2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker

[The Atheist]

You and I have very different views on what's funny. Why would you think a legal situation that could strip people of their freedoms "hilarious"?

Because your country has been asleep at the wheel for over 50 years. Since Eisenhower, I'd say.

How many chances do you want to fix it? After GHW Bush, you all voted in a philandering liar who increased inequality and started a pointless (and still going) war. Did you realise your mistake after Clinton? Hell no, you went for Dubbya.

And Obama - "No we didn't!". What a joke. Promised much, delivered little, and as I made the comment earlier - where the hell is he now?

If America is such a diabolical mess under Trump, why isn't he leading the charge, up on stage with his chosen candidate? Solidarity behind a strong candidate is what you need, and instead you're all jumping up & down going nowhere, with "any other candidate" probably still leading the field.

You've been too blind to learn the lessons of Dubbya's election, Clinton & Obama's failures, Trump's election, Brexit, the UK about to elect Boris, and the Australian election.

You have the president you deserve.

 

[Delvo]

"For the lulz" is not a reason anybody anywhere actually uses to decide a vote. Your lie is obvious. Doing that might actually be "for the lulz", but then you're trying to do your stand-up routine in a political debate.

 

[Cabbage]

Utter bunkum - stick to maths, because your English comprehension is weak.



Absolutely. I gave the reason why I'd vote Trump - he's hilarious, and with only a small improvement with Biden, I'd go with the LULZ.

If someone scripted what's going on, they'd be laughed out of Hollywood, yet here you are living it.

This stuff is gold.

I'm still laughing about the Prince of Whales.



I certainly didn't mis-speak, and I'm quite happy to stick by statement, which is why I just repeated it.

Have you looked at Creepy Joe's Senate voting record? His support of wars, anti-abortion laws and Wall Street?

Please do tell me why he would be such an improvement on Trump that people should vote for him.




Speaking of shifting the goalposts...



Loads of nonsense on special this week?

For a mathematician, you don't seem very competent - maths is about using the evidence to find the reason.

You've decided on the reason and are using maths to back your claim up, but without any causal analysis. If you really are a mathematician, you ought to know that correlation is not causation. Edited to add: The far right in Europe has been on the rise since well before Trump. What you're seeing may well just be part of that cycle.

I tend to think the racists were brought out by having a ****** president just as much as they're emboldened by Trump.

You have no evidence to back your claim up.



Except that's exactly what you said a few posts back - you blame Trump for the murder.

He's a lot of things, but Henry II ain't one of them.



Without evidence.

You can believe what you like, but it seems a bit dumb to me.

Are you sure you're a mathematician? Ever had any papers published?



Waco, McVeigh, Orlando. Oh hang on, Orlando was anti-fag. Are you pinning that on Trump as well?

Not as many people involved in Oklahoma as Charlottesville, but a lot more deadly.

I will grant you that the KKK and organised groups had declined in USA, but if you want to make a point about their resurgence, go away and do some more of that maths stuff.

How many members of WN groups have been jailed?
What impact has that had on their operations?
When did the decline start?
When did it reverse?
Has it reversed because of Trump, Obama's presidency, or the removal of Confederate meorabilia?

Show your work.

I see you haven't retracted your repeating of the CT about Trump being responsible for Tarrant's murder rampage yet. How's that coming on? Were you just hoping I'd forget it?

Your own article noted:

The number of hate groups has grown every year for the past four years, the SPLC said, a 30 percent increase roughly coinciding with President Donald Trump's election campaign and presidency. The increase followed three years of decline toward the end of the Obama administration.

...which pretty much destroys your theory that the rise is due to President Obama. Being History, there's no way we can run repeated experiments to determine causal effects. I'm glad you're at least cognizant enough to be aware there's a correlation. However, if you're so dense you can't even recognize a natural causal relationship from

1) Giving a voice to white supremacists by placing white supremacist sympathizer/apologist Trump in the White House

to

2) Emboldening those same white supremacists to actions such as those in Charlottesville

then I won't be able to convince you using math or logic, either.

You mention Waco, McVeigh, and Orlando. The first was a religious cult. The other two were acts of terror committed by one or two individuals. The fact that you have to substitute cults and lone wolf terrorist acts from over 20 years ago (2 out of 3, anyway) in your failed attempt to give other examples of Organized Hate Rallies merely underscores the fact that we haven't seen this kind of activity in decades...Precisely like I said. Now that you've failed once, can you try actually coming up with the last significant Organized Hate Rally.

Oh, and you claim

Except that's exactly what you said a few posts back - you blame Trump for the murder.

Quote me where I said this. I dare you.

What I responded to, if you'd bother to even pay attention, was:

Show me any evidence that the Charlotsville death was in any way caused by Trump.

...and I maintain that Trump's election emboldened white nationalist groups (catalyzing the murder in Charlottesville), just like your own cite claims. If you disgree, I'd be curious to see your explanation for why they were declining the last few years of Obama's presidency.

