2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker

[Regnad Kcin]

Let me explain why I said that Biden's base (again, older black people) "just might" go elsewhere, and not "He's toast".

Black people are very transactional when it comes to working with other racial groups, particularly white people, out of necessity. Sometimes you have to work with a overtly racist person to get to some goal or other, and that includes Civil Rights workers. That's why I'm personally so fast to put clear-cut racists on ignore here - I have no need to deal with such a person here.

Am I appalled that Biden worked with some guy who said "Life, Liberty, and the Right to Pursue Dead (N-word)s"? No. He's a long-time congressman, I expected that. Am I shocked that he didn't like bussing? No, most people never really liked it, regardless of skin color. Black folks wanted good schools in their own neighborhoods, and yeah, Biden's right, to say that black people somehow need white people to learn is pretty racist on it's own. I keep saying, the problem with "separate but equal" was that nothing was actually equal.

I thought Harris was very effective, and showed that, like Hillary, she could get right under Dolt 45's skin and leave him raging for days. Biden was sloppy, and Mayor Pete - I've never been understood why he's such a media darling.

A comes-out-of-nowhere pol who’s thoughtful, articulate, as intelligent as a certain president is not, self-assured but not arrogant, and, most remarkably, matter of fact about a personal aspect that until recently would’ve been radioactively toxic?

But the average black voter? Depends on whether they see Biden the way I did, or Harris as attacking Obama-Biden as a team. The guy who will really lose is Pete - that answer he gave for police shootings won't fly, and frankly, there's a lot of other ugliness that hasn't hit mainstream news that will absolutely sink him among black voters. But I already knew he was a dead man walking, so I didn't bother.

As far as white voters go? Kinda the same, except the Obama-Biden teamup isn't seen in such powerful terms.

Innuendo? Well, that’s nice.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

I think he handled the question about as well as he could have.

 

[The_Animus]

He didn't exactly shine in the time he got, anyway.

Because his ideas, and any serious discussion for that matter, require in depth explanation, which you can't do in 60 second sound bites.

Watching these debates all I see is a joke. It's a farce pretending to be something of substance when it's nothing of the sort.

 

[Mumbles]

A comes-out-of-nowhere pol who’s thoughtful, articulate, as intelligent as a certain president is not, self-assured but not arrogant, and, most remarkably, matter of fact about a personal aspect that until recently would’ve been radioactively toxic?

I'm just not impressed much by this. All I get is "He's a Rhodes Scholar! He learned a language just to read a book!" And those all speak well to his intelligence - hell, I wish I could learn so much as a second spoken or written language, as my high school Spanish grades would show anyone.

But that doesn't make one ready to be president.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to say "Aw man, Biden's done! He's at 1% now. Mayor Pete is the progressive Hero! He showed everyone he's ready! He's gonna take out that idiot Dolt 45 and send him to the Hague for trial!" I'm just not getting my hopes up, and I'm cautioning that y'all should't either. Wait for a few polls to come out, we'll see.

Biden might actually turn this into a strength. Key word, Might. I know a lot of old black folks that still have Obama photos hanging next to MLK Jr. and Jesus. Biden showed up with a strong advantage because of this association.

My top pick for now are Sanders or Warren, Harris, and either Booker or Castro. I'm just saying folks should settle down for a bit. Yes, I'd like to see an LGBT president. I think this guy's going to flame out.

Innuendo? Well, that’s nice.

I thought I'd linked at least some of these before, but maybe not, or maybe you just didn't see that particular post on this forum. Either way, you make a good point, and you deserve an explanation. So:

Here's a new one concerning Officer Knepper, the cop who shot a guy. Note that he was such a problem that people were organizing to get Knepper, specifically, fired years ago.

Here's the more important one. His reconstruction initiative is one of his signature achievements. But it sounds like little more than a gentrification project, where he ignored any input from black and Hispanic residents. Worse, from some stories, the city got minority-owned businesses to buy the properties, only to demolish them, and forcibly resell them, when they didn't bring them up to code "fast enough". This will kill him once it hits mainstream, at least among many nonwhite groups.

