2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Belz... said:
I still don't understand why that is.
Click to expand...

Like most things, it's probably a confluence of many factors.

Pete is competing with Biden for the centrist lane of the party and Biden has tremendous advantages that make him more supported among the black populace. Sanders is second in support, but notably mostly with young black voters and not the older population. Perhaps if Biden were not a factor, Pete might gain more traction. Hard to say.

There is some speculation that black voters don't like Pete because the black population is generally more homophobic than the rest of the party. No idea if that's true or significant.

I would find it ironic if that were the case. Pete's candidacy is that of a conservative Democrat, and black democrats are the stronghold of conservative Democratic politics. If being homophobic were part of the baggage associated with that conservatism, that makes Pete largely ineligible among what should be his core support for the centrist lane.


The fact of the matter is that the monolithic black voting block for Democratic politics is the result of history, not because of some deep appreciation for liberal politics. Especially in the South. Looking at the South, you see that blacks there are similarly religious and socially conservative as their white neighbors. Plenty of black folks would probably be more at home in the Republican party if it weren't for the fact that the party is absolutely infested with racism, which is automatically disqualifying.
 
Last edited:
rockysmith76 said:
He's too socialist to get through a General Election. It's not a smear, it's the painful truth for lefties. These are the same folks who have pinned hopes on similar from McGovern on, with consistent results.
Click to expand...

Too socialist- his policies are too focused on lifting up the poorest and ordinary working Americans. If you focus on the policy the scare labels lose their power. And I think more and more people see that.
 
Belz... said:
Oh, really? Let's read back, shall we?






Notice the two contradictory highlights? If you've changed your mind, that's fine, but don't pretend that this wasn't exactly your claim about dudalb's posts.



Sure you are.
Click to expand...



I've told you what I was trying to say. I didn't think I had to spell it out for you, but there you go.

Why you keep on wanting to drag this out over such pedantry is a mystery to me.
 
Cabbage said:
Why you keep on wanting to drag this out over such pedantry is a mystery to me.
Click to expand...

There's no pedantry. Dudalb has not said what you claimed he SAID, not what he thinks, what he SAID. And now you're trying to change your argument to something else while pretending that this is what you have been saying all along.

There's got to be a word for this sort of irony.
 
rockysmith76 said:
He's too socialist to get through a General Election.
Click to expand...


I like that people not starving, living on the streets, dying of curable illnesses and not being price gouged for essential medication is now viewed as 'Too socialist'.

In the richest country in the world.

Where Jeff pays 16KUSD in parking fines so he doesn't have to walk too far.



It's not a smear, it's the painful truth for lefties. These are the same folks who have pinned hopes on similar from McGovern on, with consistent results.
Click to expand...


It always amuses me when the definition of 'Lefty' is used in expanded sense to mean, as far as I can work out, anyone not bang in behind the corporate American agenda.


It is also amusing watching the Democrat party trying to oust Trump while simultaneously not shafting their corporate paymasters by letting Bernie get in and ruin the game for everyone.
 
Belz... said:
There's no pedantry. Dudalb has not said what you claimed he SAID, not what he thinks, what he SAID. And now you're trying to change your argument to something else while pretending that this is what you have been saying all along.

There's got to be a word for this sort of irony.
Click to expand...

It wasn't carefully worded at the start, yes, but, as I said previously, only a moron would interpret the causal relation as simple as "popular among progressives" implies "loses general", which was never my intention to claim to begin with. Indeed, I gave a clarification soon after, and you still persisted in bitching at me about it:

Cabbage said:
They are the same when people like dudalb think progressive voters are supporting someone so far left that they will alienate moderate voters.

Which he clearly does think.
Click to expand...
 
Cabbage said:
It wasn't carefully worded at the start, yes, but, as I said previously, only a moron would interpret the causal relation as simple as "popular among progressives" implies "loses general", which was never my intention to claim to begin with.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I deal with morons and people who believe stupid things all the time, so I can't just assume that what you say isn't what you meant.

Indeed, I gave a clarification soon after, and you still persisted in bitching at me about it
Click to expand...

Again, sorry for taking you at your word.

They are the same when people like dudalb think progressive voters are supporting someone so far left that they will alienate moderate voters.

Which he clearly does think.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's clearly something that we've already covered and that we seem to agree on.
 
Belz... said:
Yes, that's clearly something that we've already covered and that we seem to agree on.
Click to expand...


Too bad you couldn't have let it lie there two days ago when I posted it, instead of prolonging your nonsense with this post at the time:

Belz... said:
Even allowing for that, he still never said or implied what you claimed. You're drawing an inference that one leads to the other, but your accusation has not been substantiated. If you had said that dudalb's argument is effectively equivalent to this, I would not have challenged. But you said that he has said this, when he has not.



No feelings hurt. I just don't understand why you seem to view every question as some sort of challenge to a duel.
Click to expand...
 
Cabbage said:
Too bad you couldn't have let it lie there two days ago when I posted it, instead of prolonging your nonsense with this post at the time:
Click to expand...

It's not nonsense. I said I allowed for it but that your earlier claim, which you only retracted now, was not supported.

It's not my fault if you took it personally.
 
Last edited:
Sideroxylon said:
Too socialist- his policies are too focused on lifting up the poorest and ordinary working Americans.
Click to expand...

This is not accurate. If that was the focus, he may be less hostile to means testing added to his proposals. But he is vehemently anti means testing. That isn't about helping the poorest. That is a rearrangement of how everyone interacts with the system.
 
Sideroxylon said:
Too socialist- his policies are too focused on lifting up the poorest and ordinary working Americans. If you focus on the policy the scare labels lose their power. And I think more and more people see that.
Click to expand...

He's too far to the left whether you want to lift yourself out of denial or not. Even if he won, it's 4 painful years of Mitch the Turtle obstructing anything he tries to accomplish. But in the meantime noone seems to want the Socialist States of America.
 
rockysmith76 said:
He's too far to the left whether you want to lift yourself out of denial or not. Even if he won, it's 4 painful years of Mitch the Turtle obstructing anything he tries to accomplish. But in the meantime noone seems to want the Socialist States of America.
Click to expand...

That rat ****** is up for election this cycle, isn’t he? Lets hope he and his pals get kicked to the kerb.
 
rockysmith76 said:
He's too far to the left whether you want to lift yourself out of denial or not. Even if he won, it's 4 painful years of Mitch the Turtle obstructing anything he tries to accomplish. But in the meantime noone seems to want the Socialist States of America.
Click to expand...

Mitch will do that regardless of who wins.
 
Belz... said:
What denial are you refering to?
Click to expand...

The denial that a Socialist some how has a majority of the American vote and is going do anything productive for 4 years in the face of partisan bickering. The mirror opposite of a outrage fatigued lefties crying about Trump. (Even though a whole bunch stayed home when they could have voted Hillary but gave in to complacency instead.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom