2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/feb/02/john-kerry-bernie-sanders-nbc-news-report

John Kerry discussed 2020 run to stop Sanders and save Democrats
Click to expand...

It's amusing to watch the corporate establishment wing of the democratic party pulling a chicken little regarding Sanders. Universal healthcare, tuition free college, a higher minimum wage, stopping the constant wars - He'll bring the sky down upon our heads so he must be stopped!

Fortunately it seems the democratic base isn't buying it.
 
The_Animus said:
Fortunately it seems the democratic base isn't buying it.
Click to expand...

Perfect. Flawless plan. No downside what so ever.

Oh I assume the "Only Democrats will be voting in the general election in November" plan is already in it's final steps.
 
"Basing a candidate's electibility on how popular they are among their own party is a flawed plan" is not a strawman.
 
Belz... said:
I'd love to see him quoting the relevant parts of the Constitution.
Click to expand...
I've had it up to here (no, not there, even higher) with these right wing nutjobs foisting the constitution in service of starkly anti constitutional concepts.
 
Belz... said:
No it's not. He's reminding Animus that popularity within the party is not popularity in the general. It's not a strawman; it's Joe's own point!
Click to expand...


It's an absurd criterion ("Only Democrats will be voting in the general election in November"). It has never happened, is entirely irrelevant, and is merely more of his Henny Penny negativity.
 
Cabbage said:
It's an absurd criterion ("Only Democrats will be voting in the general election in November"). It has never happened, is entirely irrelevant, and is merely more of his Henny Penny negativity.
Click to expand...
You're being far too literal. Agree or not, his point is clear as clear can be.

See my sig.
 
The "Vulcan Robot with Aspergers who only understands binary Lojban" persona got old a while ago and it's rapidly becoming the Democratic equivalent to Republican semantics.

I didn't just invent colorful language and just up and started being the only one who's using it, ever used it, or ever will use just to annoy other people. Stop acting like you're Picard and I'm saying "Damok and Jalad at Tanagra."

Nothing I say is that difficult to understand unless you're being intentionally obtuse.
 
Last edited:
Can the Crabby Bunny Brigade conclude its business so we can move back to the insanity that was John Kerry suggesting he run again to save the Democratic Party from itself? Good God, is the man that clueless he thinks anybody wants him back? We don't even want Hillary back and she was ten times better than him, and came so much closer to winning!

Sorry, Kerry, you're yesterday's jam.
 
Cabbage said:
It's an absurd criterion ("Only Democrats will be voting in the general election in November"). It has never happened, is entirely irrelevant, and is merely more of his Henny Penny negativity.
Click to expand...

I think you're missing the point, otherwise you wouldn't have posted this.

I repeat the point: trying to gauge de chances of success of a candidate in the general based on his popularity in the primaries may be a fallacy.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Can the Crabby Bunny Brigade conclude its business so we can move back to the insanity that was John Kerry suggesting he run again to save the Democratic Party from itself? Good God, is the man that clueless he thinks anybody wants him back? We don't even want Hillary back and she was ten times better than him, and came so much closer to winning!

Sorry, Kerry, you're yesterday's jam.
Click to expand...

I think the Democrats do often forget that, outside of the general requirements of just being an overall decent guy and good leader in the eyes of the voters, Obama had the success he did because he was a, mostly, new figure. Nobody knew who Barack Obama was a year out from Super Tuesday.

I think there is a value, no I can't put some exact number on it and no it won't always override other factors, in putting a candidate up that we haven't seen lose before.

No it's not an absolute "Must not run this candidate under any circumstances" kind of black mark, but "We, the general voters base of all America, have seen this candidate already lose an election/primary and remember and mentally associate them with that" is a... factor in all this.

People remember, if even in the back of their heads, a candidate losing before and a lot of them do emotionally factor that in.
 
Last edited:
TragicMonkey said:
Can the Crabby Bunny Brigade conclude its business so we can move back to the insanity that was John Kerry suggesting he run again to save the Democratic Party from itself? Good God, is the man that clueless he thinks anybody wants him back? We don't even want Hillary back and she was ten times better than him, and came so much closer to winning!

Sorry, Kerry, you're yesterday's jam.
Click to expand...
Funny(?) how everyone and their grandpa thinks they need to jump in at this late stage to save the party/country.

Not so funny: I strongly suspect that Bernie will get creamed in the general.
 
angrysoba said:
Biden certainly looks like a Democratic presidential candidate, in the same way that John Kerry and Al Gore did.
Click to expand...

I thought I had been making a joke saying that Biden comes across like John Kerry. I did not realize that John Kerry was actually putting himself forward as his stand-in.

Somehow John Kerry lost the fight about who was the best war veteran with George W Bush. I can only imagine what Trump would do to him.
 
Belz... said:
I think you're missing the point, otherwise you wouldn't have posted this.

I repeat the point: trying to gauge de chances of success of a candidate in the general based on his popularity in the primaries may be a fallacy.
Click to expand...

True, but if there were an unusually large turnout at the primaries it might be taken as an indicator of voter interest and increased total voter turnout in the election.

The people who can vote but don't could sway an election in either direction if they actually voted.
 
TragicMonkey said:
True, but if there were an unusually large turnout at the primaries it might be taken as an indicator of voter interest and increased total voter turnout in the election.

The people who can vote but don't could sway an election in either direction if they actually voted.
Click to expand...

Of course, you are correct. I'm just pointing out that it's not as simple as some seem to be implying, which I gather is Joe's point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom