Serious 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

[eifo]

On that note, the most worrying part of Bernie winning the nom is that he will lose to Trump. I personally think he'll get crushed on his own merits, but even if you think he can put up an actual fight, that goes down the drain when Bloomberg runs 3rd party and splits the vote.

Bloomberg will not run as 3rd party candidate. In fact, he pledged to spend hundreds of millions promoting whoever the candidate ends up being - including Sanders and Warren

The former New York City mayor plans to continue paying hundreds of staffers and funding his digital operation to defeat Trump even if he's not the nominee. Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s massive campaign apparatus and an army of some 500 staffers will march on through the general election in November even if he loses the Democratic nomination, campaign officials tell NBC News, shifting their efforts toward working to elect whomever the party selects to face President Donald Trump. (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...n-effort-through-november-even-if-he-n1113421).

On a different note, it's disgusting just how much political power rich people have in the US - Bloomberg included.

If another Democrat wins the nomination, the Bloomberg-funded staffers won’t work directly for the nominee, which would constitute an in-kind contribution by Bloomberg to the campaign that would exceed federal contribution limits. Rather, those staffers would be paid by an independent funding vehicle supported by Bloomberg, officials said. By law, those staffers and Hawkfish would not be able to coordinate their activities with the nominee’s campaign. The arrangement would likely be similar to how super PACs, which can accept unlimited contributions, can spend limitless sums working to defeat or elect candidates as long as they act independently.
In states where the Democratic nominee will be competing in the fall, the Bloomberg staffers could play a critical role driving up Democratic turnout, in line with the former mayor’s pledge to spend more than $15 million this election on get-out-the-vote efforts. They could also organize their own events, ad campaigns and other organizing tactics in support of the nominee, so long as it’s not coordinated with the campaign. Bloomberg already has a super PAC, Independence USA PAC, that could be used to facilitate the effort. In 2018, Bloomberg spent more than $110 million through that PAC to help elect Democratic candidates for the House, according to the PAC. The vast majority of those candidates won their races. (same source^).

In Chomsky's words: In the United States, one of the main topics of academic political science is the study of attitudes and policy and their correlation. The study of attitudes is reasonably easy in the United States: heavily-polled society, pretty serious and accurate polls, and policy you can see, and you can compare them. And the results are interesting. In the work that's essentially the gold standard in the field, it's concluded that for roughly 70% of the population - the lower 70% on the wealth/income scale - they have no influence on policy whatsoever. They're effectively disenfranchised. As you move up the wealth/income ladder, you get a little bit more influence on policy. When you get to the top, which is maybe a tenth of one percent, people essentially get what they want, i.e. they determine the policy. So the proper term for that is not democracy; it's plutocracy. (https://www.salon.com/2013/08/17/chomsky_the_u_s_behaves_nothing_like_a_democracy/).

Y'all need campaign finance reform asap. Yet we all know it's not gonna happen, considering the very people who are benefiting from the corrupt system are the ones with the power to change it. It's cool and all that Bloomberg wants to spend money to beat Trump, but the fact that he, Soros, Koch brothers and other uber rich guys have so much influence on policy, while 70% of citizens do not affect it at all is detrimental to democracy. The citizens obviously realize this themselves too - ever since 1972 voter turnout has ranged between 49-56%(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections). The Democracy Index reflects the lack of democracy in the US, labeling it a flawed democracy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index).

In spite of the system being entirely rigged against anyone not taking big money, one presidential candidate dared to stand up against this corrupt practice. It is uplifting to see that he - in spite of this huge handicap - can compete with the other candidates through an exclusively grassroots funded campaign. Moreover, it generates hope to see others run similar campaigns and get elected into office (AOC, Omar, Tlaib etc). Hopefully this could be a turning point. Sadly, considering how the vast majority of congress is beholden to corporate money, I would not bank on it. Joe Biden sums it up perfectly:

Lobbyists aren’t bad people. Special interest groups aren’t bad people. But guess what: they’re corrosive. People who accept the money from them aren’t bad people. But it’s human nature. If you go out and bundle $250,000 for me, all legal, and then you call me after I’m elected and say, “Joe, I’d like to come and talk t you about something,” you didn’t buy me, but it’s human nature. You helped me. I’m gonna say, “Sure! Come on in!” (

)

 

[GatoDelFuego]

In regards to wealthy Americans being taxed, Yang has a similar plan. The Freedom Dividend (I'll just refer to it at the 1k a month thing) is primarily being paid for by a VAT of 10%, meaning that we're taxing corporations 10% of their production.

interesting that you think this is what VAT is

The VAT is a progressive tax which 169 other countries currently have.