Now, here's the key. For all the cries of how the DNC somehow "rigged" everything, the truth is, Sanders could have quite possibly won the 2016 primary, if he hadn't abandoned the black vote, and thus lost the entire South, to Clinton. Mayor Pete simply can't win in the South - not because he's gay (although let's be honest, that will count against him) but because democrats in the south are overwhelmingly black and/or Hispanic, and once the stories I'm linking to above above hit mainstream, he won't be able to recover.

And what's the best argument against any other frontrunner? "Harris jailed parents who let their kids skip a month or more of school within a single school year!"? Good, get your kids to school. "Biden once worked with racists!" So? "He was anti-bussing!" Okay, a lot of people of every skin color were (side note: my family in Boston mostly saw local schools improve when white families saw the decrepit state of the schools in black neighborhoods).

Castro and Booker did...something really bad and offensive?

"Sanders yelled a lot on tv!" Let's be honest, he yells a lot everywhere, he's like KRS-One. Again, not too important.

"Mayor Pete gentrified his city as mayor, didn't put enough black and brown people on his city council, and let a violent racist cop run around until he killed a guy"? That's deadly In comparison, Beto just kinda sucks standing next to anyone except Ted Cruz.

 

[Mumbles]

I think he handled the question about as well as he could have.

I agree, given the circumstances, the time limit, and his legal restraints.

But that's all I'll give him.

Because his ideas, and any serious discussion for that matter, require in depth explanation, which you can't do in 60 second sound bites.

Watching these debates all I see is a joke. It's a farce pretending to be something of substance when it's nothing of the sort.

Well, the problem is, if you're on a stage with 9 other people, and you're one of the also-rans, if you have a message, you need to muscle in. And he didn't. All I know about Yang is his guaranteed minimum salary (okay), and that he's loved by 4channers (very bad). He's like the "Pass the torch" guy. In my personal view, Harris just stepped up and took it. If he makes it to debate 2, he needs to do vastly better.

But why even bother, when guys like Di Blasio are more persuasive, yet still likely aren't moving?

 

[Belz...]

Because his ideas, and any serious discussion for that matter, require in depth explanation, which you can't do in 60 second sound bites.

No. Because he wasn't ready for the question, which he perfectly understood.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I'm just not impressed much by this. All I get is "He's a Rhodes Scholar! He learned a language just to read a book!" And those all speak well to his intelligence - hell, I wish I could learn so much as a second spoken or written language, as my high school Spanish grades would show anyone.

But that doesn't make one ready to be president.

Buttigieg is a younger, value-centered (as opposed to policy-centered), charismatic, above-the-fray, pragmatic, center-left technocrat. He also reclaims traditionally Republican values. This is appealing for mass media. In a lot of ways, he is in the mold of Obama. And that's why he would make a terrible president.

I definitely don't see him winning the nomination, but his presence is important to more helpfully ground the farther left debate and broaden appeal than Hickenlooper sneering about socialism.

 

[applecorped]

Watching actual dogs and ponies would have been more enjoyable

 

[Bikewer]

I didn’t watch the debates... They tend to analyze them in excruciating detail on NPR, which I listen to all day at work.
Morning Edition did about 30 minutes with Yang a couple of weeks ago; I thought he made some cogent points.
Sad to hear he was somewhat shut out of the debate.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

not because he's gay (although let's be honest, that will count against him)

Let's be honest, that's the main factor against him. Black voters as a demographic are hugely homophobic. Literally anything he does will be demonized.

 

[The_Animus]

I agree, given the circumstances, the time limit, and his legal restraints.

But that's all I'll give him.



Well, the problem is, if you're on a stage with 9 other people, and you're one of the also-rans, if you have a message, you need to muscle in. And he didn't. All I know about Yang is his guaranteed minimum salary (okay), and that he's loved by 4channers (very bad). He's like the "Pass the torch" guy. In my personal view, Harris just stepped up and took it. If he makes it to debate 2, he needs to do vastly better.

But why even bother, when guys like Di Blasio are more persuasive, yet still likely aren't moving?

Muscling in, aka childishly shouting over each other, is an embarrassment which took up more time in the debate than some of the candidates got to speak.

And he did try to interject a couple times but as I already pointed out his mic was turned off, unlike the other candidates, so he literally couldn't muscle in.

