• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cabbage said:
...

Let's begin here: Sanders himself claims to be a socialist. You present polls that x% refuse to vote for a socialist, and yet other polls have >(100-x)% voting for Sanders over Trump, despite the fact that Sanders himself claims to be a socialist.

I claim you are putting far too much weight on the anti-socialism polls, apparently pretending that this election is happening in a vacuum and no other variables are relevant.

How do you explain this discrepancy?
Click to expand...
We've been here before. My answer is the same.

Got anything else?
 
Venom said:
When was the last time a candidate became VP for another?

I generally avoid this wishful thinking and it seems most presidential hopefuls have a good idea of who they want as their running mate far in advance.
Click to expand...

George H W Bush for Reagan, maybe?
 
JoeMorgue said:
If I'm Buttigieg I'm campaigning hard for a VP spot with one of the remaining candidates right now.
Click to expand...

I don't see it. I think America could accept a gay President, but I can't see a nominee picking a gay Vice President. The mantra for VP candidate selection is "First, do no harm". Buttigieg lacks experience, is very young, and is gay. He's not going to bring anyone to the guy at the top of the ticket, and he'll drive a few away. If you want him in order to bring in some moderate votes, there are lots of better choices.
 
Meadmaker said:
I don't see it. I think America could accept a gay President, but I can't see a nominee picking a gay Vice President. The mantra for VP candidate selection is "First, do no harm". Buttigieg lacks experience, is very young, and is gay. He's not going to bring anyone to the guy at the top of the ticket, and he'll drive a few away. If you want him in order to bring in some moderate votes, there are lots of better choices.
Click to expand...

My guess is he'll get some position in a Democratic administration, but no way is he going to get the VP spot. He doesn't help the ticket secure more votes. But Im not sure who does. I like Warren, but we really need someone younger.
 
Here's argument #1 in Ways to Determine Your Debating Opponent Isn't Arguing in Good Faith:

Repeats the same arguments over and over without moving forward in the debate.

Where this debate stalled: you not addressing how easily Sanders can be demonized into a really scary guy.

What evidence have you seen that Sanders has a way to address this other that repeating his decades old mantra, the public will rise up?

What evidence do you have that said public uprising is actually manifesting itself? Sanders doesn't even have 50 % of the Democratic Party.
 
With Steyer and Buttigieg gone, Super Tuesday would be quite the boon for Sanders: early voters for the dropouts would arguably have switched to Biden rather than Bernie, given the opportunity.
 
Last edited:
Venom said:
Pete Buttigieg is out.
Click to expand...

Indeed. He did remarkably well, either way, and I hope for a bright future for him and Chasten. His funds were mostly used up in Iowa and New Hampshire, though, by the sound of it.

angrysoba said:
Yes. He is the first out candidate for president.
Click to expand...

...Thank you for the laughter.

Beeyon said:
Pete seems to be disliked by the progressive wing of the party, which seems to be the weakness Biden's VP pick would be chosen to fix.
Click to expand...

Mmm. "Disliked" might be right? Sorta? He's inexperienced and would probably get steamrolled by the Republicans in Congress. He's also pretty much rebranded himself over the course of the campaign, which doesn't speak well of how authentic he's being. His homosexuality is also a huge drawback when it comes to electability. I could probably poke at more, but... frankly, why? I like the guy and I would happily vote for him in the general if pitted against Trump. I just don't think that he was the best candidate on the field.

acbytesla said:
Four more years of Trump means the end of democracy in the US,
Click to expand...

Just because the GOP requires fearmongering doesn't mean that you have to do what they do.

A bit more seriously, until Trump's actually out, it's practically an open question of how fast things will and are escalating in that direction.

acbytesla said:
My guess is he'll get some position in a Democratic administration, but no way is he going to get the VP spot. He doesn't help the ticket secure more votes. But Im not sure who does. I like Warren, but we really need someone younger.
Click to expand...

I've seen Abrams mentioned a number of times as a good choice. Whether she'd be willing is another matter entirely.
 
Last edited:
The Great Zaganza said:
With Steyer and Buttigieg gone, Super Tuesday would be quite the boon for Sanders: early voters for the dropouts would arguably have switched to Biden rather than Bernie, given the opportunity.
Click to expand...

These numbers are a bit dated (pre-SC), but... 2nd choice for Buttigieg was something like 21% Bernie, 19% Warren, 19% Biden, 17% Bloomberg, if I remember the main numbers right. I don't have numbers for Steyer, though.

Either way, the main effect of Buttigieg dropping out might be to help buoy some of the other candidates, like Warren, up above the cut off line in multiple states.
 
angrysoba said:
Uh, no.
Click to expand...

And yet you said this:

angrysoba said:
Yeah, they definitely dislike him, or even ridicule him. I have seen memes from them about how Buttigieg is the kind of person who would ask Rosa Parks to sit in the middle of the bus.

Maybe Biden would be better off with Warren.
Click to expand...

Sounded like you agreed that Buttigieg as a VP pick could hurt Biden.

After I posted my question I thought it was redundant, but now you seem to be saying two contradictory things. Could you clarify?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Here's argument #1 in Ways to Determine Your Debating Opponent Isn't Arguing in Good Faith:

Repeats the same arguments over and over without moving forward in the debate.

Where this debate stalled: you not addressing how easily Sanders can be demonized into a really scary guy.

What evidence have you seen that Sanders has a way to address this other that repeating his decades old mantra, the public will rise up?

What evidence do you have that said public uprising is actually manifesting itself? Sanders doesn't even have 50 % of the Democratic Party.
Click to expand...


And you still refuse to answer my question? I'm not gonna go forward in the debate until I have some reassurance of your participation.

A reminder: The question was: Sanders himself claims to be a socialist. You present polls that x% refuse to vote for a socialist, and yet other polls have >(100-x)% voting for Sanders over Trump, despite the fact that Sanders himself claims to be a socialist.

I claim you are putting far too much weight on the anti-socialism polls, apparently pretending that this election is happening in a vacuum and no other variables are relevant.

How do you explain this discrepancy?

You claim you've answered this before; I honestly don't believe you have. Your behavior, to me, is indistinguishable from simply dodging the question.

I consider this question a rather important point: Why should I have faith in your ability to model the future of this election when your argument fails to even model the present?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom