Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee


used2b

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I'm pretty blown away that the Bros are apparently taking their talking points from Fox News now.  My god, through the looking glass indeed.

I think a more accurate representation would be that the Bernie bros thought Joe was dead in the water and were preparing for a fight with Pete or Klobs and/or Bloomberg. Now that they have all fallen and Joe is the guy to beat the bros are saying “wait, I thought we all agreed that Joe had dementia. Now you all think he’s Joe cool again?”  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bonnieblue said:

Vote your conscience in the primary, vote blue in the general. That's it. Stop trying to play pundit, because no one has any idea how this will play out one way or another. This will be a game of incredibly small margins. Bernie may turn some additional people out, Joe might too. Bernie may scare some people away, Joe might not inspire them to go vote. Bernie is not going to be able to turn the US into a socialist haven where all of his wish list items will suddenly become true. He might get one big thing done. Joe is not going to completely  sell the people out to corporate interests and will actually probably succeed in making some incremental progressive gains. No one has any clue what the correct path is for a dem victory, and either lane will be 10,000x better than what will happen if Trump wins. So stop bickering like children and just vote and get your neighbors/family/friends to vote.

this is a REALLY good post and should be on every page. 

truth

but it's fun to debate at times

Edited by mchookem
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prediction: Warren's numbers today will be lower than previous polling projected, obviously due to the Bernie-Biden matchup that has materialized quickly over the last few days.  Bloomberg also underperforms, so she drops out later this week and endorses Bernie. Game on. 

Sanders generally has a shitty group of surrogates (outside of AOC and Omar), but Liz would clearly be fantastic. He needs her badly. 

 

Edited by Hank Kingsley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Prediction: Warren's numbers today will be lower than previous polling projected, obviously due to the Bernie-Biden matchup that has materialized quickly over the last few days.  Bloomberg also underperforms, so she drops out later this week and endorses Bernie. Game on. 

Sanders generally has a shitty group of surrogates, but Liz would clearly be fantastic. He needs her badly. 

 

That small bump would be more than offset by Bloomberg endorsing Biden. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Will except for the fact that Biden has a history of selling out people to corporate interests. 

I mean, I did say "completely".

I don't think he's going to be some progressive warrior, but I think he would seek to get some progressive items accomplished given the temperature of this election. Inversely, although I think Bernie has great positions on progressive issues, he's not going to be able to get very many of them enacted given the makeup of congress and his stance on the filibuster. So while they have very different stances on the issues, I think the actual outcomes of their hypothetical presidencies aren't going to look too dissimilar (which is why you should vote (and convince your friends to vote) for either if they get the nomination).  I'm not telling progressives to vote for Biden in the primaries or vice versa, just eventually get your act together for the nominee in the general as either one probably won't be too bad (although both will be worse than Liz, obviously 😋).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Literally never heard of Matt Stoller in my life. I am not a subscriber to Chapo Trap House.

But please, guys, keep telling me all about the Sanders movement because all it does is reveal the carefully curated toxic social media worlds you've created for yourselves to fester in.

6 minutes ago, bonnieblue said:

So while they have very different stances on the issues, I think the actual outcomes of their hypothetical presidencies aren't going to look too dissimilar...

I follow what you're saying here in terms of Biden and Sanders as individual leaders, but the huge difference is the larger machine they will build.

Bernie's movement is wide and consists of grassroots advocacy. Biden's is going to be like Obama's, a thin band of extremely rich, largely work financiers. Another huge factor is who they put into positions of power. Like Barack, Joe will put Goldman Sachs in charge of the treasury and fiscal policy. He'll put healthcare execs (or their lackeys) in charge of that kind of policy.

The current Democratic establishment doesn't build a bench. Bernie will.

Just now, David Dennison said:

That's it?

Oof.

Pathetic recovery, David.

Tell the class what you thought you were setting up. Don't lie.

Just now, 6th Street said:

Bernie has a history of selling out to the NRA. See how that works?

No he doesn't. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

Bernie has a history of selling out to the NRA. See how that works?

Are you asking if I see how terrible posting with no connection to things that have actually been said works? If so, yes. Yes I do. But I've seen your work before so it's expected. 