There area several long form interviews of Yang where he has the time to actually have a real discussion of his positions. That is the best way to actually learn something about the candidates.

I'm not at all interested in who has nice sounding one liners or elevator speeches but no actual substance. That's how you end up with terrible people in government like Trump.

 

[The_Animus]

Also, I get that for a debate with 10 people there is only so much time they can each speak, but the debate format and how it's run was just awful.

They should have the debate go 2 hours and have time split evenly among candidates. That gives each one about 12 minutes total. The debate should be limited to a single topic, or at most two topics, one per hour.
When it is a candidates turn to speak, all other candidates should be muted to discourage interrupting and shouting over one another.

Instead we get this train wreck of one minute nothings over 7 different topics with constant interruptions and shouting matches.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Let me explain why I said that Biden's base (again, older black people) "just might" go elsewhere, and not "He's toast"....

... Don't get me wrong, I'd love to say "Aw man, Biden's done! He's at 1% now. ...

Biden might actually turn this into a strength. Key word, Might. I know a lot of old black folks that still have Obama photos hanging next to MLK Jr. and Jesus. Biden showed up with a strong advantage because of this association.
....

Biden is toast. "You shouldn't have said it wasn't so, Joe."

Democracy Now Interview: Jonathan Kozol: Joe Biden Didn’t Just Praise Segregationists. He Also Spent Years Fighting Busing

AMY GOODMAN: ...

While Biden’s recent comments made the news, far less attention has been paid to the former vice president’s actual record. In the 1970s, then-Senator Biden was a fierce critic of Delaware’s attempts to bus students in an effort to integrate its schools. In a recently unearthed interview from 1975, Biden said, quote, “We’ve lost our bearings since the 1954 Brown v. School Board desegregation case. … To 'desegregate' is different than to 'integrate.'” He went on to say, quote, “The real problem with busing is that you take [white] people who aren’t racist, people who are good citizens, who believe in equal education and opportunity, and you stunt their children’s intellectual growth by busing them to an inferior school,” unquote. CNN recently revealed that in 1977 Biden wrote a letter to the segregationist Senator James Eastland thanking him for supporting his anti-busing legislation ....

JONATHAN KOZOL [National Book Award-winning author]**: Joe Biden didn’t simply reach out, in consensus, some kind of civility, to these Southern racist senators. It wasn’t hard for him to reach out, because he shared their views in the first place. He didn’t just support legislation introduced by James Eastland, Jesse Helms. He thanked them for supporting his legislation and his own anti-busing legislation. He called busing “asinine.” And worse than that, at one point he even came to the point of saying—I want to get his words exact—of saying, “I’ve gotten to the point where I think our only recourse to eliminate busing is a constitutional amendment.” Just stunning words.

OMG! An anti-busing crusader, wrote legislation against busing, suggested a Constitutional Amendment because he believed that strongly against busing... And he now describes that as never being against busing, just being against a federal mandate?


Here's the article from The Nation: When Joe Biden Collaborated With Segregationists - The candidate’s years as an anti-busing crusader cannot be forgotten—or readily forgiven.

In the interview, which captured an early unfiltered Biden, today’s Democratic front-runner picked through a grab bag of anti-integration canards to make his case against busing—among them, the idea that a school where children of different races or multiple ethnicities sit in class together is doomed to be inferior. ...

WA Post reporters unearthed the interview. It's behind a paywall for me but there's a link to it in The Nation article.

Nor did Biden stop there. With bald disregard for centuries of American history, he said, “I do not buy the concept, popular in the ’60s, which said, ‘We have suppressed the black man for 300 years and…in order to even the score, we must now give the black man”—no reference to black women—“a head start or even hold the white man back.… I don’t buy that.” He concluded, “I oppose busing. It’s an asinine concept, the utility of which has never been proven to me. I’ve gotten to the point where I think our only recourse to eliminate busing may be a constitutional amendment.”

But oh no, he wasn't racist.

Apparently Biden's anti-bussing legislation was mentioned in the CNN letters but it seems the collaboration with the segregationists got the most attention.