No, it's a consumption tax that hits those who spend the most the hardest. And the poorest people spend the most, relative to their income

169 countries use this, which do not use a sales tax system.

 

[Celticpride]

In regards to wealthy Americans being taxed, Yang has a similar plan. The Freedom Dividend (I'll just refer to it at the 1k a month thing) is primarily being paid for by a VAT of 10%, meaning that we're taxing corporations 10% of their production. This makes it harder for corporations to hide profits and income.

Actually, a VAT is almost certainly paid for by the end consumer, ala a sales tax (it’s commonly a remittance tax afaict and that would likely be the direction the US would look to implement it in). You’d have to spend more than $120,000 to come out losing under Yang’s UBI plan, but in all likelihood the tax would be paid by the end user. A sales tax that is imposed by most states also is incredibly similar to a VAT - I think it’s a bit disingenuous to say x number of countries have a VAT so why not us. There’s also likely an argument that a VAT places undue burden upon a small business to track and record, similar arguments have been made regarding recent changes in sales tax nexus, pretty weak if you ask me but nonetheless something does get brought up. I also can’t imagine a VAT not having exempt services and products, which opens up a whole bunch of grey areas (or, the alternative, the VAT taxes everything leading to people seeing their medications and other essentials that generally avoid taxation being taxed, which would not be a good look and would create some bad headlines). There are also ways for a business to cut down on their VAT amount, I’m not entirely sure but I guess it would likely be through structuring and intercompany sales rules if I had to guess. It would also likely increase prices for small businesses due to their generally having longer supply chains and more middle men, generally speaking (a larger corp likely either owns their suppliers or deals with suppliers that they deal with directly - small businesses generally have more intermediaries and less vertical intergration).

Which is a long-winded way of saying, a VAT is no magic bullet. It’d collect money no doubt, but it’s not as cut and dry as “10% OF EVERYTHING EQUALS A LOT OF MONEY.”

It also doesn’t really address how corporations hide taxes, there’s a lot of misinformation about that in general. I don’t think I’ve heard any of the candidates address the tax system in a way that would actually collect from F1000 companies without also taking away the advantages those “loopholes“ from smaller businesses that do need to utilize those rules to help reduce their tax rate. Truthfully it’s hard as heck to make the tax system work like people want, if I had to pick a direction attacking capital gains seems to be the most effective, but even that brings it’s own set of issues. Maybe trying to hit stock buybacks with an extra tax?

 

[Ace Emerald]

No, it's a consumption tax that hits those who spend the most the hardest. And the poorest people spend the most, relative to their income

Honest question: the proposed VAT exempts food and clothing purchases. And as far as I understand, does not effect rent. Do we have any insight into how much poor people spend on items other than food, clothing, and rent, relative to their income? Again, I don't mean this in an inflammatory "Poor people shouldn't buy non essential goods!" kind of way, but I was under the impression that poorer citizens would benefit significantly more from UBI.

 

[GatoDelFuego]

Utilities, household supplies, car insurance, any repairs of any kind, furniture, cooking supplies, public transit. Just off the top of my head. Does it exempt ALL food, or just groceries as current sales tax often does?

 

[Chou Toshio]

Honest question: the proposed VAT exempts food and clothing purchases. And as far as I understand, does not effect rent. Do we have any insight into how much poor people spend on items other than food, clothing, and rent, relative to their income? Again, I don't mean this in an inflammatory "Poor people shouldn't buy non essential goods!" kind of way, but I was under the impression that poorer citizens would benefit significantly more from UBI.

In Yang's version though, there is a choice between UBI and other social services like Food Stamps and Disability. So many of the most vulnerable people will NOT get additional resources while paying the VAT and seeing the market prices adjust to the greatly increased purchasing power of the middle class.

I'm fine with the idea of a UBI or national dividend if it is truly universal and has some progressive funding method; notably the nationalization of some industries to be owned democratically and pay dividends. But right now the people are hurting so much and there is so much to do in the way of re-building infrastructure, expanding medical/food access, housing, universal childcare, re-investing in basic scientific research... we'd definitely better off with the government using such resources to do stuff than just pour in cash.

Of course pouring cash into communities is way way way better than tax cuts to billionaires or increasing military budget, but again this is why the DemSoc left doesn't like Yang-- because his prescriptions are mostly defeatist; conceding that we can't accomplish big things before we've even had a fight.

