2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker - Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Skeptic Ginger said:
And yet we have Trump.
Click to expand...

Yes....in a squeaker of an election that came down to ~70,000 votes in three states.

...and that was against an establishment candidate in an era when much of the electorate is fed up with establishment candidates, yet you want to try going with the establishment candidate again for some reason.
 
They didn't vote for Trump as an outside the establishment candidate. They voted for Trump to punish the establishment. Everything going wrong isn't a bug, it's a feature.

I don't know how to keep saying this to people. Trump wasn't elected as a candidate. He was elected as a punishment. He's a troll writ large.

Why is Trump going to be re-elected? Because how much he's broken the country is the point, not a side effect.

Trump was a reckoning. A brick thrown the window of a country that had left everyone more then walking distance from two Starbucks and a vinyl record store behind.

It's not them saving themselves or making things better for themselves anymore. They're past that. Way past that. When you put a bag of flaming dog poop outside your exe's door and ding-dong-ditch them... it's not in hope of you getting back with them. And Trump is America Conservative's Bag of Flaming Dog Poop. They don't even necessarily like the Flaming Dog Poop themselves. I'm sure some do and some don't but in the end it's just a tool to hurt people with more then anything else.

This is a dying, scared, and angry people trying to do as much damage as they can as they die off.

Need proof of this? Look at the board. Notice how almost none of the major Trumpers have any goddamn interest in anything beyond pure trolling? You think that's just an insular problem here on the board? I assure it's not. It manifests in different ways out in the real world, but it's same base mentality. They know things aren't going to get better for them.

They don't want things to get better. They have no hope. And nobody is trying to give them any. Trump is selling a perfect coded message of "Let's burn this place to the ground while we can, at least they won't win either" and his opponents have tossed them to the wind as racists and rednecks not worth saving. Whatever good people are left in the margins isn't numbered or organized enough to make a difference.

When your opponent is playing "Flip the board over" and not chess it doesn't matter how many moves ahead of him you're thinking.
 
Last edited:
Regnad Kcin said:
A frisbee lost in a field, being drooled on by a cow would make a better president than Trump. That doesn’t mean an intelligent person should promote the idea.
Click to expand...

Ahhh.

What about a deliberately obtuse person?
 
JoeMorgue said:
They didn't vote for Trump as an outside the establishment candidate. They voted for Trump to punish the establishment. Everything going wrong isn't a bug, it's a feature.

I don't know how to keep saying this to people. Trump wasn't elected as a candidate. He was elected as a punishment. He's a troll writ large.

Why is Trump going to be re-elected? Because how much he's broken the country is the point, not a side effect.

Trump was a reckoning. A brick thrown the window of a country that had left everyone more then walking distance from two Starbucks and a vinyl record store behind.

It's not them saving themselves or making things better for themselves anymore. They're past that. Way past that. When you put a bag of flaming dog poop outside your exe's door and ding-dong-ditch them... it's not in hope of you getting back with them. And Trump is America Conservative's Bag of Flaming Dog Poop. They don't even necessarily like the Flaming Dog Poop themselves. I'm sure some do and some don't but in the end it's just a tool to hurt people with more then anything else.

This is a dying, scared, and angry people trying to do as much damage as they can as they die off.

Need proof of this? Look at the board. Notice how almost none of the major Trumpers have any goddamn interest in anything beyond pure trolling? You think that's just an insular problem here on the board? I assure it's not. It manifests in different ways out in the real world, but it's same base mentality. They know things aren't going to get better for them.

They don't want things to get better. They have no hope. And nobody is trying to give them any. Trump is selling a perfect coded message of "Let's burn this place to the ground while we can, at least they won't win either" and his opponents have tossed them to the wind as racists and rednecks not worth saving. Whatever good people are left in the margins isn't numbered or organized enough to make a difference.

When your opponent is playing "Flip the board over" and not chess it doesn't matter how many moves ahead of him you're thinking.
Click to expand...
On the nose, sir.

About the simplest way I've put it to a few friends is along the lines of "watch about 5 hours of videos about rust belt stagnation and opioid addiction, then watch that last scene from planet of the apes and cap it off with Aenema by Tool at max volume. Tell me where your headspace is after that.

Now imagine living in that headspace for several decades.
 
Belz... said:
...what?
Click to expand...

In my opinion, they are walking dead. They have not maintained their momentum; if anything Harris is going in reverse. Buttigieg has much the same problem: Negligible support among African-Americans. Here's the Quinnipiac poll I mentioned earlier. Harris and Mayor Pete both are running at margin of error levels of support (1%) among blacks. I don't think you can do that badly among blacks and make up for it elsewhere.
 
Distracted1 said:
Which of the candidates that are "splitting the vote" does as well as Biden against Trump?
Click to expand...
If you are basing your preferred candidate on straw polls against Trump more than a year out from the election .... I suggest you reconsider.
 
Last edited:
Cabbage said:
Yes....in a squeaker of an election that came down to ~70,000 votes in three states.
Click to expand...
Yes, very successful target marketing.

Cabbage said:
...and that was against an establishment candidate in an era when much of the electorate is fed up with establishment candidates, yet you want to try going with the establishment candidate again for some reason.
Click to expand...
This is a bit hard to parse. Who is my establishment candidate? I'm certainly not for Biden.

