Cont: 2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker Part IV

[Delphic Oracle]

No. Have you found that skeptic hat yet? Maybe look under the bed?

When you do find it, maybe go back and look at the explanations you were given last time you tried this.


edited to add: I repeat my earlier question. How do you think attacking Trump's only opponent will play out for you? Will the masses write in Sanders? Or will Trump name Sanders as his VP and give you an excuse to fully back him? Or...what?

In one thread, we talk about how disturbing Trump's portraying a criticism as an attack is lamentable.

In another, we engage in that exact behavior to protect the candidate we like.

Another one:

"Because Trump is worse" is the liberal "we have to stop soshulism!" These are the invocations that allow temporarily being a complete hypocrite.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Legitimate criticism of Biden now constitutes supporting Trump, even when you've repeatedly clarified that Trump is worse than Biden.

And even though this forum is largely liberal and we (the liberals here) all agree how horrible Trump is but disagree on how bad Biden is, thou shalt not debate why Biden is a terrible candidate and instead must only speak our daily (legitimate) Trump hate.

So sayeth the critical thinkers!

I'm trying to be optimistic here. If Biden wins, and that means Trump is gone, so that's good.

If Biden loses, hopefully the HRC-Biden one-two punch is enough to force a come-to-jesus moment for the party and we purge the worthless corporatists, and that would be swell.

 

[Brainster]

During the early part of the primary season, there seemed to be a widespread belief that this time around, any candidate would get universal appeal from each and every Democrat and democratic-leaning voter. Sure, no nominee would be everyone's first pick, but even a ham sandwich could win the popular vote against OMB. So if a ham sandwich gets nominated, that's who everyone will vote for.

It's the happy horsecrap every party tells itself before the primary starts and the elbows jab. Was the GOP united in the wake of Trump's primary win in 2016, or Mitt's in 2012 or McCain's in 2008?

 

[wareyin]

Legitimate criticism of Biden now constitutes supporting Trump, even when you've repeatedly clarified that Trump is worse than Biden.

As to the hilited, no. It wasn't legitimate the last time it was tried, and ignoring all the responses and repeating the smears certainly doesn't make it become legitimate now. Regarding the "Trump is worse" even after being shown that Sanders supporters on this forum are straight up making the claim that Trump is better? Well,at least you are consistently ignoring the evidence that you are wrong rather than only occasionally doing so.

And even though this forum is largely liberal and we (the liberals here) all agree how horrible Trump is but disagree on how bad Biden is, thou shalt not debate why Biden is a terrible candidate and instead must only speak our daily (legitimate) Trump hate.

So sayeth the critical thinkers!

Ok, how do you see attacking the only impediment to Trump winning as working out for you? Trump is so horrible that you are trying to remove his opponent with baseless smears and already debunked rumors? This passes for critical thinking for you?

 

[Suddenly]

Nope. Goalpost move noted, but I have enough faith in your cognitive abilities that I'm sure you are not confused by different claims having different metrics and proofs. 'Whether one candidate is electable' is different from 'can people who aren't allowed to vote or choose not to vote affect the outcome?' But, again, that's so painfully trivially obvious that I am sure even you are not confused by it.

If anything other than raw pragmatism entered into it Clinton would be president.
Blaming people that don't like you is sort of like nihilists claiming something isn't fair.

Being "electable" is meaningless. It's like the "most photographed barn in the world" in DeLillo's White Noise. At some point it gets photographed because it if famous for being photographed.

Ok, so you aren't Bernie or bust. Which other Democratic candidate -that is by any measure closer to the man you are working to defeat than Trump- did you have your heart set on?

Bernie or Warren. Just that both are not great at being politicians. I'm fine with a replacement level Democrat. Biden was my least favorite in that group. I probably wouldn't have voted for Bloomberg.

Really I'd have liked Richard Ojeda, but he's nowhere ready and his even wanting to run was a bit disconcerting. AOC/Ojeda 2024, dammit.

I honestly keep trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but being unable to see the difference from going 'significantly left but not all the way left' and going 'right' is really making that hard. Please, help me out here.

Populism doesn't exist on the classic left/right scale. There are potential "Bernie Republicans" out there. I could sell Bernie to people that wouldn't vote for any other Democrat in a million years. Socially conservative people who are invested in labor issues and who feel abandoned by the Democrats.

The leftists that vote for Trump would mostly be accelerationalists that want the system to collapse and see Biden as a waste of time at best. It isn't spite, more an angry callousness and playing a longer game. Personally, I find their disregard for those most vulnerable to a second Trump term abhorrent, but that is me.