Look sometimes a Yang-type approach is the best you can do. When Bernie was elected Mayor of Burlington they didn't even let him choose his own cabinet-- so nothing Bernie could operate in the government would have worked the way he wanted. Bernie chose to defund much of the government and instead get cash in the hands of various community groups and local interests-- that strategy helped him win the support and trust in the community that eventually let him politically seize more power by winning seats for his allies and re-shaping the wider city government. We expect him to be able to make the next-best-strategy call as needed; even if the only methods available are more libertarian. But what we want in a leader is not someone who assumes that we can't do progressive taxes, we can't enforce anti-trust, we can't do a federal jobs guarantee or massive GND from the start and is set to be defeated before the fight even begins. We want a revolutionary who will be the Organizer and Chief, rallying the people to demand aggressive expansion of democracy.

 

[MikeDawg]

Wow Liz dragged Bernard to filth. Maybe I was wrong, and she is more than "just a player in the game".

Then again, if she never goes further than innuendo, I'm not sure that she'll be able to make a dent. Anti-bernie folks don't want vague call-outs, they want conviction. And the media doesn't want innuendo, they want DRAMA.

Regardless, at least she's doing something. She and Kamala had it in the bag, and both sank themselves by trying to court Bernie fans. It was too late for Kamala to pivot back towards reality, but maybe Liz still has a shot. I'd love to vote for her in the primary if she stops with the wine caves and refocuses on the issues (and changes her idiotic foreign policy views).

Only time will tell.

MY PROMISE TO FIGHT DISINFORMATION AS A CANDIDATE
To truly stem the spread of damaging false information, tech companies and the federal government need to take a more serious, comprehensive approach. But I’m committed to doing everything I can do to combat disinformation, and that means tackling it on the campaign trail.

It’s not enough to make vague statements condemning fraudulent attacks on opponents or efforts to suppress the vote -- while also reaping the benefits of those attacks on democracy. Campaigns need to make clear that disinformation has no place in our campaigns, and that we will disavow supporters who embrace it and act quickly to stop its spread. That’s why I’m pledging to fight disinformation aimed at my campaign, my opponents, and voters:

• My campaign will not knowingly use or spread false or manipulated information, including false or manipulated news reports or doctored images, audio, and videos on social media.
• My campaign will not knowingly promote content from fraudulent online accounts.
• My campaign will not knowingly allow campaign staff or surrogates to spread false or manipulated information on social media.

I’m sending a clear message to anyone associated with the Warren campaign: I will not tolerate the use of false information or false accounts to attack my opponents, promote my campaign, or undermine our elections. And I urge my fellow candidates to do the same.

https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/fighting-digital-disinformation/

 

[MikeDawg]

New Bloomberg take:

He's not trying to win, just trying to get enough votes to ensure a brokered convention in the very unlikely event that Bernie pulls a plurality. Bernie has no shot whatsoever at a brokered convention, especially if Bloomberg endorses the leading non-Bernie candidate (presumably Biden). No need to run 3rd party if he handles the situation in the primary. He just doesn't want to let Bernie (in his words) turn the country into a Kibbutz.

If that's the case, I appreciate that the vast majority of his ads have been anti-Trump as much as they've been pro-Bloomberg. Still mostly a vanity campaign, but a productive vanity campaign.

 

[termi]

what the fuck are you even talking about dude. what planet are you from. fucking liberals

 

[The Amazonian Rainforest]

what the fuck are you even talking about dude. what planet are you from. fucking liberals

I think hes implying that Bloomberg is Bernie's secret benefactor

 

[MikeDawg]

Like I said: celebrity. Who else gets this much free attention?

 

[termi]

I think hes implying that Bloomberg is Bernie's secret benefactor

well so far thinking hasn't done you a lot of favors so maybe you need to take a break from that

Like I said: celebrity. Who else gets this much free attention?

i keep feeding the dawg so the dawg keeps posting incomprehensible nonsense. there's barely any delusional american white woke centrists posting on this website i so i savor your unique brand of insanity

 

[eifo]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1222386002724978689

This kind of blatant pandering is just cringy. When you take into consideration his past of actively fighting against LGBT people, it's nothing short of shameless.