It's entirely possible we simply disagree on how "caused" is interpreted here. Can we at least agree Trump was a catalyst and stop wasting each others time with exactly what "causal relationship" means? For what it's worth, I'll agree that Trump is ultimately more symptom than cause, but that doesn't imply Trump doesn't also cause some of the symptoms himself. When the Presidency embraces the same rhetoric as the alt-right, it snowballs. Can you honestly claim otherwise?

 

[Cabbage]

Oh, and:

Speaking of shifting the goalposts...

This was in response to my comment 'Your "math" is ignoring a number of factors', referring to you point out there was a mere increase in the number of hate groups by two. But it's not moving the goalposts to point out your "analysis" completely ignored the growth of those individual hate groups.

Let me illustrate so that even simpletons can understand: Suppose there's only one hate group. Let's call them "The Haters".

By your "logic", if this is the only hate group from 2010 to 2019 (to pick some arbitrary dates), then hate group activity is stable. That's when I (the mathematician) feels it necessary to point out that your conclusion is wrong if the membership of The Haters grew from 500 to 5000 during that period (again, to pick some arbitrary numbers for illustration).

It ain't moving the goalpost to point that out, bro.

 

[Belz...]

Because your country has been asleep at the wheel for over 50 years. Since Eisenhower, I'd say.

What's that got to do with finding people suffering or being denied their rights funny?

How many chances do you want to fix it? After GHW Bush, you all voted in a philandering liar who increased inequality and started a pointless (and still going) war. Did you realise your mistake after Clinton? Hell no, you went for Dubbya.

And Obama - "No we didn't!". What a joke. Promised much, delivered little, and as I made the comment earlier - where the hell is he now?

If America is such a diabolical mess under Trump, why isn't he leading the charge, up on stage with his chosen candidate? Solidarity behind a strong candidate is what you need, and instead you're all jumping up & down going nowhere, with "any other candidate" probably still leading the field.

How is that different from the majority of elected dumbheads in the world?

You've been too blind to learn the lessons of Dubbya's election

Excuse me, who are you talking to?

You have the president you deserve.

I have a Prime Minister, thank you very much.

 

[Aridas]

"For the lulz" is not a reason anybody anywhere actually uses to decide a vote. Your lie is obvious. Doing that might actually be "for the lulz", but then you're trying to do your stand-up routine in a political debate.

"Because it's funny" is, in fact, the reason that a few people that I spoke to claimed that they voted for Trump, incidentally.

 

[JoeMorgue]

"Because it's funny" is, in fact, the reason that a few people that I spoke to claimed that they voted for Trump, incidentally.

I think "for the Lulz" (even if not conceptualized exactly that way) was the single biggest factor in Trump's election, and a factor the Dems will have to account for in 2020.

"People are going to vote just to make other people worked up" is a thing.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

... and that is the real issue for the 2020 election:
when it seems likely that Trump can't win, will people vote just to deny Democrats the House?

Democrats should gear their campaigns towards winning the Senate, since the White House is pretty much irrelevant if it doesn't come with a chance to get laws through Congress.

 

[Belz...]

I think "for the Lulz" (even if not conceptualized exactly that way) was the single biggest factor in Trump's election, and a factor the Dems will have to account for in 2020.

"People are going to vote just to make other people worked up" is a thing.

Yes, I think "humans are insane" is a well established reality now. Part of the reason democracy doesn't seem to work as well in the age of the internet.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I think Democrats can at least ask the question "Why did so many people consider the system so broken that they turned to the first person who obviously wasn't going to work within it?"

This doesn't mean kowtowing to Trump's base, but at least ask the question.

Even after Trump is gone one way or another, the hows and whys of how Trump happened are still questions we need to ask or this won't be the last time we do this dance.

 

[Belz...]

I think Democrats can at least ask the question "Why did so many people consider the system so broken that they turned to the first person who obviously wasn't going to work within it?"

This doesn't mean kowtowing to Trump's base, but at least ask the question.

Even after Trump is gone one way or another, the hows and whys of how Trump happened are still questions we need to ask or this won't be the last time we do this dance.

Less flippantly than my previous post, I think the US democratic system, and that of many democratic countries, needs a major overhaul to deal with the modern world. Otherwise it'll collapse and be replaced by, well, not-democracy.

 

[theprestige]

...and I maintain that Trump's election emboldened white nationalist groups (catalyzing the murder in Charlottesville), just like your own cite claims.

I think the rally in Charlottesville, and the violence there, was encouraged more by the antifa antics in Berkeley and elsewhere the year before, than anything Trump said or did.

Antifa had made it clear that they were willing to destroy property and beat up both peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders, in order to suppress speech they disagreed with. Sooner or later a neo-Nazi group was going to take note, and see a perfect opportunity to invite a clash and mix it up with 'the other side'. The guy in the car got carried away, and there's no excuse for what he did. But something like that was bound to happen sooner or later. Antifa set the tone in Berkeley. Like I was saying back then, sooner or later antifa would find themselves trying to beat down people who were willing and able to fight back.

"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it."

