I wasn't aware of the issue with Harvard (and if that's the case that's definitely a pretty scummy thing to do, but everyone has skeletons in their closet, and it seems like a minor issue next to the fact that the standing president openly brags about, if presented in the most favorable possible light, using his fame and influence to coerce women into sexual encounters that they otherwise wouldn't consent to). As for Trump and co. holding that against her, I really don't think it's an issue that's going to sway many voters. Most of the people calling her Pocahontas and the like weren't voting for her to begin with.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Serious 2020 Democratic Primary Thread
- Thread starter MikeDawg
- Start date
I wasn't aware of the issue with Harvard (and if that's the case that's definitely a pretty scummy thing to do, but everyone has skeletons in their closet, and it seems like a minor issue next to the fact that the standing president openly brags about, if presented in the most favorable possible light, using his fame and influence to coerce women into sexual encounters that they otherwise wouldn't consent to). As for Trump and co. holding that against her, I really don't think it's an issue that's going to sway many voters. Most of the people calling her Pocahontas and the like weren't voting for her to begin with.
In his second term were you holding your Republican congressmen accountable as well?
yeah all those republican congressman in Santa Cruz CA I held them all accountable lol
What in the world is possibly the point of a post like this? Don't be so personal, you're just going to look silly when the other person knows more about their personal life than you possibly could.
someone was ranking their bottom 5 presidents that seems like fun lets do that so i can laugh at trump more
how are u holding politicians accountable in your own life raikoulover? why is the discussion of accountability about my activities or anyones? The truth is, as I've posted over and over abt in this thread, if the ppl who get you into office are corporate types you're gonna be accountable to those interests, thats why Sanders and Warren are trustworthy to implement a progressive agenda as far as possible: their donors are grassroots orgs and not corporations. My organizations protests against deportations and dronings during the obama presidency were never about merely 'holding him accountable' in some metaphysical sense. Individually, I also wrote him a letter about the Golan Heights during what was the very beginning of the Syrian Refugee Crisis. When I did all of these things, I never at a single point thought any of it would reach the president let alone any other politicians.
why do u say 'argue in facts not feelings' and then when i tell you what obama did and said you accuse me of bitterness?
im trying not to be as dismissive of you as other posters that share my ideologies mainly because i do not believe u are fascist despite the dumbass memes other ppl post cause they have no content of their own, but you're making it difficult to take this seriously as a discussion.
i hope ur right abt the senate, but really don't see collins losing.
why do u say 'argue in facts not feelings' and then when i tell you what obama did and said you accuse me of bitterness?
im trying not to be as dismissive of you as other posters that share my ideologies mainly because i do not believe u are fascist despite the dumbass memes other ppl post cause they have no content of their own, but you're making it difficult to take this seriously as a discussion.
i hope ur right abt the senate, but really don't see collins losing.
and then u have unclesam over here stealth republicaning you on, buddy, he only likes ur strat cause it gets you a president pence. this is so funny i cant believe i took this srsly for a whole page, this just shows how thinking about electoral politics numbs ur mind
Consistency. Sanders supporters have a tendency to use every opportunity to attack Democrats, yet are eerily silent about Republicans.
Vote in the primaries. Stay involved in local politics.
Grievances are just that... grievances. Among the Sanders base I find (already proven twice in the last two pages) a bunch of rhetorical arguments followed by contrarian suggestions ("If Bernie doesn't win, 4 more years of Trump isn't that bad"). One can only conclude that those rhetorical arguments are more important than actually getting Democrats elected and progressive policies through Congress.
Reiterating an earlier point, passing a progressive agenda requires a Democratic Congress and Democratic President. The President signs the legislation passed to them. President Sanders / Warren / Biden / Klobuchar / Buttigieg / Bloomberg are not going to veto legislation passed by Nancy Pelosi's House. Electing a "real progressive" such as Sanders also doesn't mean medicare for all will get through a Democratic Congress in the form proposed in the election.
That's great work! Are you doing the same under the Trump administration?
Bitter is exactly how your post came across.
There's an actual fascist sitting in the White House. I'm not interested in being ideological; I want shit to get done.
She's toast.
Looks like Yang and Bennett have dropped out.
Bernie looking strong in New Hampshire atm. Poised to win.
Second place likely going to Pete but could go to Amy who is in a strong 3rd.
Warren in a weak 4th and Biden in a very weak 5th. Both not looking like they'll reach 15% or get delegates. This is around 20% reporting.