Gotcha. It's not petulance, it's....something that sounds, looks, tastes, feels, and smells like petulance, but is different because while you say you will personally vote for Biden you will also be doing everything you can to convince people that they should not vote for Biden. Thereby, you hope to bring about another Trump victory but be able to wash your hands of it because you personally didn't vote the way you told everyone else they should vote. Yeah...that's a great plan.

Sorry. I'm not working on the campaign. I don't work in sales and I find misrepresenting my own opinions to influence other people's behavior personally unacceptable. This is a politics forum. I'm here to say what I think.

Labeling criticism in this forum as "everything I can do to convince people that they should not vote for Biden" is the sort of binary "for us or against us" thinking that I'm never finding acceptable. Obviously I'm not out there trying to persuade people not to vote for Biden seeing I'm voting for him, but that doesn't mean I can't have an honest conversation about his flaws.

 

[wareyin]

In one thread, we talk about how disturbing Trump's portraying a criticism as an attack is lamentable.

In another, we engage in that exact behavior to protect the candidate we like.

Hmmm, I am not aware of supporting attacking Trump based on debunked rumors and baseless smears. Nor am I aware of anyone claiming that making up stuff about Trump is a mere criticism. Perhaps these things are not the same as you are portraying them to be?

Another one:

"Because Trump is worse" is the liberal "we have to stop soshulism!" These are the invocations that allow temporarily being a complete hypocrite.

No, no, do go on with the dishonest smear campaign against Biden. It totally makes you not a hypocrite.

 

[wareyin]

I'm trying to be optimistic here. If Biden wins, and that means Trump is gone, so that's good.

If Biden loses, hopefully the HRC-Biden one-two punch is enough to force a come-to-jesus moment for the party and we purge the worthless corporatists, and that would be swell.

A lot of Sanders supporters thought that by harming Clinton and letting Trump win last time, the progressive revolution would be easier this time. Now that that's predictably failed, they're doing their best to sabotage Trump's opponent again because this time it'll bring about the progressive revolution for sure! Spoiler alert: It won't. It will be 1 maybe even 2 more far right wack-jobs on the SCOTUS and hundreds more far right wack-jobs at every level of the courts, meaning it will be decades before any progressive agenda will be possible.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

A lot of Sanders supporters thought that by harming Clinton and letting Trump win last time, the progressive revolution would be easier this time. Now that that's predictably failed, they're doing their best to sabotage Trump's opponent again because this time it'll bring about the progressive revolution for sure! Spoiler alert: It won't. It will be 1 maybe even 2 more far right wack-jobs on the SCOTUS and hundreds more far right wack-jobs at every level of the courts, meaning it will be decades before any progressive agenda will be possible.

Ahh yes, the knife in the back argument, a timeless classic. Would it kill you to just admit that Hillary was a bad candidate and ran a bad campaign? Whatever some Bernie or bust weirdos did in the margins is only significant because Hillary gave her opponent huge advantages in every significant battle?

It has been pretty clear through this process that the party is openly contemptuous of the progressive wing of the party. A Biden nomination is an open statement that the party thinks it can win without the more progressive, younger wing of the party. Plenty of these folks were practically jumping with glee to see the low voter turnout among the Bernie coalition. So be it, the party has spoken. They got Joe, despite all the obvious issues that people have been pointing out the entire primary.

Perhaps the party can win this way, perhaps not. If it breaks bad, just remember that this is what the party chose.

 

[Suddenly]

Biden actually has experience building coalitions, negotiating, and convincing a wide group of people to work together. McConnell certainly won't "hand" him a win, but Biden seems to know how to wrangle enough people together to win anyway. Sanders? He has no people or leadership skills. He'd do his ultra-pure, my way or the highway dance, and be left wondering why even the Democrats in Congress don't work with him.

I don't really dispute the difference in skills. Where I disagree with it is that at this point, especially with a Republican senate, an unhinged Bernie willing to set the world on fire is more likely to get things done than Biden trying to negotiate with a brick wall.

As far as a Democratic congress goes, the alternate world where Bernie get the nom and wins while flipping the Senate is a world where centrist Democrats have to really worry about primary challenges from the left. That changes things quite a bit.

 

[theprestige]

Legitimate criticism of Biden now constitutes supporting Trump, even when you've repeatedly clarified that Trump is worse than Biden.

Criticism of Biden at this point in the process, including legitimate criticism, undermines his candidacy and increases the risk of a Trump reelection.

Unless your criticism legitimately concludes, "... and that is why we must defeat Biden in November, even though it means another four years of President Trump", maybe the wise and ethical play right now is to let it lie. Save these critiques until after the election, and use them to influence even-more-optimal outcomes from the Biden presidency.

 

[wareyin]

If anything other than raw pragmatism entered into it Clinton would be president.
Blaming people that don't like you is sort of like nihilists claiming something isn't fair.

Non sequitur.

