Jump to content
ryanlammi

2020 Democratic Presidential Primary

Recommended Posts

He's firing anyone who disagrees with him or dares cooperate with investigations into him (which he's been stonewalling).  He's putting pressure on the DOJ to be lenient with his co-conspirators.  The entire GOP is ignoring Russian psy-op warfare against our democracy.  Also, they continue pushing voter disenfranchisement in increasing brazen fashion.

 

I've said it before, Republicans are playing democracy like they intend this to be the endgame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gramarye said:

(a) to what extent do the centrists in the Democratic Party stay home (they're usually higher-turnout

Like you said, these people have high turnout anyway. If Trump were a moderate, these people being unmotivated might be a thing. But it seems like this demographic is the most vocal about Trump's destruction of norms and institutions, etc. There's probably a very small segment of these people who could be convinced Sanders's policies are somehow equivalent to Trump's corruption and lawlessness. But that's a hard sell to most people, especially those inclined to vote for a Democrat in the first place. Judging by polls (head-to-head ones and polls about who is most electable) and the iterative crashing of Sanders's theoretical support "ceilings," the Democratic electorate does not share the pundits' and party brass's fears of Sanders's platform.

 

1 hour ago, Gramarye said:

(b) what effect Sanders has on downballot races. 

...

the party line from that camp will be that Sanders will help down-ballot Democrats in competitive races somehow).

"Somehow" -- that somehow is the same calculus as above. The moderates who always vote will vote anyway, fired up to deliver a blow to Trump, and then there will be a turnout boost by those enthusiastic about voting for Sanders. There're your coattails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ck said:

https://www.npr.org/2019/08/30/755523088/as-fec-nears-shutdown-priorities-such-as-stopping-election-interference-on-hold

 

 

  

 

There are simply too many insane things happening on a weekly basis to keep up.  People are definitely forgetting about many scandals because new ones are popping up daily.  I sincerely hope that during the election someone aggregates all of them together to remind the public of how ridiculous the last 4 years have been. 

 

Yeah like how almost nobody gets audited by the IRS now except poor people "to save money". If there ever was a license to print money, now is the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Robuu said:

Like you said, these people have high turnout anyway. If Trump were a moderate, these people being unmotivated might be a thing. But it seems like this demographic is the most vocal about Trump's destruction of norms and institutions, etc.

 

That's pretty much me. Kind of a skeptic on Bernie but you can bet I will be enthusiastically voting for him in November if he's the guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, mu2010 said:

 

That's pretty much me. Kind of a skeptic on Bernie but you can bet I will be enthusiastically voting for him in November if he's the guy.

 

Same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, ck said:

https://www.npr.org/2019/08/30/755523088/as-fec-nears-shutdown-priorities-such-as-stopping-election-interference-on-hold

 

 

  

 

There are simply too many insane things happening on a weekly basis to keep up.  People are definitely forgetting about many scandals because new ones are popping up daily.  I sincerely hope that during the election someone aggregates all of them together to remind the public of how ridiculous the last 4 years have been. 

 

Yea, this is right. It was widely reported toward the end of last year, but there are just so many scandals it is difficult to keep up. The next thing happens and the prior scandal is forgotten. It's pretty enraging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After seeing the hypothetical matchups out of Wisconsin - which, to be fair, aren't all that useful 9 months out without a nominee yet, but still - I think anyone who wins the nomination should seriously consider Tammy Baldwin for VP if she'd consider it.  Kind of middle of the road, mainstream Democrat who leans left on social issues.  I think a lot of suburban women - who flipped the House in 2018 - would like her on the ticket if the top of the ticket ends up being a man.  I think she'd be able to shore up Wisconsin in a way almost no one else can.  I also have to tell myself that VP noms change almost nothing in races.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Trump would have given Chris Christie the VP nomination, I think he would have lost in the general. I think Pence brought him over the finish line (as well as several other things working in tandem).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

After seeing the hypothetical matchups out of Wisconsin - which, to be fair, aren't all that useful 9 months out without a nominee yet, but still - I think anyone who wins the nomination should seriously consider Tammy Baldwin for VP if she'd consider it.  Kind of middle of the road, mainstream Democrat who leans left on social issues.  I think a lot of suburban women - who flipped the House in 2018 - would like her on the ticket if the top of the ticket ends up being a man.  I think she'd be able to shore up Wisconsin in a way almost no one else can.  I also have to tell myself that VP noms change almost nothing in races.