Here's a hint: what in bonnieblue's initial post is addressed in your non sequitur? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

Are you asking if I see how terrible posting with no connection to things that have actually been said works? If so, yes. Yes I do. But I've seen your work before so it's expected. 

Here's a hint: what in bonnieblue's initial post is addressed in your non sequitur? 

Throwing out a lazy argument accusing Obama/Biden "selling out to corporate interests" was the non-sequitur du jour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 6th Street said:

Throwing out a lazy argument accusing Obama/Biden "selling out to corporate interests" was the non-sequitur du jour.

Obama put Wall Street in charge of TARP and it became a firehose of public cash into private capital hands.

Biden's entire Senate career was smashing workers and families to keep them in eternal debt to the banks and creditors that run Delaware.

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

I wasn't setting up anything. His endorsement record isn't that good, particularly in house and gubernatorial races.

Shameful lies, David, you and I both know the talking point from the debates you were trying to bring up.

#sad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Obama put Wall Street in charge of TARP and it became a firehose of public cash into private capital hands.

Biden's entire Senate career was smashing workers and families to keep them in eternal debt to the banks and creditors that run Delaware.

Shameful lies, David, you and I both know the talking point from the debates you were trying to bring up.

#sad

I was pointing out why the party wants nothing to do with him politically. The candidates he supports don't win much. 

But you don't have to convince me. I already voted for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

Throwing out a lazy argument accusing Obama/Biden "selling out to corporate interests" was the non-sequitur du jour.

You are really bad at reading. I said nothing about Obama and it wasn't a non sequitur because I was responding to a comment specifically about Biden selling out to corporate interests. Your ability to be terrible at posting regardless of the subject matter is impressive. 

Edited by Huckleberry
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Literally never heard of Matt Stoller in my life. I am not a subscriber to Chapo Trap House.

But please, guys, keep telling me all about the Sanders movement because all it does is reveal the carefully curated toxic social media worlds you've created for yourselves to fester in.

I follow what you're saying here in terms of Biden and Sanders as individual leaders, but the huge difference is the larger machine they will build.

Bernie's movement is wide and consists of grassroots advocacy. Biden's is going to be like Obama's, a thin band of extremely rich, largely work financiers. Another huge factor is who they put into positions of power. Like Barack, Joe will put Goldman Sachs in charge of the treasury and fiscal policy. He'll put healthcare execs (or their lackeys) in charge of that kind of policy.

The current Democratic establishment doesn't build a bench. Bernie will.

Pathetic recovery, David.

Tell the class what you thought you were setting up. Don't lie.

No he doesn't. :)

I have concerns with both on these points.

-Positions of power: obviously some concern with Biden (as noted above), concerns with Bernie as I'm not a fan of many he surrounds himself with either. Hopeful both will listen to their better angels.

-Bench/movement: Bern's movement is awesome, but both need to be willing to allow space on the bench for moderates (Bernie) and progressives (Biden) or the bench won't be big enough to get anything done.

 

Again, don't know anything, but they both can probably be better than what we have now, so let's just hope we can get everyone else to think so too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The variance between young and old Democrats is about the only shred of optimism I can pull out of this heap of shit-stained rags. Bernie is different not just in degree from the rest of the candidates but in kind, and little by little, the young will continue to foster his ideals as they age.

Used to be you could say "Hell they will. Once they get a job and a mortgage and have a couple of kids they'll turn Republican real quick."

Well, guess what. Their jobs suck, they're in debt, and they can't afford a down payment and what kids they have are mistakes they can't afford. 

Every win for the establishment merely forestalls a more severe correction to come. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If Biden is close enough after today's results he will be the favorite to win the nomination. 

Bernie had to know that a coalition would eventually be built against him. He was fortunate enough that it came together late, but here we are. 

There are obviously a shitload of D voters who are not excited about a Biden presidency. Well past time to start figuring out a way to welcome and embrace these people that doesn't involve conspiratorial rhetoric about the Dem establishment. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Obama put Wall Street in charge of TARP and it became a firehose of public cash into private capital hands.

Biden's entire Senate career was smashing workers and families to keep them in eternal debt to the banks and creditors that run Delaware.

Shameful lies, David, you and I both know the talking point from the debates you were trying to bring up.

#sad

TARP was a highly successful infusion that stabilized the capital markets to enable lending to continue. Every cent + interest was paid back to treasury in full. It was a key catalyst for the roughly 8 years of economic expansion under the Obama administration. 

I would also add the $80B bailout to GM/F/FCA saved thousands of jobs in the automotive industry in highly vulnerable part of the country. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Coronavirus is going to come in with a HUGE assist to the brokered convention crew.

 

Ignoring the delegates for a moment. The convention is scheduled for July and the virus may go dormant by that time, but are there contingency plans for the candidates themselves?

Given that Warren is now the youngest candidate and even she is in the threshold of an extended potential recovery time, this could be rather problematic for the party with the other three as well.

 

Edit to include--and if the virus resurfaces in the fall and a nominee has been selected, the chaos that would ensue should that nominee become ill or worse, what then? (as you can tell, I am a prepare for the worst, hope for the best kind of person)

Edited by Mrs Whiggins
Addition
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

TARP was a highly successful infusion that stabilized the capital markets to enable lending to continue. Every cent + interest was paid back to treasury in full. It was a key catalyst for the roughly 8 years of economic expansion under the Obama administration. 

I would also add the $80B bailout to GM/F/FCA saved thousands of jobs in the automotive industry in highly vulnerable part of the country. 

 

Which turned right around and voted for Trump

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

TARP was a highly successful infusion that stabilized the capital markets to enable lending to continue. Every cent + interest was paid back to treasury in full. It was a key catalyst for the roughly 8 years of economic expansion under the Obama administration. 

I would also add the $80B bailout to GM/F/FCA saved thousands of jobs in the automotive industry in highly vulnerable part of the country. 

 

TARP to infinity is welfare for the wealthy. Commie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

TARP was a highly successful infusion that stabilized the capital markets to enable lending to continue. Every cent + interest was paid back to treasury in full. It was a key catalyst for the roughly 8 years of economic expansion under the Obama administration. 

I would also add the $80B bailout to GM/F/FCA saved thousands of jobs in the automotive industry in highly vulnerable part of the country. 

 

Corporate welfare: good 

Actual welfare: bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

uh, yeah, they sorta are. welfare goes to people. corporate welfare goes to corporations.corporations are not people, despite what scotus says

I meant you can do both successfully. 

Obama passed TARP and the automotive bailout, while also addressing key tenets of social welfare such as Obamacare. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember when the market tanked last week and it was partly because Bernie was surging? Now we have a huge rate cut, Biden surging, and Donald telling people who don't have health insurance to pound sand. With that dream scenario for the 1%, their market is down almost 800 points right now. Lets stop fucking listening to the moderates who brought us this shit show. But socialism will ruin us! 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

The variance between young and old Democrats is about the only shred of optimism I can pull out of this heap of shit-stained rags. Bernie is different not just in degree from the rest of the candidates but in kind, and little by little, the young will continue to foster his ideals as they age.  Used to be you could say "Hell they will. Once they get a job and a mortgage and have a couple of kids they'll turn Republican real quick.". Well, guess what. Their jobs suck, they're in debt, and they can't afford a down payment and what kids they have are mistakes they can't afford.  Every win for the establishment merely forestalls a more severe correction to come. 

giphy.gif

Edited by LTtxfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a parallel universe, where the US is a a Parliamentary Republic, the Labour Party with Bernie Sanders as its leader got a solid 14% of the vote in 2016.  With a ground-swelling of support with grassroots campaigning from his legions of Bernie Bros, along with a growing number of disaffected Center-Left Liberal Democrat voters, they are optimistic about their chances to get as much as 18% in 2020.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dbeasy said:

 


This debate has been raging on this thread for months. What’s more impactful, Sanders driving more liberal voters or Biden driving more swing voters. I continue to believe that Trump is so hated both will drive enough to win.

 

I agree with your premise -- that's the question.  But you know that I disagree with your answer -- in fact, I think that either path costs enough voters from the other faction that the Dem was always doomed to lose to Trump.  The Democratic party is a split and broken party.  It can't win a national election.

Eight years, folks.  Get used to it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...