Are you claiming only Sanders and Warren are non-establishment candidates? :confused: You do know they are both Senators right?

After Harris appears to be fizzling out, and Warren made the glaring mistake in the last debate saying she'd abolish all private health insurance, I'm starting to lean toward Steyer.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
To be fair, not a lot is actually going wrong.
Click to expand...
Sure, if you don't give a **** about the environment, the increasing rich/poor income gap, trade wars based on Trump's ego, personal vendettas as the business norm, corruption gone mad, turning a faux disaster at the border into a real one, ... etc.

Mind boggling how convenient denial is on the right.

Back to the Democratic candidates discussion.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
This is a bit hard to parse. Who is my establishment candidate? I'm certainly not for Biden.
Click to expand...

That was my impression (you support Biden) at the time of my post. Sorry about that. I have no problem with who you support, of course; I simply believe you are naively dismissive of candidates like Sanders and Warren.
 
Cabbage said:
That was my impression (you support Biden) at the time of my post. Sorry about that. I have no problem with who you support, of course; I simply believe you are naively dismissive of candidates like Sanders and Warren.
Click to expand...

Oh heavens! I have never supported Biden.

I get it, it's hard to keep it straight who supports whom. But seriously, calling people against Sanders and Warren naive, :rolleyes: puhleese.

I have clearly and specifically stated multiple times why I don't support either of them. I posted at length about it in support of Clinton in 2016.

I was seriously considering Warren until she screwed up with the banning private health insurance comment.

Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean they are naive.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
Oh heavens! I have never supported Biden.

I get it, it's hard to keep it straight who supports whom. But seriously, calling people against Sanders and Warren naive, :rolleyes: puhleese.

I have clearly and specifically stated multiple times why I don't support either of them. I posted at length about it in support of Clinton in 2016.

I was seriously considering Warren until she screwed up with the banning private health insurance comment.

Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean they are naive.
Click to expand...


I never called anyone against Sanders and Warren naive. What I called naive is your default notion that they have no chance against Trump. That's a rather significant distinction. It's your prerogative to support who you choose; your support does not necessarily reflect the support of the general public and to think otherwise is naive.
 
Cabbage said:
I never called anyone against Sanders and Warren naive. What I called naive is your default notion that they have no chance against Trump. That's a rather significant distinction. It's your prerogative to support who you choose; your support does not necessarily reflect the support of the general public and to think otherwise is naive.
Click to expand...
It's a well thought out notion and you're still calling people naive for not sharing your POV.

I could say Sanders and Warren supporters are naive for believing Bernie's movement is ever going to manifest. It isn't.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Yes, very successful target marking.

This is a bit hard to parse. Who is my establishment candidate? I'm certainly not for Biden.

Are you claiming only Sanders and Warren are non-establishment candidates? :confused: You do know they are both Senators right?

After Harris appears to be fizzling out, and Warren made the glaring mistake in the last debate saying she'd abolish all private health insurance, I'm starting to lean toward Steyer.
Click to expand...

Surely if electability is your concern than choosing Steyer (I mean, who?) over Sanders and Warren is surely a mistake. He polls at one or two percent:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-tom-steyer-could-win-the-2020-democratic-primary/
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I could say Sanders and Warren supporters are naive for believing Bernie's movement is ever going to manifest. It isn't.
Click to expand...

Why do you think that? Sanders consistently polls as one of the top three candidates, and (per the map posted earlier in this thread) has by far the most individual donors of any of them, with his support pretty constantly spread across the country. Anecdotally, as a person in my 20s, most people I know have been more excited about Bernie in both elections than anyone else by far. He even managed to pull of a wildly success town hall on Fox news.

He's still not my top pick (Warren still has more of a chance of getting establishment support), but I don't see how you could claim that Bernie has no momentum. Fundamentally, he's a populist, and he's been able to build very active followings in two national elections now.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
It's a well thought out notion and you're still calling people naive for not sharing your POV.

I could say Sanders and Warren supporters are naive for believing Bernie's movement is ever going to manifest. It isn't.
Click to expand...

It's not a well thought out notion; it's oversimplistic and speculative. You seem to act as if your opinion concerning this is a given fact. It's not.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
That will change. He has an extensive organization set up.
Click to expand...

We shall see. He has to stand out in a crowded field by offering something others are not. From a marketing point of view, what does he offer that would make me change my vote from any of the other candidates?
 
ArchSas said:
Why do you think that? Sanders consistently polls as one of the top three candidates, and (per the map posted earlier in this thread) has by far the most individual donors of any of them, with his support pretty constantly spread across the country. Anecdotally, as a person in my 20s, most people I know have been more excited about Bernie in both elections than anyone else by far. He even managed to pull of a wildly success town hall on Fox news.

He's still not my top pick (Warren still has more of a chance of getting establishment support), but I don't see how you could claim that Bernie has no momentum. Fundamentally, he's a populist, and he's been able to build very active followings in two national elections now.
Click to expand...

I didn't say he has no momentum. He has a significant core following. I said his revolution wasn't going to happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom