2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker Part III

[Cabbage]

So in your mind eliminating the split vote that Sanders benefits from is "spoiling his chance"?

I think that's the way it's intended, yes. Do you have an alternate theory?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Looks like Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropped out in the hopes their voters will support Biden and should he win they get a seat in his administration.....

How do you know that?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I think that's the way it's intended, yes. Do you have an alternate theory?

Hmm, my post disappeared. Fortunately it was short.

You are defining "spoiling" differently than I do. Spoiling means what you care about is ruining for someone.

As opposed to endorsing Biden because he's closest to your own ideals.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Spoiling means what you care about is ruining for someone.

As opposed to endorsing Biden because he's closest to your own ideals.

... and doing so just in time to ruin Sander's lead.

I thought the accusations of bias against Sanders in 2016 were overblown, but the Democratic establishment is really pissing themselves trying to keep him from getting nominated this go-round.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Anyone notice that the more Sanders feels he is certain to win, the more he speaks out about the Democratic Party being 'other', not one of his crowd?

It's not smart, seeing everyone as your enemy instead of building bridges with people whose support might be important later.

CNN: Bernie Sanders just declared war on the Democratic establishment

Bernie Sanders took his long-running fight with the Democratic Party establishment very public Friday night, hours after news broke that Russia is working to help his 2020 primary bid and hours before the critical Nevada caucuses.

"I've got news for the Republican establishment," the Vermont senator tweeted on Friday night. "I've got news for the Democratic establishment. They can't stop us."

It's not helpful.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

... and doing so just in time to ruin Sander's lead.

I thought the accusations of bias against Sanders in 2016 were overblown, but the Democratic establishment is really pissing themselves trying to keep him from getting nominated this go-round.

You're doing the same thing as Cabbage. The opposition to Sanders is split. Some drop out and combine with the front runner of the same opposition and somehow you think that's unfair?

Does it worry or bother people when Sanders simply doesn't have the majority and it becomes an issue?

 

[Beelzebuddy]

You're doing the same thing as Cabbage. The opposition to Sanders is split. Some drop out and combine with the front runner of the same opposition and somehow you think that's unfair?

People who have spent millions of dollars trying to be elected President are giving up just before the single biggest day in the trying-to-be-President process. What that tells me is not that they want to endorse Biden, but that they really really really don't want Sanders to win, to the extent that they will sacrifice whatever remote chance they might have had to further tilt the odds against him.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

People who have spent millions of dollars trying to be elected President are giving up just before the single biggest day in the trying-to-be-President process. What that tells me is not that they want to endorse Biden, but that they really really really don't want Sanders to win, to the extent that they will sacrifice whatever remote chance they might have had to further tilt the odds against him.

I don't think it's either one of those options. Like Steyer said, he didn't see a path to the nomination. They have their own pollsters so have some idea ahead of time how they will do on Tuesday.

You drop out, of course you want to support the candidate you prefer.

 

[Sideroxylon]

People who have spent millions of dollars trying to be elected President are giving up just before the single biggest day in the trying-to-be-President process. What that tells me is not that they want to endorse Biden, but that they really really really don't want Sanders to win, to the extent that they will sacrifice whatever remote chance they might have had to further tilt the odds against him.

Buttigieg would have sat in a room with strategists who have run the numbers and it wouldn’t have added up. No sunken cost mindset but save money, time and face by not rolling the dice at what looked like slim chances.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I don't think it's either one of those options. Like Steyer said, he didn't see a path to the nomination. They have their own pollsters so have some idea ahead of time how they will do on Tuesday.

You drop out, of course you want to support the candidate you prefer.

Steyer, Kamala, et al. didn't drop out right before a big election and immediately endorse someone.

I don't think it is unfair or anything, but it is pretty clear what they are doing with the recent drop-outs and endorsements. Though for Warren it probably does seem unfair.

 

[Aridas]

Sanders gets asked about Cuba because he likes to talk about Cuba.

And for thirty-five years, he's been singing the same refrain: Castro was a dictator, but he did good stuff for his people. That's why he gets asked about Cuba.

Even in that article, while he does downplay Castro's crimes by not specifically calling them out, nothing he said there supports your claim that he was pushing Cuba as a model for social policy. Going by the article, his comments were more in line with...

Sanders also commented on Fidel Castro, pointing to the lack of resistance to Castro as proof that Americans would be "very, very mistaken" to expect a popular uprising against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua.

"In 1959 [...] everybody was totally convinced that Castro was the worst guy in the world and all of the Cuban people were going to rise up in rebellion against Fidel Castro," said Sanders. "They forgot that he educated their kids, gave their kids healthcare, totally transformed the society."

In short, many of his claims come down to effectively acknowledging that the world is complex - and that the generally right-leaning media often pushes narratives that are overly simplistic and biased, as well as being easily influenced by certain bad faith actors.

Going further, is his limited support for left-wing authoritarian governments problematic? Yes, but, by the look of it, I quite think that it's overemphasized and the points that he was actually making are largely ignored by the critics in favor of different, much easier to attack ones that he wasn't actually making.

Buttigieg did Biden a pretty good solid by dropping out of the race. He realized that he and Joe were splitting votes, allowing Bernie to show better.

To poke at numbers, again, the second choice of Buttigieg supporters, at last check, starting from the most was Bernie, then Warren, then Biden, then Bloomberg... and all those were pretty close to 20%. The whole "moderates lane" narrative is pretty close to BS in reality. With that said, Buttigieg and Klobuchar endorsing Biden and handing over their delegates to Biden is a pretty good solid, even if dropping out was of more limited value. Still, that might be enough to help get other candidates over the "gets any delegates at all" hump in some states.

Perhaps I have made a mistake and got some wires crossed. Somehow I got the impression that JoeMorgue was one of the ones misrepresenting Sanders statements on Cuba. I can't find that so I guess I was wrong.

My sincere apologies for that, but I continue to stand by my other accusations of Joe's credibility.

You refer, perhaps, to this -

Arguing for anti-smoking policies is one thing, pointing out out of nowhere without being prompted that the Nazis "did some bad things but they did stop smoking in public" is another.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Lets hope Sanders has a big Super Tuesday. Bring on a fair and compassionate America.

 

[Aridas]

Lets hope Sanders has a big Super Tuesday. Bring on a fair and compassionate America.

Here's hoping that Warren makes the strong comeback that her recent second place polling suggests that she should.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Buttigieg would have sat in a room with strategists who have run the numbers and it wouldn’t have added up. No sunken cost mindset but save money, time and face by not rolling the dice at what looked like slim chances.

The time to do that would've been after a failure on Super Tuesday. It wouldn't have cost much to coast for a week and see if the slim chance appeared. The only reason to call it quits the day before is if you need to shift your supporters to someone else before it's too late.

 

[Cabbage]

Hmm, my post disappeared. Fortunately it was short.

You are defining "spoiling" differently than I do. Spoiling means what you care about is ruining for someone.
As opposed to endorsing Biden because he's closest to your own ideals.

Quite possibly. I'm not intending any pro/con Sanders sentiments with my claim. For me, spoiling just means "Hurting the chances" (what you or I care about is irrelevant); I'm not trying to pass any judgment on it. Just stating the strategy as I see it. They very well could be doing it because Biden is closest to their ideals; they're still spoiling Sanders' chance.

 

[Cabbage]

Anyone notice that the more Sanders feels he is certain to win, the more he speaks out about the Democratic Party being 'other', not one of his crowd?

I haven't noticed that, but I'm not challenging or doubting you. I honestly don't see how you can really blame him, though, with all the talk about preventive measures to keep him away from the nomination. Do you honestly think it's wrong for him to express his opinion on these issues? They are taking measure to try and stop him! Do you really also demand he simply shut his mouth and take it?

 

[Cabbage]

You're doing the same thing as Cabbage. The opposition to Sanders is split. Some drop out and combine with the front runner of the same opposition and somehow you think that's unfair?

Does it worry or bother people when Sanders simply doesn't have the majority and it becomes an issue?

I challenge you to quote me where I said it was unfair. Didn't you just post about our different definitions of spoiler? I thought then you understood what I was saying.

Evidently not....

 

[Cabbage]

I don't think it's either one of those options. Like Steyer said, he didn't see a path to the nomination. They have their own pollsters so have some idea ahead of time how they will do on Tuesday.

You drop out, of course you want to support the candidate you prefer.

But you're ignoring the fact that: They can just coast through Super Tuesday without spending another dime, wait to see how they do then (possibly a miracle? Why not wait 24 hours for free for that possibility?) and then announce Wednesday if they don't receive any good news.

Everything to gain with literally nothing to lose....and yet they toss it all, without even waiting to see tomorrow's results.

Makes no sense--unless they're trying to block Bernie.

 

[Cabbage]

You refer, perhaps, to this -

Actually, yeah, that is a good catch for what I was looking for.

Thanks!

 

[Sideroxylon]

The time to do that would've been after a failure on Super Tuesday. It wouldn't have cost much to coast for a week and see if the slim chance appeared. The only reason to call it quits the day before is if you need to shift your supporters to someone else before it's too late.

Warren is leaving it late.