 

as of now it doesn't look too promising for any Democrat in Wisconsin, regardless of running mate

 

 

Edited by eastvillagedon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard someone say today that it's f*cked up that Putin is the only politician that's reached across the aisle and worked with both parties in the last four years. But Trump isn't a Republican and Sanders isn't a Democrat....

 

 


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TheCOV said:

Why isn't this story common knowledge. People need to be outraged by this.

 

Because literally half the country *wants* this to happen.  Fascism doesn't just rise out of the blue with one guy.  Trump supporters and his enablers are doing the real dirty work.  

Meanwhile, many Democrats and liberals are f**king around with "so and so candidate doesn't hold my views exactly, so I can't support them!"  

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, eastvillagedon said:

 

as of now it doesn't look too promising for any Democrat in Wisconsin, regardless of running mate

 

 

One other swing state that may not resonate because of its size, but New Hampshire can be a swing state and Maine could also split its electors. Not sure if that is significant to change things should say MI and or AZ flip, but it could be worth mentioning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, freefourur said:

Bloomberg is releasing women from their NDAs and disallowing their use in his company. Warren gets sh** done.


TBF, in my experience it’s often the victim that wants the NDA included. So idk if I like this as a universal practice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, YABO713 said:


TBF, in my experience it’s often the victim that wants the NDA included. So idk if I like this as a universal practice

 

 

Well, there's some nuance to what's actually happening....he only identified "three" of what are likely dozens of the NDA's. 

 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/02/michael-bloomberg-nda-release-women-weaselly.html

 

p.s. when did Slate start using spam headlines lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Sanders will win Nevada by a lot tonight.

 

Here’s my sober prediction that I hate to admit... Sanders will win the Dem nomination. And Bloomberg will be the self funded third party option. I will go for Bloomberg, along with a lot of other people like me who think we can stop populism and give Bloomberg the plurality. The Dems will unofficially endorse Bloomberg even though they officially endorse Sanders, just like how Mike Pence endorsed Cruz but really endorsed Trump back in 2016. 
 

Bloomberg and Sanders will split the Dem vote, and Trump will run away with a plurality win for 2020. This sucks.

Edited by SWOH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, we're toast.  Sanders is going to lose the Presidency, and hand Trump the Senate and House on a silver platter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, SWOH said:

Looks like Sanders will win Nevada by a lot tonight.

 

Here’s my sober prediction that I hate to admit... Sanders will win the Dem nomination. And Bloomberg will be the self funded third party option. I will go for Bloomberg, along with a lot of other people like me who think we can stop populism and give Bloomberg the plurality. The Dems will unofficially endorse Bloomberg even though they officially endorse Sanders, just like how Mike Pence endorsed Cruz but really endorsed Trump back in 2016. 
 

Bloomberg and Sanders will split the Dem vote, and Trump will run away with a plurality win for 2020. This sucks.

 

If Bloomberg is committed to removing Trump, then he would know that being a 3rd party candidate would split the Dem vote and ensure a Trump victory. So would he do so anyway knowing the outcome?  I don't know him well enough to know the answer.  Also, would Bloomberg or Warren be asked to--and accept--a VP role?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, SWOH said:

Bloomberg and Sanders will split the Dem vote, and Trump will run away with a plurality win for 2020. This sucks.

 

Obama will walk into the convention and tell everyone to suck it up and give an endorsement of Bernie, there isn't going to be some gigantic split in the party at this time.  There is a uniting factor much more important to both wings of the party, and that is removing the immediate threat to the United States that sits in the office.  If Dems win and the party is in a good place, I could see a split happening eventually, but sh*t is too bad right now for that to actually happen this cycle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Pugu said:

 

If Bloomberg is committed to removing Trump, then he would know that being a 3rd party candidate would split the Dem vote and ensure a Trump victory. So would he do so anyway knowing the outcome?  I don't know him well enough to know the answer.  Also, would Bloomberg or Warren be asked to--and accept--a VP role?


Bloomberg is committed to removing Trump, but Bernies policies would be awful for him too. Even if Bernie gets nothing done (which is what would happen), it’ll shake business confidence in investment and torpedo the economy. I cannot see Bloomberg dropping out if Sanders gets the nomination.