Being "electable" is meaningless. It's like the "most photographed barn in the world" in DeLillo's White Noise. At some point it gets photographed because it if famous for being photographed.

Wait, you haven't figured out that getting more people to vote for you means ... you win the election? That's basically the thing about being electable. You can win an election, by getting people to vote for you. Sanders? He isn't and wasn't electable because he can't get people to vote for him. Watching people who backed candidates who couldn't win complain that the only reason Biden won is because more people like him is frankly astounding. How can you guys miss the point so badly?

Bernie or Warren. Just that both are not great at being politicians. I'm fine with a replacement level Democrat. Biden was my least favorite in that group. I probably wouldn't have voted for Bloomberg.

Really I'd have liked Richard Ojeda, but he's nowhere ready and his even wanting to run was a bit disconcerting. AOC/Ojeda 2024, dammit.

Honestly Warren would have been my top choice. Bloomberg my least favorite. I'm not looking for the left-version of Trump, an "only I can fix it," johnny come lately who seems to switch parties at the drop of a hat. Which is also why I don't like Sanders, oddly enough.

Populism doesn't exist on the classic left/right scale. There are potential "Bernie Republicans" out there. I could sell Bernie to people that wouldn't vote for any other Democrat in a million years. Socially conservative people who are invested in labor issues and who feel abandoned by the Democrats.

Bernie couldn't sell himself, but you're a good enough salesman that you could sell him to people who already believe he's a communist socialist atheist Jew? Ok...

The leftists that vote for Trump would mostly be accelerationalists that want the system to collapse and see Biden as a waste of time at best. It isn't spite, more an angry callousness and playing a longer game. Personally, I find their disregard for those most vulnerable to a second Trump term abhorrent, but that is me.

On this we agree.

Sorry. I'm not working on the campaign. I don't work in sales and I find misrepresenting my own opinions to influence other people's behavior personally unacceptable. This is a politics forum. I'm here to say what I think.

Wait, I thought you were able to sell Sanders to the people who have been primed for decades to automatically scream "socialism" when they hear his name. Now you don't do sales?

Labeling criticism in this forum as "everything I can do to convince people that they should not vote for Biden" is the sort of binary "for us or against us" thinking that I'm never finding acceptable. Obviously I'm not out there trying to persuade people not to vote for Biden seeing I'm voting for him, but that doesn't mean I can't have an honest conversation about his flaws.

I keep asking this question, but haven't had an answer yet. How do you think criticizing the only guy in Trump's way will play out? When there are only 2 choices, it is binary. There is absolutely no chance that it will not be Trump or Biden.

 

[theprestige]

I'm trying to be optimistic here. If Biden wins, and that means Trump is gone, so that's good.

If Biden loses, hopefully the HRC-Biden one-two punch is enough to force a come-to-jesus moment for the party and we purge the worthless corporatists, and that would be swell.

America is essentially conservative and capitalist. Purging the "worthless corporatists" would alienate a lot of the Democratic party. The remainder would end up in the wilderness for a generation or more. More like a come-to-john-the-baptist moment.

I guess one could push the metaphor a bit, and say that this rump DNC would be the precursor party to whatever Socialist Jesus eventually appears on the scene, as fortetold in prophecy.

But none of that helps you defeat Trump through the magic of zealous ideology.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Criticism of Biden at this point in the process, including legitimate criticism, undermines his candidacy and increases the risk of a Trump reelection.

Unless your criticism legitimately concludes, "... and that is why we must defeat Biden in November, even though it means another four years of President Trump", maybe the wise and ethical play right now is to let it lie. Save these critiques until after the election, and use them to influence even-more-optimal outcomes from the Biden presidency.

How many US voters are active on this forum?

This is a back alley on the dead side of town, perfectly safe to drop trou and take a leak. No one can here me whinge about how much Biden sucks here. It's a safe place to tell unfortunate truths.

 

[wareyin]

Criticism of Biden at this point in the process, including legitimate criticism, undermines his candidacy and increases the risk of a Trump reelection.

Unless your criticism legitimately concludes, "... and that is why we must defeat Biden in November, even though it means another four years of President Trump", maybe the wise and ethical play right now is to let it lie. Save these critiques until after the election, and use them to influence even-more-optimal outcomes from the Biden presidency.

Exactly!

 

[Suddenly]

A lot of Sanders supporters thought that by harming Clinton and letting Trump win last time, the progressive revolution would be easier this time. Now that that's predictably failed, they're doing their best to sabotage Trump's opponent again because this time it'll bring about the progressive revolution for sure! Spoiler alert: It won't. It will be 1 maybe even 2 more far right wack-jobs on the SCOTUS and hundreds more far right wack-jobs at every level of the courts, meaning it will be decades before any progressive agenda will be possible.