Bernie looking strong in New Hampshire atm. Poised to win.
Second place likely going to Pete but could go to Amy who is in a strong 3rd.
Warren in a weak 4th and Biden in a very weak 5th. Both not looking like they'll reach 15% or get delegates. This is around 20% reporting.
Biden is done. He needs to drop out now. Same with Steyer and Gabbard.
Biden and Steyer are still putting their chips in South Carolina but they are moving forward looking pretty bad with these results.
But yeah, Gabbard was all invested in New Hampshire. She should drop out.
I thought you fuckers learned 50 pages ago with Chou not to engage with people who absolutely refused to consider the idea that they might be wrong, but given the recent flare-ups with mikedawg and raikoulover i guess you guys just ignore chou's posts because you don't need to convince him to support Bernie
Bernie, and Bernie
But it's still too early to tell. I don't wanna count Biden out till after Super Tuesday.
I think Bernie is the most likely nominee, but I don't think its more than 50%.
Honestly I think this is going to be a coin flip election. It's going to get weird.
I'm not convinced we're going to see debates. There are going to be email leaks like last time. I don't think it's possible to know who's the most prepared candidate in the general.
Honestly I think this is going to be a coin flip election. It's going to get weird.
I'm not convinced we're going to see debates. There are going to be email leaks like last time. I don't think it's possible to know who's the most prepared candidate in the general.
Nevada is a big turning point. If Klobuchar rides momentum to another 20%ish finish (whether that puts her in 3rd or 4th) and Biden tanks again, then most likely Biden either drops out or fails to win SC and then drops out. Klobuchar or Buttigieg would then be well positioned to take control and this probably mutes Bloomberg’s ability to make a stand on Super Tuesday. They are both still in each other’s way but in the end Klobuchar would be the more credible candidate of the two and I’d expect her to have the edge. I’m really impressed with what Klobuchar has managed to do so far as a campaigner to make this even a possibility, but there may be something to be said for her political instincts.
the alternative of course is Biden doing tolerably in NV and then winning SC and we’re back to “chaos” with no clear front runner who can credibly get to 50% without multiple other people dropping out, and due to the lack of a front runner Bloomberg could even add to the mix of the craziness on Super Tuesday.
for my own sanity’s sake I’m rooting for the first outcome.
the alternative of course is Biden doing tolerably in NV and then winning SC and we’re back to “chaos” with no clear front runner who can credibly get to 50% without multiple other people dropping out, and due to the lack of a front runner Bloomberg could even add to the mix of the craziness on Super Tuesday.
for my own sanity’s sake I’m rooting for the first outcome.
I see no scenario in which Biden would drop out before SC. It's his firewall according to his campaign so it wouldn't make sense for them to give up before SC in my opinion. In fact, he flew to South Carolina (he's there right now) instead of Nevada, probably expecting another poor performance in NV and trying to get the SC numbers to support him to keep him afloat.
Klobuchar's big problem is that, well, Pete's polling with voters of color is abysmal but hers is even worse than his. And now that the two first white states are over it's gonna be a lot harder for both of them moving forward. Especially if Bernie wins New Hampshire which he likely will and he goes into Nevada with momentum + he's the candidate with the most latino support, which is a big part of Nevada.
No one responds to Chou cause no one has the time to watch 20 minute masturbatory videos about Bernie that are entirely unrelated to the prior string of posts.
Klob and Pete both poll poorly with POC nationally right now yes but that’s partially due to a lack of name recognition or prioritizing other candidates who have been seen as more viable (see: Biden). A lot of that support could fall at once as their momentum rises and his falls.
In particular I’d point to how Klob has had zero issues motivating and winning the base of POC voters in the twin cities en route to winning Minnesota. I give her an honest chance of winning over their support.
Buttigieg on the other hand....
In particular I’d point to how Klob has had zero issues motivating and winning the base of POC voters in the twin cities en route to winning Minnesota. I give her an honest chance of winning over their support.
Buttigieg on the other hand....
For evidence about SC voters changing preferences based on credibility of a candidate and past results in the preceding primaries/caucuses, see how preference changed from Clinton to Obama in 2008 after Iowa and New Hampshire
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...th_carolina_democratic_primary-234.html#polls
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...th_carolina_democratic_primary-234.html#polls
As much as I'd love to harp on how often you repeat "argue with facts not emotions" and then repeatedly handwring spouting easily falsifiable "truisms" that mean nothing, I really want to ignore all the petty bullshit and actually speak to you straight up.