 

I think Bloomberg figures he could pull off a Hail Mary and win it, like Ross Perot but actually be the guy at the end. My guess is that he will fail and Trump stays in, which is preferable to Bloomberg over a Sanders win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, SWOH said:


Bloomberg is committed to removing Trump, but Bernies policies would be awful for him too. Even if Bernie gets nothing done (which is what would happen), it’ll shake business confidence in investment and torpedo the economy. I cannot see Bloomberg dropping out if Sanders gets the nomination.

 

 

 

You know there's an enormous amount of opportunity in the business realm created by change, right? Enron, WorldCom, Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley created a tremendous amount of much-needed white collar jobs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

 

You know there's an enormous amount of opportunity in the business realm created by change, right? Enron, WorldCom, Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley created a tremendous amount of much-needed white collar jobs. 


Having to comply with more regulation does not add value to companies. It acts as an additional tax that forces companies to take on more labor, which in turn causes them to reduce capital expenditures and new investment. This includes new investment in R&D that is desperately needed to keep America competitive.

 

Right now China is killing us in advancing 5G technology that will become the backbone for all cellular technology. It will also drive most all of the new innovation in smart home technology and the future of IoT (internet of things). As a country we really need to be thinking about how to push our consumes to lead in this field and not still be playing catch up to Huawei.

 

Removing trillions of dollars in capital that could be used to fund this investment and channeling it into untested social programs that cost tremendously more than the entire current federal budget is the definition of an American experiment killing idea. This country isn’t guaranteed, and we absolutely need that money to protect our own future and place in the world. We will get beat by China in GDP by 2050, but in the meantime we shouldn’t drain the bank even more than it’s already drained. We need the cash cushion to stay viable and remain competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SWOH said:

Looks like Sanders will win Nevada by a lot tonight.

 

Here’s my sober prediction that I hate to admit... Sanders will win the Dem nomination. And Bloomberg will be the self funded third party option. I will go for Bloomberg, along with a lot of other people like me who think we can stop populism and give Bloomberg the plurality. The Dems will unofficially endorse Bloomberg even though they officially endorse Sanders, just like how Mike Pence endorsed Cruz but really endorsed Trump back in 2016. 
 

Bloomberg and Sanders will split the Dem vote, and Trump will run away with a plurality win for 2020. This sucks.

 

If Bloomberg gets the nomination, Sanders may do the same thing.   I can't imagine them supporting a guy with most of Trump's weaknesses (in their eyes).   Bernie makes a more viable third party than Stein (who was more 4th party in point of fact) and would gain the support of some of the left populists that picked the right-populist over the left leaning corporatist in 2016.

Trump gets the right populist vote and the grudging support of the Constitutionalists.  He splits the corporatists with Bloomberg.   Sanders gets the left populists and most of the identity politics people, unless they come up with a fourth choice of their own.

While I'm all but certain Trump would beat any of the current Dems one on one, against both Sanders and Bloomberg it's a lock.

Some of us on Twitter were talking about General Mattis.   Now *that* could make things interesting.   #MadDog2020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, SWOH said:


Having to comply with more regulation does not add value to companies. It acts as an additional tax that forces companies to take on more labor, which in turn causes them to reduce capital expenditures and new investment. This includes new investment in R&D that is desperately needed to keep America competitive.

 

Right now China is killing us in advancing 5G technology that will become the backbone for all cellular technology. It will also drive most all of the new innovation in smart home technology and the future of IoT (internet of things). As a country we really need to be thinking about how to push our consumes to lead in this field and not still be playing catch up to Huawei.

 

Removing trillions of dollars in capital that could be used to fund this investment and channeling it into untested social programs that cost tremendously more than the entire current federal budget is the definition of an American experiment killing idea. This country isn’t guaranteed, and we absolutely need that money to protect our own future and place in the world. We will get beat by China in GDP by 2050, but in the meantime we shouldn’t drain the bank even more than it’s already drained. We need the cash cushion to stay viable and remain competitive.

 

Your first paragraph is 100% correct.  Most of these regulations are a jobs program for bureaucrats, and unfortunately they take up resources the private sector could be using to move forward.

The threat of China may be overstated.  They have severe fault lines that could fracture dramatically over the next ten to twenty years.  

India would be a threat except they have internal issues as well.  Their current politics force a choice between bureausclerotic pseudo-socialism and religious fanaticism.  

Nations to watch long term include Turkey, Brazil, and Poland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Good regulations are there to keep corporations honest. They obviously have a lot of power and it needs to keep them in check.  So a Sears would not need to have the same legal department as a financial institution or a fossil fuel extraction company.  I consider it a good that these companies are forced to report what they are doing. Fine if it employs a few more people.