- Admiral Josh Painter, watching Milo Yiannopolous crash land on the deck of an aircraft carrier, probably.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Less flippantly than my previous post, I think the US democratic system, and that of many democratic countries, needs a major overhaul to deal with the modern world. Otherwise it'll collapse and be replaced by, well, not-democracy.

You might be correct, but it's hard to imagine a post-democratic system that isn't.... ominous.

Trump has brought a lot of problems to the surface, but right now I'm more inclined to (inclined to, not married to) the idea that it is still worth trying to save.

 

[Belz...]

"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it."

- Admiral Josh Painter, watching Milo Yiannopolous crash land on the deck of an aircraft carrier, probably.

Quoting Blade Runner and now The Hunt for Red October.

I'm beginning to like you.

 

[Brainster]

They've announced who will be debating which night.

The first night features Booker, Warren and Beto. The second night (which definitely looks more interesting) has Biden, Bernie, Mayor Pete and Harris. Note that although the draw appears to have been reasonably impartial, the nights for each group were chosen by NBC News:

Those in the room then waited to see which group, purple or orange, would debate on June 26 and which would debate on June 27. Campaign operatives and DNC officials present were taken aback when NBC officials debated behind closed doors to make the decision.

When NBC News executives announced that Warren's group would be debating first and the Sanders and Biden group would be debating second, campaign representatives present asked how they came to the decision. According to multiple people at the drawing, an NBC News official told the room it was because they wanted to "maximize viewership."

 

[Beelzebuddy]

They've announced who will be debating which night.

The first night features Booker, Warren and Beto. The second night (which definitely looks more interesting) has Biden, Bernie, Mayor Pete and Harris. Note that although the draw appears to have been reasonably impartial, the nights for each group were chosen by NBC News:

Easy night for Warren. Between Biden and Sanders people are going to have to struggle to get a word in edgewise.

 

[The Atheist]

"For the lulz" is not a reason anybody anywhere actually uses to decide a vote.

Did you notice the result of the US 2016 election?

It's clear a lot of people did just that, and I've certainly voted for that very reason myself in the past.

Quote me where I said this. I dare you.

My apologies - it wasn't you.

Sloppy work by me - I just checked back and it was Mumbles.

Can we at least agree Trump was a catalyst and stop wasting each others time with exactly what "causal relationship" means? For what it's worth, I'll agree that Trump is ultimately more symptom than cause, but that doesn't imply Trump doesn't also cause some of the symptoms himself. When the Presidency embraces the same rhetoric as the alt-right, it snowballs. Can you honestly claim otherwise?

Yep, that I'll go along with.

For the record, I think Trump probably has increased the visibility and popularity of racists, but there are lots of other factors in play, so I also think it's a bad idea to blame him for it.

Even more importantly, there are so many demonstrable disgraces that are unquestionably all 100% Trump - mocking disabled, abusing Gold Star family, paying off a porn star, etc, ad nauseum - that the opposition to him looks like they're trying to place all of the issues in the country on Trump's shoulders.

And as you say, he's actually just another symptom of the disease in your society.

What's that got to do with finding people suffering or being denied their rights funny?

What suffering has Trump caused? Whose rights have been denied as a result of his actions?

How is that different from the majority of elected dumbheads in the world?

So, if others do it, it's ok?

Gotcha.

Excuse me, who are you talking to?

American voters.

I have a Prime Minister, thank you very much.

Goodo.

I'm pretty sure you're not an ANZAC, so I'll presume your PM is Trudeau.

How's that working out for you?

He's a classic example - in the Bill Clinton mould - of a pretty liberal with no substance or integrity who ends up driving support to the other side.

 

[JoeMorgue]

The whole "X drove people to the other side" thing, while probably true in a lot of cases and something that has to be factored on a purely practical political level, reeks a little too much of a 3rd person, by proxy "Lookit what you made me do defense."

 

[Cabbage]

I think the rally in Charlottesville, and the violence there, was encouraged more by the antifa antics in Berkeley and elsewhere the year before, than anything Trump said or did.

Antifa had made it clear that they were willing to destroy property and beat up both peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders, in order to suppress speech they disagreed with. Sooner or later a neo-Nazi group was going to take note, and see a perfect opportunity to invite a clash and mix it up with 'the other side'. The guy in the car got carried away, and there's no excuse for what he did. But something like that was bound to happen sooner or later. Antifa set the tone in Berkeley. Like I was saying back then, sooner or later antifa would find themselves trying to beat down people who were willing and able to fight back.

"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it."

- Admiral Josh Painter, watching Milo Yiannopolous crash land on the deck of an aircraft carrier, probably.

So what? I don't think we would have had the antifa antics without Trump, either, so my point still stands.

 

[BobTheCoward]

I think Democrats can at least ask the question "Why did so many people consider the system so broken that they turned to the first person who obviously wasn't going to work within it?"

This doesn't mean kowtowing to Trump's base, but at least ask the question.

Even after Trump is gone one way or another, the hows and whys of how Trump happened are still questions we need to ask or this won't be the last time we do this dance.

But it is hard to talk about so many when it was so few. In the early primaries most people didn't vote for Trump. And in the election most people didn't.