2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker Part III

[Aridas]

A continued run could only be explained as vanity or as an effort to split the progressive vote and undercut Bernie.

No.

But then, I got tired of hearing this half-assed line of argument long ago. Of course, had Warren listened to people like you back then, Bloomberg would likely be one of the top contenders now, rather than just having dropped out and endorsed Biden. Warren eviscerated his momentum, repeatedly, in a way that none of the others even came close to doing.

Regardless, given her record, I'm fine with letting Warren assess the situation herself and make a decision. Fairly certainly, whichever decision she makes will have good reason.

And a constant barrage from the media that he's electable.

That's what apparently constitutes a worthy POTUS these days. We are so screwed

...He was being propped up by the MSM since before he was even officially in the race. He's as close to an anointed one by the media as you can get here.

"As a plutocrat, I'm going to support the guy who slavishly serves the financial interests of the plutocracy. This surprises all of you. Now you shall applaud."

Brings to mind Biden fighting for the credit card companies against Warren, who was fighting for the people being screwed over by them.

 

[Belz...]

I disagree. There is also stern duty, which should take precedence over selfish desires.

Would that it were so.

But I think people with a strong sense of duty simply have integrated it into their happiness subroutines.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Who said anything about pursuit of happiness? You said earlier today that 'happy' meant 'ok with' in this context.

I said I was using those terms interchangeably in one post you got confused about. Have you not noticed how frequently you get into semantic squabbles with so many different posters? The common factor is you. You keep trying to treat discussions like a legal case where you can suddenly win points by saying "aha! In post #1684 you said X, which I interpreted to mean Y! Inconsistency!"

Just put me on ignore because I find that sort of game exceedingly tiresome. It's not worth posting at all if every post turns into a goddamn Inquisition.

 

[Belz...]

I said I was using those terms interchangeably in one post you got confused about.

Ok so not generally in political discussions, then. Sorry, this is difficult to keep track of, especially since I was just making a joke.

Have you not noticed how frequently you get into semantic squabbles with so many different posters? The common factor is you. You keep trying to treat discussions like a legal case where you can suddenly win points by saying "aha! In post #1684 you said X, which I interpreted to mean Y! Inconsistency!"

Dude IT WAS A JOKE. I was being playful WITH you. It's not my fault if the thing you said in one thread doesn't apply to this one on the same damned topic and you take it as some sort of personal challenge. It's not my fault if you're not consistent.

Just put me on ignore because I find that sort of game exceedingly tiresome.

Shouldn't you put me on ignore, then?

 

[theprestige]

And I'm still pointing out that McConnell and the GOP have engaged in an unprecedented level of obstructionism. You can't just hand wave that away and pretend it's Sanders fault for overcoming that obstruction; place the blame where it clearly lies.

Nobody's talking about McConnell obstructing Sanders' bills in the Senate. This is about Sanders lifelong lack of success at building a coalition or a voting bloc. Where's Sanders' version of the Blue Dogs? Nowhere. It's just him. Where's Sanders' version of the Squad? Nowhere. It's just him.

That isn't McConnell's fault.

 

[xjx388]

That doesn't follow. Distribution among states is an issue as well. It also assumes there isn't another nationwide coalition of voters fighting against him--There can be two or more with competing interests, you know.

McConnell represents just such a competing interest. Bernie hasn’t convinced enough people throughout the nation, in places like Kentucky, that his progressive platform is worth supporting over others like the platform McConnell represents.

Therefore, Bernie has not been successful, in his long career as a politician, in advancing his agenda.

What you call “obstruction,” is simply competing interests, you know . . . competing. If Sanders’ interests were winning, he would be the one “obstructing” McConnell and we’d all have free healthcare, college and ponies by now.

 

[The Atheist]

This is about Sanders lifelong lack of success at building a coalition or a voting bloc. Where's Sanders' version of the Blue Dogs? Nowhere. It's just him. Where's Sanders' version of the Squad? Nowhere. It's just him.

That, while absolutely true, goes down like a cup of cold puke with Bernie Bros.

