent job security and a visibly decaying nation-scape. It has finally dawned on most Americans that they have been conscripted into a Global Race to the Bottom, and they want out of the downward spiral.

....

Despite their vice-grip on media and corporate donor control of the Democratic Party machinery, all the oligarchs’ eggs are in Joe Biden’s basket this election year. The numbers show that, were it not for all-consuming fears of Trump among older Black voters, who cling to the notion of Biden’s “electability,” Sanders and Warren would collectively sweep the primaries. The corporate consensus on austerity – and, therefore, the shape of capitalism, at home and globally -- is in dire peril. That’s why Michael Bloomberg has thrown his $55 billion hat into the ring – not because he has any prospect of winning the nomination (his presence in fact helps the anti-austerity candidates), but as the first stage in what Bloomberg is determined will be an epic battle to preserve the austerity regime and its hold on the Democratic Party machinery – the favored party of the ruling class as long as Trump runs the GOP.
....