  Hopefully Steyer ends his folly and gets out of the race by SC. Its bad enough Bloomberg is chopping up the Democratic vote. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^that is true for sure, regulation is definitely necessary. Corporations aren’t going to act on their own in good faith, the motivation is profit.

 

Its also true that there is only so much money in the economy. All of the handouts come at a price, which is why I’m a big fan of M4AWWI for instance. It’s paid for if the recent tax cut for corporations is repealed. Andrew Yang’s $1000/mo UBI came with gutting social services, which makes a lot of sense too. It’s paid for. 
 

The issue if we keep adding costs to companies without taking any expenses away is a lot of them will die. The Amazons, Facebooks, etc. of the world will be fine. But the smaller companies will continue to die off. And that will keep accelerating the rapid race of wealth to the very top. I say this as a member of a small business owning family.

 

We need a balance, somehow. Some type of fully accessible guaranteed healthcare is critical to making this happen. This will allow small business to shift healthcare management and cost to the government. So is free community college to get employees trained in the skills they need to stay competitive in whatever the economy throws at us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

 

If Bloomberg gets the nomination, Sanders may do the same thing.   I can't imagine them supporting a guy with most of Trump's weaknesses (in their eyes).   Bernie makes a more viable third party than Stein (who was more 4th party in point of fact) and would gain the support of some of the left populists that picked the right-populist over the left leaning corporatist in 2016.

Trump gets the right populist vote and the grudging support of the Constitutionalists.  He splits the corporatists with Bloomberg.   Sanders gets the left populists and most of the identity politics people, unless they come up with a fourth choice of their own.

While I'm all but certain Trump would beat any of the current Dems one on one, against both Sanders and Bloomberg it's a lock.

Some of us on Twitter were talking about General Mattis.   Now *that* could make things interesting.   #MadDog2020


I agree 100%. If Bloomberg gets the nomination Sanders will definitely run as an independent. There’s a good chance he would stay in even if a non-billionaire candidate won it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

 

Your first paragraph is 100% correct.  Most of these regulations are a jobs program for bureaucrats, and unfortunately they take up resources the private sector could be using to move forward.

The threat of China may be overstated.  They have severe fault lines that could fracture dramatically over the next ten to twenty years.  

India would be a threat except they have internal issues as well.  Their current politics force a choice between bureausclerotic pseudo-socialism and religious fanaticism.  

Nations to watch long term include Turkey, Brazil, and Poland.


China definitely has issues but is very well positioned moving forward. It’s already a major world power, and it’ll be driving development in places like Africa instead of the USA.

 

Its interesting you mention Poland, I agree they could do very well. Brazil and South/Central America has wayyyy too many issues to get ahead in my lifetime, unless something drastic changes. They will keep circling the drain IMO. Turkey is interesting because it’s a country that can go with Europe one second and with the Arab world the next. I know Ford right now is pulling production out of there as quickly as possible because of the instability. If they get their act together there may be upside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2019 at 6:35 PM, SWOH said:

As an ardent Pete supporter, that's where I'd be at too.

I like the guy personally, but he's a cartoon character. He wouldn't get anything done but making everyone mad at each other. TBH, he's just the Dem version of the Oompa Loompa we have now. I'd vote for him over Trump just because I do think his heart is in the right place, and I'd like some of his policies.

 

Life comes at you fast lmao


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a good tweet.  Speaks to the challenges Bernie supporters face (you can't alienate everyone who isn't on your side right now) as well as moderates who fear Bernie is too far left.

 

Everyone wanting to get Trump out of office will have to rally around someone. Right now, that looks like it'll be Sanders but it might not be in the end.

Edited by DarkandStormy

Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

Life comes at you fast lmao


I still stand by that. But if it’s a three way race and Bloomberg looks viable I’ll go for Bloomberg 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, SWOH said:

If Bloomberg gets the nomination Sanders will definitely run as an independent.

 

Sanders was on 60 Minutes last night saying the exact opposite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

 
Bernie the champion of women’s rights

It was part of a stream of consciousness writing criticizing Traditional gender roles. I think the context matters a little bit, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bumsquare said:

It was part of a stream of consciousness writing criticizing Traditional gender roles. I think the context matters a little bit, no?

 

Yeah - definitely. I uhhhh just think context matters a little less when applied to this sort of language. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...