Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee


used2b

Recommended Posts

Its a Biden v. Warren race now. The other three, Bernie, Harris and Pete, need one or both of them to implode to win.

Bernie needs Warren to implode to have a shot. Kamala needs Biden to implode to have a shot. Pete needs both to implode and then still trails Bernie and Kamala so he probably needs them to implode too.

Edited by JimmyJames
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe it’s just me but it already kinda feels like Warren is the leader of the Democratic Party now.  Albeit unofficial, power resides where people believe it to be. 

Compared to six months ago, Warren now wields massive influence over other democrats. 

Pelosi is the official leader of the Democratic Party but you’d have to be aloof not to see Warren pushing from the outside. 

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, Liz is my number two and all but she’s been a dick about Hillary much more recently than 15 years ago.

There’s still a not small number of Democratic primary voters who are still PISSED about the way Hillary was treated and those bitches can hold a grudge.

I’m a dick about Hillary all the time, because she’s a bad politician whose ambition, insecurity and strategic myopia gave us Donald Trump. And what are the PUMA types going to do? Vote for Donald Trump like they voted for McCain in 08?
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Here we go...

 

Quoting my own post here...

"Right now M4A is a framework, and it doesn't have the details.."

"lot of work to figure out the transition"

 

Like I've been saying, she is not "with Bernie on Medicare For All".  He has a very specific plan with clear transition timelines. She is co-opting the title and will pivot to her own, softer version. I'm sure I will LIKE her plan, but the deception is not good. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

She is co-opting the title and will pivot to her own, softer version. I'm sure I will LIKE her plan, but the deception is not good. 

Of course! That’s why she tweets multiple times a day about shutting down for profit health insurance. It’s 3D chess so she can stab everyone in back later down the road. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

hahahahaha she knew the obvious answer but doesn't want to piss off the Dem establishment.

It's absolutely hilarious that the thing the Dems have decided to finally go after Trump with also shows them to be profoundly corrupt.

She should have just said no, under my plan that wouldn't be allowed without roping in the Bidens. I don't think anyone would have seen it as an unfair shot at Biden (as she was just directly answering a question). And that non-answer is way off-brand for her "I'm a straight shooter who will end corruption" brand. I don't think anyone will care, but I agree with you that it was weak sauce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Quoting my own post here...

"Right now M4A is a framework, and it doesn't have the details.."

"lot of work to figure out the transition"

 

Like I've been saying, she is not "with Bernie on Medicare For All".  He has a very specific plan with clear transition timelines. She is co-opting the title and will pivot to her own, softer version. I'm sure I will LIKE her plan, but the deception is not good. 

 

Yep. "Make sure people who need it are covered right away". She's tap dancing right on that line between being called a shitlib centrist and going all-in on full M4A. 

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Of course! That’s why she tweets multiple times a day about shutting down for profit health insurance. It’s 3D chess so she can stab everyone in back later down the road. 

 

"No one should be able to make a profit off of denying people health care" =/= "shutting down for profit health insurance"

Do you think it's just a coincidence that she hasn't actually stated directly that she is in favor of removing private insurers from the equation, despite speaking on healthcare multiple times daily? It's obviously intentional. I don't know if it's that she hasn't figured out her exact plan yet and is still working through it, or she's trying to be viable enough for the left on healthcare while not committing to full M4A in the general (this is what I believe, but not 100% convinced).

But it's not an accident. I'm sure of that. She's too smart.

Edited by BradInATX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BradInATX said:

She should have just said no, under my plan that wouldn't be allowed without roping in the Bidens. I don't think anyone would have seen it as an unfair shot at Biden (as she was just directly answering a question). And that non-answer is way off-brand for her "I'm a straight shooter who will end corruption" brand. I don't think anyone will care, but I agree with you that it was weak sauce.

If, as Hugo states, her entire agenda and platform is removing corruption from politics, that should have been a no-brainer, fast break 360 slam dunk answer. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Js1 said:

If, as Hugo states, her entire agenda and platform is removing corruption from politics, that should have been a no-brainer, fast break 360 slam dunk answer. 

Exactly. She fumbled that one. I've become a big Warren fan but I'm pretty disappointed in that one. It was a softball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bernie is going to say the same thing as Liz regarding the obvious corruption of the Biden family because Bernard has Senate Decorum Poisoning just like the rest of the old people in there. It is profoundly disappointing.

Some younger candidate is going to throw it in Joe's face and Bernie/Liz will grumble about the unkindness of it all and I will cry into my bourbon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-26/warren-and-sanders-share-union-endorsement-campaign-update

 

Elizabeth Warren supporters allege conspiracy, harass the union leadership on social media, and riot in the streets.  

Wait, no they didn’t because they’re not petulant entitled whiny little bitches.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pence at 100:1 seems like a solid dark horse bet. If Trump were impeached/removed or resigned and Pence came out of it without any bruises, I think he's >50% to win the general election. Which means I'd just need Trump's removal/resignation chances to be 1 in 30 or so for it to be +EV

Edited by BradInATX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

Pence at 100:1 seems like a solid dark horse bet. If Trump were impeached/removed or resigned and Pence came out of it without any bruises, I think he's >50% to win the general election. Which means I'd just need Trump's removal/resignation chances to be 1 in 30 or so for it to be +EV

I do not think Pence is >50% to win it all.

A) His extreme social conservativism combined with embracing Trumpism is going to further turn off moderate suburban women.  

B) The Trumpkin base will be PISSED and unmotivated.  They don't vote for Republicans - they vote for Trump.  I can see them sitting it out altogether or leaving the top line blank.  

C) Mike Pence inspires literally nobody.  He has the charisma of a pencil eraser.  

E) Mike Pence is not going to turn out blue collar WWC voters to vote Republican in the Midwest.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I do not think Pence is >50% to win it all.

A) His extreme social conservativism combined with embracing Trumpism is going to further turn off moderate suburban women.  

B) The Trumpkin base will be PISSED and unmotivated.  They don't vote for Republicans - they vote for Trump.  I can see them sitting it out altogether or leaving the top line blank.  

C) Mike Pence inspires literally nobody.  He has the charisma of a pencil eraser.  

E) Mike Pence is not going to turn out blue collar WWC voters to vote Republican in the Midwest.  

I generally agree. But I don't think we know for sure how Trumpublicans would react to Pence. They could walk away or fully jump on board depending on how it would unfold.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Anyone hinging their long-term vision on the eternal conversion of white suburbanites/professionals to progressive values is an idiot. They are on a temporary vacation because Trump is gross and dumb. Josh Hawley will having them baying for concentration camps in 2024.

Long-term, I think how progressive values are presented to white suburbanites/professionals will determine when/if they eventually convert. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...