I suspect those legions of judges are coming whether Trump wins or not. His lame duck period is going to be a frenzy of judicial appointments, and I'd expect some attempt to add two more SCOTUS justices.

The only issue will be whether the Democrats are going to accept this farce or force a long overdue constitutional crisis over the nature and power of the courts. With the Senate they have more options. Without the Senate it gets dicier. Either way I don't see Biden doing anything but whining about it and worrying about preserving the norms that the GOP uses as so much toilet paper.

Trump did move the country closer to a progressive revolution. If you go back to 2012 and tell people that Bernie Sanders was recognized as the clear front runner at the beginning of the 2020 primary campaign, not as a novelty or protest candidate, they'd laugh in your face.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I keep asking this question, but haven't had an answer yet. How do you think criticizing the only guy in Trump's way will play out? When there are only 2 choices, it is binary. There is absolutely no chance that it will not be Trump or Biden.

There's a third option you're missing, and it's actually the most popular option for this country. It's not voting. It's deciding that electoral politics don't matter, that things can't change for the better, and withdrawing from the process entirely.

Strangely enough, 2016 was the lowest turnout in 20 years. Wonder why HRC couldn't get people to the polls after 8 years of a very popular Democratic president. Curious indeed.

Good thing the DNC nominated a candidate that everyone is enthusiastic to vote for this time!

 

[wareyin]

I suspect those legions of judges are coming whether Trump wins or not. His lame duck period is going to be a frenzy of judicial appointments, and I'd expect some attempt to add two more SCOTUS justices.

By increasing the size of the court? I'm pretty sure RBG is going to hang on til January at all costs if she knows a Democrat is the next President. But if Trump wins, I don't know if she has another 4 years+ of Justicing left in her.

The only issue will be whether the Democrats are going to accept this farce or force a long overdue constitutional crisis over the nature and power of the courts. With the Senate they have more options. Without the Senate it gets dicier. Either way I don't see Biden doing anything but whining about it and worrying about preserving the norms that the GOP uses as so much toilet paper.

If Trump wins, I'd expect the Dems to lose the House and probably some Senate seats as well. If Biden wins, there's likely enough people voting Dem that they keep the House, if not take the Senate. If the Reps keep the Presidency and the Senate, there is no way the power of the (now stacked with Rep Judges) courts will face a challenge.

Trump did move the country closer to a progressive revolution. If you go back to 2012 and tell people that Bernie Sanders was recognized as the clear front runner at the beginning of the 2020 primary campaign, not as a novelty or protest candidate, they'd laugh in your face.

I doubt they'd laugh, probably because most people in 2012 wouldn't know who he was. I will note that he is doing significantly worse in 2020 than he did in 2016, so if anything he's pushing the progressive revolution farther away. Add to that the efforts of his supporters to make Trump's win easier, and this revolution ain't gonna be seen for generations.

 

[wareyin]

There's a third option you're missing, and it's actually the most popular option for this country. It's not voting. It's deciding that electoral politics don't matter, that things can't change for the better, and withdrawing from the process entirely.

Strangely enough, 2016 was the lowest turnout in 20 years. Wonder why HRC couldn't get people to the polls after 8 years of a very popular Democratic president. Curious indeed.

Good thing the DNC nominated a candidate that everyone is enthusiastic to vote for this time!

Ok, don't vote. Doesn't change the fact that it's still going to be Biden or Trump. Work against Biden? You're helping Trump, because it's binary, one or the other will win. Working against the guy who is closest to your political beliefs may feel good in a "burn it all down and I don't care who I hurt" way, but it's not noble. It won't make everyone pick the guy they have now twice rejected and will be far too old next time around. And it will drive your revolution farther away from ever happening because the guy you helped win doesn't burn it down, he stacks the deck so the courts are hard right for a decade.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Ok, don't vote. Doesn't change the fact that it's still going to be Biden or Trump. Work against Biden? You're helping Trump, because it's binary, one or the other will win. Working against the guy who is closest to your political beliefs may feel good in a "burn it all down and I don't care who I hurt" way, but it's not noble. It won't make everyone pick the guy they have now twice rejected and will be far too old next time around. And it will drive your revolution farther away from ever happening because the guy you helped win doesn't burn it down, he stacks the deck so the courts are hard right for a decade.

If taking any action that results in Trump winning is considered helping him, then nominating HRC in 2016 was helping Trump. A better candidate would have won, so selecting Hillary was helping Trump.

 

[theprestige]

If taking any action that results in Trump winning is considered helping him, then nominating HRC in 2016 was helping Trump. A better candidate would have won, so selecting Hillary was helping Trump.

This is not a new idea.

But nobody is asking you to predict the future with 20/20 hindsight. We're saying you should be mindful of your own actions in the present, and how they might be detrimental to your cause.