How do you think an actual fascist got to be sitting the White House? Do you truly consider Trumps policies that aberrant from the operations as usual in America? Do you think he's a sole catalyst for this? Do you think he masked his true agenda before he came into office? How do you think this happened? Do you think a moderate Democrat will reverse course for the country and we'll never see the likes of Trump again?
These are all honest questions because I truly cannot understand how you see the world when you argue for more status quo Democrats in the face of this rise of nationalist fascism.
Donald Trump is the logical culmination of nearly 50 years of money in politics (as started by the Buckley v. Veleo in 1976) having an ever corrupting influence on the Republican Party, along with their increasing reliance on Southern Strategy racial politics and voter suppression to remain electorally viable. A state-run propaganda outlet in Fox News is a contributing factor as well.
To an extent yes, Donald Trump did mask his true agenda. While the majority of American voters saw him for the con man he was, he was able to convince enough voters in the right states (along with help from Russia, the media, and James Comey) that he was the better binary choice than Clinton. As posted earlier, more voters viewed Trump as closer to the center than Clinton.
Yes, a "moderate" Democrat can reverse course for this country but not with their current interpretation of politics. Democratic political consultants continue to ignore the obvious realities that negative partisanship dictates elections. All elections now are influenced by national politics. Democrats are favored to have a good year in 2020, much like 2018 because of the current occupant in the White House (generic ballot has been polling at D+6 all cycle).
The error of the Obama Administration was refusal to prosecute those responsible in the Bush Administration for their crimes. Should the next Democratic President do the same with Trump, it is only a matter of time before a more competent, authoritarian figure emerges out of the Republican Party. Liberals and conservatives speak in different languages. Conservatives operate on moral systems of punishment and reward. To curtail further assaults on democracy, the Democratic President must prosecute all the corruption in the Trump Administration, and enact retribution towards Mitch McConnell and Congressional Republicans for their persistent attacks on Democratic norms. Such examples would be stonewalling funding to states that purge voters or requiring highway funds to come with carbon reduction requirements. Playing "hard ball" is the only language Republicans will understand, and the only way to deter future nefariousness.
Last edited:
Klobuchar certainly doesn’t do any worse with non-white voters than a generic democrat, but she also isn’t really over performing them either. Amy won all 8 MN congressional districts in 2018 including 1, 6, 7, and 8 (which are very white)
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fiveth...esota-may-not-translate-to-the-primaries/amp/
Key takeaways are that Amy outperformed Tina Smith (can confirm most generic dem of all time) among non-white voters only 4%, while outperforming her in white districts by 12-20% depending on the income level of the district. Also, I don’t even know the name of the guy who ran against Klobuchar in 2018, because Republicans put all their money into Karen Housely vs Tina Smith so that 4% could easily be equivalent to 0% when you factor in Amy’s opponent was a total dud.
Not saying Amy would do poorly electorally. She probably benefits from this trend by keeping NH and MN easily, while doing well in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Maine 2, kind of Michigan and potentially NE 1 (or NE 2? whichever is Omaha) and IA. But i would guess the democrats would see no benefit from her in senate races in AZ, NC, AL, or GA. I’m also not sure how much she appeals outside of MN, I think she’s fine, people my parents age seem to love her a lot, but MN is weird and idk how much it would translate nationally.
Last edited:
I really like this answer.
My top priority in this election is anti-corruption (which includes electoral reform, as I see it). My biggest issue with the top moderates is their current interpretation of the playing field as it stands. Buttigieg and Biden aimlessly, hopelessly, looking for cross-partisan appeal. Klobuchar is only marginally better on this front, primarily focusing on her electability in red areas. The only moderate I've really seen advocate for prosecuting corruption in the Trump Administration is Harris, who is now out.
The remaining candidate who is strongest on this front is unequivocally Warren, with Steyer and Bernie taking rather aggressive positions as well.
If you think this is an important issue, I don't know how you can stand behind the moderates that we have. Buttigieg and Biden can not try to appeal to Trump voters will also being open to prosecuting Trump administration officials. Klobuchar, as a former prosecutor, may have a better hand here, but I haven't seen any aggression from her.
Victory!!!!!!!!!!
We are 2-2, and most candidates who do that, go on to win!!
We are 2-2, and most candidates who do that, go on to win!!