2020 Democratic Party primary thread

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Good. I wish I only had to pay 7 grand. That's a gift. lol.

Uh, lots of people can't afford that.

I still wiped out the savings I earned on my salary that was the hourly equivalent of 80k on my last job from breaking my wrist. That was with insurance. If I still had those savings, I probably wouldn't have gone on unemployment.

 

[Jaguar]

Uh, lots of people can't afford that.

My post was about me. Can't you read?

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

My post was about me. Can't you read?

A lot of people in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania are not like you. These are states that Democrats need to gain from 2016 in order to win. The ideal candidate for 2020 is someone who can speak to the concerns of people in those states.

 

[Jaguar]

A lot of people in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania are not like you. These are states that Democrats need to gain from 2016 in order to win. The ideal candidate for 2020 is someone who can speak to the concerns of people in those states.

If you don't like my post, I do not care. Go make up a conspiracy theory if you're bored.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

If you don't like my post, I do not care. Go make up a conspiracy theory if you're bored.

It's not in Vlad's marching orders at the moment.

 

[Jaguar]

Iowans in Arizona meet for caucuses; Amy Klobuchar wins most votes in metro Phoenix
The Iowa caucus in St. Petersburg, where Amy Klobuchar won over the snowbirds
Amy Klobuchar shows up big at Port Charlotte’s first-ever Iowa Caucus
Amy Klobuchar receives most votes at Pensacola Iowa satellite caucus
Iowa Democrats in Tucson Amy Klobuchar had the most backers

Hm.

 

[Grand Admiral Crunch]

Is there something special about Iowa? Why would both the RNC/DNC agree to let some little state set the stage for the election season? Texas should take the lead.

I love Texas. It would benefit the nation for the candidates to be exposed to Texas culture and maybe hear lectures about Texas history. It would be an improvement in terms of diversity too. It would probably be harder for someone like Buttigieg, with low name recognition, to advance. Oh well.

To be fair, though, the states should be rotated every 4 years. It should be randomly decided which ones come in order and the state who was first last time should be bumped to the end of the list.

 

[Jaguar]

100% reporting.

Butti holds on to narrow lead over Sanders.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Iowans in Arizona meet for caucuses; Amy Klobuchar wins most votes in metro Phoenix
The Iowa caucus in St. Petersburg, where Amy Klobuchar won over the snowbirds
Amy Klobuchar shows up big at Port Charlotte’s first-ever Iowa Caucus
Amy Klobuchar receives most votes at Pensacola Iowa satellite caucus
Iowa Democrats in Tucson Amy Klobuchar had the most backers

Hm.

yeah, fuck people in Michigan for being too lazy to get the lead out of their water.... let's see if we can get Arizona and Georgia, even though Arizona only has 11 electoral votes to Michigan's 16.

Only Россия-матушка could inform me of the folly of such actions.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I love Texas. It would benefit the nation for the candidates to be exposed to Texas culture and maybe hear lectures about Texas history.

Like how they seceded from Mexico because of slavery?

 

[Jaguar]

yeah, fuck people in Michigan for being too lazy to get the lead out of their water....

I think not.

 

[Jaguar]

Voters deserve better than a choice between damage that’s reversible and damage that might not be.
Trump Hurts the Economy. Sanders Would Be Worse.

It would bring a class warrior into the Oval Office, sending a corrosive message that the government aims to punish success and is willing to use legislation and executive action to do so. The senator’s position is clear: “Billionaires should not exist.” This is exactly the wrong message. A president should be rooting for more billionaires to exist. Sanders would be trying to make society more just and fair. But he would do the opposite.

Sanders’s default view is that the government is the solution to any problem, and by being so eager to redistribute income today, he endangers the future generations that would pay for his programs through slower economic growth. This change in the relationship between the individual and the state would reduce economic dynamism, dampen risk-taking and sap the energy of workers and businesses.

On balance, Sanders is the more significant threat to the U.S. economy, in part because the damage he would inflict is likely to be more difficult to reverse.

But here’s my real conclusion: The U.S. deserves a better choice.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Voters deserve better than a choice between damage that’s reversible and damage that might not be.
Trump Hurts the Economy. Sanders Would Be Worse.

The website owned by one of the guys running against him? You can do better.

 

[Jaguar]

The website owned by one of the guys running against him?

My post stands. Deal with it, Bernie Bro.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

My post stands. Deal with it, Bernie Bro.

I wonder if the person who wrote that would keep their job if they said that Bloomberg was not a good choice for President. But that's freedom for you.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Voters deserve better than a choice between damage that’s reversible and damage that might not be.
Trump Hurts the Economy. Sanders Would Be Worse.

 

[anticlimatic]

Voters deserve better than a choice between damage that's reversible and damage that might not be. Trump Hurts the Economy. Sanders Would Be Worse.

One huge reason millennials love gray-haired candidates like Bernie Sanders - MarketWatch

If we don't try to elect Sanders who else is going to pay for your favorite generation's college, debt, medical bills, housing, onesees, pacifiers, etc?

 

[Grand Admiral Crunch]

Like how they seceded from Mexico because of slavery?

That's just how people not from Texas understand it. You leave me alone now. I'm going to go cry or cut things with scissors.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I love Texas. It would benefit the nation for the candidates to be exposed to Texas culture and maybe hear lectures about Texas history. It would be an improvement in terms of diversity too. It would probably be harder for someone like Buttigieg, with low name recognition, to advance. Oh well.

To be fair, though, the states should be rotated every 4 years. It should be randomly decided which ones come in order and the state who was first last time should be bumped to the end of the list.

I think every state should hold their primaries simultaneously

OR

it should be scheduled so that primaries are held in order of number of delegates, starting with the states and territories with the least number of delegates and gradually working up to the states with the most delegates.

I also think all of the primary ballots should be preference ballots, and delegates awarded based on weight of preference. While we're at it, let's have preference ballots in general elections as well. This creates instant run-off, since turnout almost always declines in a non-instant runoff election.

Another way the parties might consider ordering the primaries would be on how states voted in the last Presidential election. Chances of South Carolina going blue are fairly low, so really I don't see why that state's votes should hold as much weight for the democratic party's selection process. Iowa went red last time, therefore their democratic caucus would get pushed back considerably in the 2020 primary schedule. If they go blue in 2020, then they can get bumped back up in priority for 2024's democratic primary process.

Also do away with any winner-take-all bullshit like the republicans do in some states. (Winner take-all should also be obsoleted from the electoral college system. If they're going to keep that system then electoral votes should be awarded proportionally. Say a state has 10 electoral votes. A candidate wins 40 percent of the popular vote in that state, they get 4 electoral votes. A candidate gets 10 percent of the vote in that state, then they get 1 electoral vote. and so on)

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

That's just how people not from Texas understand it. You leave me alone now. I'm going to go cry or cut things with scissors.

They also seceded from the USA because of slavery a few years later. This isn't an outsider's perspective, it's pretty clearly stated in their articles of secession, as it is stated in the articles of secession for multiple other former confederate states.

I'll never understand why there even exists a debate, to this day, over why the southern states actually seceded. We have first hand, written records of why most of them seceded and why the subsequent war was waged.