2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker Part III

[Delphic Oracle]

Here's the issue.

Sanders and Yang's supporter bases are the only ones playing the "If my candidate doesn't get the nomination I'm taking my ball and going home" game. *

The thing is they are trying to spin that "My way or the highway" mentality into making it sound like their candidate has more support by ignoring the raw numbers and the entire concept of politics.

It's a trap question. If they prove more Sanders supporters will take their ball and go home if they don't get their way, they think that means they've proved Sanders is the stronger candidate.

* Only 50% of Yang supporters and 53% of Sanders supporters answered "Yes" when asked if they will vote for the Democratic Nominee if it is not their preferred choice.

https://www.newsweek.com/andrew-yan...r-nominee-democratic-unity-msnbc-poll-1485241

More contorted wording of that poll.

The people who didn't say "definitely will" as in "no matter who." Some percentage of that number would ostensibly support another candidate, just not any candidate.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Yet, with the exception of Biden, all the front runners have staked a position.

The issue is the club the Republicans are keeping hidden behind their backs with which they will brain us come the general.

The Republicans are never not going to do their absolute worst, so why bother worrying about it?

 

[JoeMorgue]

More contorted wording of that poll.

The people who didn't say "definitely will" as in "no matter who." Some percentage of that number would ostensibly support another candidate, just not any candidate.

And Biden, Warren, and (slightly less but still well outside the margins of Sanders and Yang) Buttigeig and Bloomberg supporters are perfectly happy with any of the major candidates.

Your point?

"We're pickier so we're right" isn't an answer in politics.

 

[angrysoba]

Not necessarily true. Electability in a general election and popularity with left wing activists are not necessarily the same (see Jeremy corbyn as an example - perhaps the opposite of Biden’s situation)

That only makes sense if one assumes that the Democrats and other left-leaning voters would not vote for him against Trump. Something I see little evidence for.

Not necessarily true, okay. But a candidate who doesn't get people to the polls is definitely a risk, especially when you have active voter suppression tactics to put off any fair-weather voters.

 

[Distracted1]

The Republicans are never not going to do their absolute worst, so why bother worrying about it?

That makes little sense when examined, however.
It is if you are stating that because the Republicans will be trying to defeat us no matter who we run, we should not concern ourselves with the strength of our candidate.

That is the most defeatist outlook I can imagine.

 

[varwoche]

And Biden, Warren, and (slightly less but still well outside the margins of Sanders and Yang) Buttigeig and Bloomberg supporters are perfectly happy with any of the major candidates.

Your point?

"We're pickier so we're right" isn't an answer in politics.

Driving home what I learned in 2016. A non trivial segment of Sanders supporters are cultists/zealots/babies, take your pick, some of whom liked Bernie and Trump. Hurray for angry old white dudes who want to blow up the system.

Present company excluded. (Actually. I don't view ISF Bernie supporters in this light.)

Screw you guys, I'm going home.
- Eric Cartman​

 

[Distracted1]

Not necessarily true, okay. But a candidate who doesn't get people to the polls is definitely a risk, especially when you have active voter suppression tactics to put off any fair-weather voters.

That also depends upon who's side the voters are on.

Trump is already doing us a favor by getting our voters to turn out in large numbers.
I don't think returning the favor is our best strategy.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Driving home what I learned in 2016. A non trivial segment of Sanders supporters are cultists/zealots/babies, take your pick, some of whom liked Bernie and Trump. Hurray for angry old white dudes who want to blow up the system.

Present company excluded. (Actually. I don't view ISF Bernie supporters in this light.)

Screw you guys, I'm going home.
- Eric Cartman​

There's a lot of the "The entire system is rotten to the core, so it doesn't matter in which direction we move as long as we move as far as possible, away from center" in some the Sanders supporters, and yes I'm of the opinion that's largely the mentality (expressed in a different, more spiteful way) that gave us Trump.

 

[angrysoba]

That also depends upon who's side the voters are on.

Trump is already doing us a favor by getting our voters to turn out in large numbers.
I don't think returning the favor is our best strategy.

LOL! I like that!

 

[angrysoba]

There's a lot of the "The entire system is rotten to the core, so it doesn't matter in which direction we move as long as we move as far as possible, away from center" in some the Sanders supporters, and yes I'm of the opinion that's largely the mentality (expressed in a different, more spiteful way) that gave us Trump.

Of course. Things may seem bad now.

But they can always get worse!

 

[TragicMonkey]

That makes little sense when examined, however.
It is if you are stating that because the Republicans will be trying to defeat us no matter who we run, we should not concern ourselves with the strength of our candidate.

That is the most defeatist outlook I can imagine.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying it's pointless (and self-defeating) to choose the Democratic candidate by ruling out those whom the Republicans "might say something bad about". There are plenty of examples on this board, usually along the lines of "we can't run Bernie because they'll call him a socialist!" They're going to call any Democrat a socialist. Biden could stand there getting a cash infusion by IV from Bank of America while gutting Medicare and they'll still call him king of socialism and heir to Lenin.

 

[Segnosaur]

* Only 50% of Yang supporters and 53% of Sanders supporters answered "Yes" when asked if they will vote for the Democratic Nominee if it is not their preferred choice.

More contorted wording of that poll.

The people who didn't say "definitely will" as in "no matter who." Some percentage of that number would ostensibly support another candidate, just not any candidate.

True, most Sanders supporters claim they may vote democrat "depending on who is picked".

But here's the thing... Trump is an unmitigated disaster. If you are on the political left, even the worst possible Democratic candidate would be an improvement over him. Granted, Biden may not push for "medicare for all". Mayor Pete won't offer "free college for everyone". But the situation under them will still be a darn sight better than it will be under Trump.