Lots of Sanders' supporters are every bit as illogical and bigoted as Trump's.

Talk is cheap, and that appears to be the extent of Bernie's abilities. A NZ columnist put it very neatly when he described Sanders as an old man shouting at the wind.

I always thought his chicken was crap, too.

 

[theprestige]

I disagree. There is also stern duty, which should take precedence over selfish desires.

Which brings us around to "is altruism even real"?

I hold that the only people who do their stern duty do so either because doing so gratifies them in some way, or they've been given a value proposition where doing their duty is the most profitable compromise.

Very few people say to themselves, "I hate doing this, and I'd rather have the consequences of not doing it, but I'm going to do it anyway." Even people who engage in self-harm do so because they think or feel that the overall trade-off will be gratifying in some way.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

According to early analysis, the youth vote failed to turn out in the numbers Bernie needed / expected. So much for the revolution. Better now than November.

I've been saying this since 2015. It's easy to believe that army is materializing; but how many times do you need to see a no show before you realize the calvary ain't coming?

 

[Distracted1]

Sorry, but Bernie has way more charisma than Biden.

Not a flaw in this election when one considers why Biden has a better shot than Sanders.

When Sanders' charisma is getting the Liberals in CA, and TX all happy (without doing a damn thing that will change the outcome of the election WRT those two States) it is also getting the moderates and fence-sitting conservatives in MI, PA, and WI riled up in the opposite direction, possibly costing us those States n the General- and by extension, the General itself.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I contend that if there's a baby playing in the street and Ted and Bill stop to have a big showy moral debate about whether they should rescue the baby because it's the right thing to do or whether they should do it to decrease the chances of the baby causing a multi-card pile up instead of one of them just going into street and getting the baby they should both be slapped.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It's especially striking if you compare video from Biden during Obama's 2008 and 2012 campaigns. There has been a clear drop in lucidity.

There's no doubt Biden has some seriously worrisome flaws.

But no other candidates were rising to the top. So unfortunate. Hopefully Trump's attacks will have lost a lot of effect now that people can see what an incompetent POTUS he's been.

Trump may still have his core, but a whole lot of people he conned in 2016 are not part of that core. And Trump's incompetence is blatantly obvious to a lot of people who didn't see it earlier.

Trump can't attack Biden based on Hunter because Trump's got a whole book of corruption that can be thrown back in his face. And there are dozens of videos of Trump slurring his speech and misspeaking. There's ammo this time around.

 

[dudalb]

Sorry, but Bernie has way more charisma than Biden.

SO Charisma is the only thing that counts in elections?

 

[dudalb]

I've been saying this since 2015. It's easy to believe that army is materializing; but how many times do you need to see a no show before you realize the calvary ain't coming?

Particulary when you live in an echo chamber

 

[angrysoba]

I contend that if there's a baby playing in the street and Ted and Bill stop to have a big showy moral debate about whether they should rescue the baby because it's the right thing to do or whether they should do it to decrease the chances of the baby causing a multi-card pile up instead of one of them just going into street and getting the baby they should both be slapped.

I contend you should just go into the street and pick up the baby rather than stand around with Ted and Bill having a three stooges slap fight!

 

[JoeMorgue]

Particulary when you live in an echo chamber

I asked everyone who follows me on Twitter and they said that's not true.

 

[Distracted1]

I contend you should just go into the street and pick up the baby rather than stand around with Ted and Bill having a three stooges slap fight!

Then the mainstream media can put out an Amber alert.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

That is the Warren path to victory.

There's a video going around of Sanders short of breath standing still. That's Warren's path to victory.

I mean, as long as you are hoping nature intervenes.

I'm not linking to the Sanders video because too much fake stuff is out there and because they made Clinton out to be unhealthy based on a couple instances. She's clearly looking healthy 4 years later.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Hey, Tulsi got a delegate there though!!!

I was surprised to see that too.

 

[dudalb]

I think that Biden probably has a few more delegates then the official Super Tuesday results will show; I think he has most of Mayor Pete and Klobucher's delagates pretty much in his pocket.