Like Giuliani, Bloomberg continued to battle with the non-profits that were serving people with HIV. Bloomberg made cuts to the parts of the city budget that served that population. He also cut HIV prevention dollars at a time when new HIV infections were increasing among young black and Latino gay and bisexual men. [...] Bloomberg also continued Giuliani’s attacks on city porn shops, but in 2008, undercover vice officers began the practice of luring gay and bisexual men into consensual sex encounters in the shops then offering to pay the men after they agreed to the sex. The men were then arrested for prostitution. The shops were sued in nuisance abatement lawsuits that cited the arrests and the lawsuits were intended to shut them down.

The list goes on and on, have a read if you'd like: https://www.gaycitynews.com/a-look-back-at-bloombergs-lgbtq-record/

Even if one were to ignore his horrible track record as mayor wrt lgbt issues, stop and frisk etc. or all contemporary policy disagreements, the guy is the least charismatic politician I've ever seen besides Amy the Clobber. It truly baffles me that anyone would ever support this dude over the other primary contenders.

 

[MikeDawg]

“I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made.”

I hope Bernie was right, because if I'm judged based on the 18 year old imbeciles here who let me live rent free in their heads, then I'm a superstar.

Even if one were to ignore his horrible track record as mayor wrt lgbt issues, stop and frisk etc. or all contemporary policy disagreements, the guy is the least charismatic politician I've ever seen besides Amy the Clobber. It truly baffles me that anyone would ever support this dude over the other primary contenders.

I'm not surprised anymore. As we can see by the continued rise of Bernie Sanders in the polls, people don't give a single shit about lgbt or race issues.

 

[tcr]

mikedawg youre a celebrity in the same way the australian wildfires are celebrities, your takes are wildly entertaining and you're either the most glorious troll (in which case kudos for sure) or you're absolutely a 2 digit iq dude who spent way too much time reposting what other people post to r/enough_sanders_spam and r/kamala, which is an enlightening peephole into the microcosm of suburban neoliberal elites who attach themselves to identity politics

 

[The Amazonian Rainforest]

well so far thinking hasn't done you a lot of favors so maybe you need to take a break from rhat

Take a break from thinking? I know that ur trying to insult me but if youre gonna call me out effectively you better be more fiery than that because I'm caliente rn

I know you can do better. Just think.

i keep feeding the dawg so the dawg keeps posting incomprehensible nonsense. there's barely any delusional american white woke centrists posting on this website i so i savor your unique brand of insanity

Haha and you're regurgitating a point i stressed three pages ago. Bite me.

 

[MikeDawg]

Half the posts in this thread are about me. That's such validation in itself.

 

[mym217866]

I'm not surprised anymore. As we can see by the continued rise of Bernie Sanders in the polls, people don't give a single shit about lgbt or race issues.

What makes you say Bernie Sanders doesn't care about lgbt or race issues, exactly? More or less than like any other candidate?

 

[Celticpride]

MikeDawg is kind of right about Bloomberg, in the sense that his likeliest path to the nom does involve a brokered convention. It kind of has to given how late he jumped in. He’s not on some state ballots, and his current focus seems to be on crushing Super Tuesday. I’d imagine a scenario where he is top 3 in total delegates heading into the convention and then tries to coalition build among super delegates, but for himself and not another candidate. How effective that strategy ends up being is anyones guess.

Apropos of nothing: Yang, Mayor Pete and Klob seem to be focusing on Iowa and NH, while Steyer has been by far focused the most on Nevada and South Carolina. Warren appears to be lost - her campaign seems to be geared around being a top tier candidate (aka someone that doesn’t have to focus on specific early states) but her recent dip in polling numbers leaves her without a potential early state stronghold unlike Pete Yang Klob and Steyer. Tier 2 candidates are better off focusing resources in one state and afaict she doesn’t have that kind of bulkhead anywhere. Biden and Bernie have enough support to not worry much at all about specifics, as even a 5 or 7% variance still leaves them still sitting pretty. Warren was there up until these past few weeks, but ultimately has dropped off. Outside of the top two, Steyer feels like the biggest wildcard. If he crushes NV and/or SC, that could leave him with a higher delegate count than whoever wins out in Iowa heading into Super Tuesday.

 

[Machoke]

I'm seriously wondering what would happen if Bernie has the most delegates by a good margin but it was a brokered convention and he isn't chosen as the nominee. It's a possibility, albeit I'm not sure how probable. I'd imagine if that was what happened though there would be hell to pay

 

[Divine Retribution]

I'm seriously wondering what would happen if Bernie has the most delegates by a good margin but it was a brokered convention and he isn't chosen as the nominee. It's a possibility, albeit I'm not sure how probable. I'd imagine if that was what happened though there would be hell to pay

This would be suicide for the DNC, or at least I hope it would be.

 

[Chou Toshio]

Bernie is catching up in Texas!?? +13

Holy shit I thought the Lone Star state was a lost cause but Bernie & Biden only TWO POINTS apart i one of the most conservative states—and we haven’t even gotten out of Iowa yet!!!

Not only that, Bernie’s only 3 pts behind Trump in freakin’ TEXAS (Biden 5 pts behind).

If Bernie wins Iowa & New Hampshire... every single state becomes winnable.

 

[Chou Toshio]

Also the numbers show that the Social Security argument IS WORKING

https://theintercept.com/2020/01/28/joe-biden-older-voters-bernie-sanders/

 

[Legendary Latios]

Kind of a shame that Bernie is picking up steam. I mean, if he wins, Trump is almost guaranteed to win, because Bernie is a communist who has done basically nothing in the senate and has never held a job outside of public office. The guy literally didn't earn a good paycheck until he was 40 years old. Communism has literally never worked and we spend the entirety from the 1940s till the mid 80s fighting communism and the USSR (where Bernie went on his honeymoon) as it is antithetical to what the USA actually stands for. I highly doubt that America is going to vote a full fledged, destroy capitalism, eliminate free market and profit and general wealth socialist who has supported some of the worst regimes in recent history.

 

[Machoke]

Bernie is catching up in Texas!?? +13

Holy shit I thought the Lone Star state was a lost cause but Bernie & Biden only TWO POINTS apart i one of the most conservative states—and we haven’t even gotten out of Iowa yet!!!

Not only that, Bernie’s only 3 pts behind Trump in freakin’ TEXAS (Biden 5 pts behind).

If Bernie wins Iowa & New Hampshire... every single state becomes winnable.

A few months ago Bernie was actually leading among democrats in Texas so it's very possible he could claim that 1st place spot once again. To be honest, I think it makes sense when Bernie leads in some of the more traditionally conservative states that people might think he doesn't do well in. There's a lot of conservative states that value unions and labor and he's the labor guy. Plus, he extends the olive branch to conservatives by showing them his platform and meeting them where they are rather than shaming them which is something I really like about him. Instead of dismissing conservatives and refusing to talk with them, he actually shows the leadership to be president of the entire US, and not just the democrats. In this era of "orange man bad" performance politics its hard to find that in a democrat.
Also, really glad to hear the social security argument is working. That could be what clinches it for him by getting the older vote from Biden. Everything looks like it's falling into place... Although Iowa is tricky cuz of the caucus. Even if he gets the highest percentage, who knows what the second choice voters will cause to happen.

Kind of a shame that Bernie is picking up steam. I mean, if he wins, Trump is almost guaranteed to win, because Bernie is a communist who has done basically nothing in the senate and has never held a job outside of public office. The guy literally didn't earn a good paycheck until he was 40 years old. Communism has literally never worked and we spend the entirety from the 1940s till the mid 80s fighting communism and the USSR (where Bernie went on his honeymoon) as it is antithetical to what the USA actually stands for. I highly doubt that America is going to vote a full fledged, destroy capitalism, eliminate free market and profit and general wealth socialist who has supported some of the worst regimes in recent history.

Too bad the data shows otherwise! Bernie consistently has some of the best head to head matchups vs Trump, easily beating all the other democrats except for Biden, who generally has the best polls vs Trump. Even so, he is usually close to Biden in the polls or in some even exceeds him in head to head matchups vs Trump.
"done nothing in the Senate" He was literally nicknamed the Ammendment King for how much work he did in the Senate so uh. yeah
"He's a communist" Nah, he uses the label democratic socialist. There's a big difference.
"never held a job outside public office" Ok... and? lol
"didnt earn a good paycheck until he was 40" Ok.......... and??? lmao
"Communism has literally never worked... etc" This doesnt apply cuz Bernie isnt a communist
"I highly doubt that America is going to vote for..." Why is he doing so good in the polls? Why does he have the single largest number of donors and the most money on hand from an entirely grassroots movement funding him? Why is he gaining so much steam and projected to perform well in Iowa and New Hampshire? I think you don't really have your fingers on the pulse if you think he's some unelectable communist that has not chance of winning

Also lol at Bernie supposedly supporting the worst regimes in history when literally right now the US is in bed with Saudi and Israel.