The fact that a significant number of Sander's supporters are playing a 'wait and see' attitude regarding what to do if he loses the nomination suggests they are drawing a false equivalence between at least some other Democratic candidates and Trump. That's irrational.

 

[Segnosaur]

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying it's pointless (and self-defeating) to choose the Democratic candidate by ruling out those whom the Republicans "might say something bad about". There are plenty of examples on this board, usually along the lines of "we can't run Bernie because they'll call him a socialist!" They're going to call any Democrat a socialist.

True, the Republicans will use the 'socialist' label regardless of whom the eventual Democratic nominee is.

Some people are just concerned that that label man end up sticking more when the candidate has used it to describe HIMSELF, rather than just as a Republican talking point.

 

[TragicMonkey]

True, most Sanders supporters claim they may vote democrat "depending on who is picked".

But here's the thing... Trump is an unmitigated disaster. If you are on the political left, even the worst possible Democratic candidate would be an improvement over him. Granted, Biden may not push for "medicare for all". Mayor Pete won't offer "free college for everyone". But the situation under them will still be a darn sight better than it will be under Trump.

The fact that a significant number of Sander's supporters are playing a 'wait and see' attitude regarding what to do if he loses the nomination suggests they are drawing a false equivalence between at least some other Democratic candidates and Trump. That's irrational.

It's not irrational. It's unwelcome, but the rationality behind it is to force the Democratic Party further left. If the party loses enough votes by being unappealing to the voters, voters who will not cave in and be team players, then the party will either have to compromise to make itself more appealing or give them up as lost.

This wouldn't help the "Bernie Bros" in this election, but it may help them in the next (presumably with another candidate, surely Sanders won't run in 2024 at that age!).

And to forestall the screeching, NO, I don't think it's a good idea and NO, I don't want this to happen. I'm just pointing out that it isn't madness. Not everything one disagrees with is necessarily irrational.

 

[Belz...]

It's not irrational. It's unwelcome, but the rationality behind it is to force the Democratic Party further left. If the party loses enough votes by being unappealing to the voters, voters who will not cave in and be team players, then the party will either have to compromise to make itself more appealing or give them up as lost.

This wouldn't help the "Bernie Bros" in this election, but it may help them in the next (

What next election?

 

[Segnosaur]

The fact that a significant number of Sander's supporters are playing a 'wait and see' attitude regarding what to do if he loses the nomination suggests they are drawing a false equivalence between at least some other Democratic candidates and Trump. That's irrational.

It's not irrational. It's unwelcome, but the rationality behind it is to force the Democratic Party further left. If the party loses enough votes by being unappealing to the voters, voters who will not cave in and be team players, then the party will either have to compromise to make itself more appealing or give them up as lost.

This wouldn't help the "Bernie Bros" in this election, but it may help them in the next (presumably with another candidate, surely Sanders won't run in 2024 at that age!).

And to forestall the screeching, NO, I don't think it's a good idea and NO, I don't want this to happen. I'm just pointing out that it isn't madness. Not everything one disagrees with is necessarily irrational.

I doubt the BernieBros are thinking that far ahead. But even if they supposedly have a "plan" to push the Democrats to the left, doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't acting irrationally, if their plan is one that is foolish.

Trump is an immediate threat. The damage that he is causing may take decades to undo. Ok, lets say the BernieBros get their way, and another Trump victory allows a far-left candidate to come to power in the future. Hurray for them. I hope they enjoy ruling over a united states that is financially bankrupt, suffering from the results of global warming, and has a supreme court that has just ruled abortion illegal by a 8-1 victory in the republican-stacked Supreme court.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I doubt the BernieBros are thinking that far ahead. But even if they supposedly have a "plan" to push the Democrats to the left, doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't acting irrationally, if their plan is one that is foolish.

Trump is an immediate threat. The damage that he is causing may take decades to undo. Ok, lets say the BernieBros get their way, and another Trump victory allows a far-left candidate to come to power in the future. Hurray for them. I hope they enjoy ruling over a united states that is financially bankrupt, suffering from the results of global warming, and has a supreme court that has just ruled abortion illegal by a 8-1 victory in the republican-stacked Supreme court.

Yes, yes, I'm familiar with the Henny Penny sermon. As I'm not a Bernie Bro it's wasted on me. Go preach it to Bernie Bros, they're probably...I don't know where they'd be. A Crossfit gymnasium? That sounds likely.

 

[Segnosaur]

I doubt the BernieBros are thinking that far ahead. But even if they supposedly have a "plan" to push the Democrats to the left, doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't acting irrationally, if their plan is one that is foolish.

Yes, yes, I'm familiar with the Henny Penny sermon. As I'm not a Bernie Bro it's wasted on me.

Yes, I know you're not a BernieBro. But, you did suggest their actions were rooted in a 'rational' plan to push the Democratic party further to the left. I was just pointing out that even if they had a plan, that doesn't necessarily mean they re rational.

Go preach it to Bernie Bros, they're probably...I don't know where they'd be. A Crossfit gymnasium? That sounds likely.

I figure they would be spending their time in their mom's basement.

 

[Aridas]

No results from any of the caucuses in Iowa from last night. None. Zero.

I was under the impression that maybe 2% had reported and that unofficial numbers from campaigns had Sanders, Warren, and Buttigieg all doing well.

Yet another argument for ending caucuses entirely, either way.

 

[theprestige]

I was under the impression that maybe 2% had reported and that unofficial numbers from campaigns had Sanders, Warren, and Buttigieg all doing well.

Yet another argument for ending caucuses entirely, either way.

The caucuses are not the problem. The organizers screwed up, is all, and now they're trying to put the blame anywhere but where it belongs.

"Iowa! Iowa made this happen!"

"Caucuses! They never worked!"

"Russians! The Russians did it!"