In a stunning piece of reportage in Politico in 2015, historian Jason Sokol surfaced Biden’s argument that busing children for the sake of integration was an insult to black people because it implies that they “have no reason to be proud of…their own culture” and cannot learn unless they’re sitting next to a white child. By dragging out this chestnut, Biden sought to turn the tables on Senate integrationists.

I think Biden had a prepared answer to the collaborating with segregationists accusation but was caught off-guard by the bussing questions.

He's toast. It will just take a few days to go viral.



**

Jonathan Kozol is the National Book Award-winning author of Death at an Early Age, Savage Inequalities and other books on children in inner-city schools. He taught fifth grade for two years in Boston's suburban interdistrict program, the longest-lasting voluntary integration effort in the nation. Kozol is the winner of the 2005 Puffin/Nation Prize for Creative Citizenship.

 

[bruto]

I must say I've never been a great Biden fan. I mean he's not so bad, and I'd much sooner have him than Trump, but I'd rather see someone with a little more zing and maybe a little more brains.

As I get older I feel more as if we old farts ought to let go and hand it over to the younger generation. Insley is good on climate change, and Bernie is a champion of vets,and so forth, so let's elect a smart younger candidate with a big future, and hire those experts to work under them.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Why would voting for younger candidates amount to turning the reins over? It's still your vote.

I found Biden to have a lot of the attitudes my dad had. I'm happy to report they are still outdated opinions. Both Biden and Pelosi made me cringe when they told younger legislators that their experiences meant they were superior to those naive kids. (Paraphrased, of course.)

The intelligent way to have handled it would have been to recognize the experience and knowledge of the younger legislators and then just say you believed differently. To say I have more experience than you is not a good form of communication.

Harris said the right thing when she said to Biden, I don't believe you are a racist, but...

 

[Brainster]

Also, I get that for a debate with 10 people there is only so much time they can each speak, but the debate format and how it's run was just awful.

They should have the debate go 2 hours and have time split evenly among candidates. That gives each one about 12 minutes total. The debate should be limited to a single topic, or at most two topics, one per hour.
When it is a candidates turn to speak, all other candidates should be muted to discourage interrupting and shouting over one another.

Instead we get this train wreck of one minute nothings over 7 different topics with constant interruptions and shouting matches.

That's the part the networks want in there. Let's face it, they could use a simple switchboard to shut off the microphones of everybody but the person answering the questions, but they don't. Why? Because they want the conflict--that's what gets people to watch.

But you're right, it's gotta go. The problem is with ten candidates on stage at once is that all of them other than (say) Biden and Sanders know this is their only shot--if they don't hit a home run here it's all over. Gillibrand, especially, seemed to be flailing about like a drowning person.

The biggest disappointment to me was that as with the previous night, the only mention of the word "nuclear" was in reference to nuclear arms.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Considering democrats are a coalition of college educated whites and minorities, that is a group involved in and favor a lot of current segregationist policies.

 

[Mumbles]

I didn’t watch the debates... They tend to analyze them in excruciating detail on NPR, which I listen to all day at work.
Morning Edition did about 30 minutes with Yang a couple of weeks ago; I thought he made some cogent points.
Sad to hear he was somewhat shut out of the debate.

Yang, like others, has very detailed responses to particular issues.

He'll never win, though. Best bet is for him to push his causes, and hope that the frontliners take them up.

And in fact, Al Sharpton pointed out that his run in 2004 wasn't to make himself president, but to remind the democratic party that they needed to address the needs of the poor, the homeless, and the marginalized.

Let's be honest, that's the main factor against him. Black voters as a demographic are hugely homophobic. Literally anything he does will be demonized.

I'm not at all sure of this. It's correct to say that "black" culture is really southern culture, but in truth, *every* US culture is figuring out how to deal with LGBTQ folk. This is not what will ultimately what will sink Mayor Pete.

I just don't see why Mayor Pete is even there, honestly. Does hehave an issue to deal with? Does he think he'll be better than the other umteen dems running?

Muscling in, aka childishly shouting over each other, is an embarrassment which took up more time in the debate than some of the candidates got to speak.

And he did try to interject a couple times but as I already pointed out his mic was turned off, unlike the other candidates, so he literally couldn't muscle in.

There area several long form interviews of Yang where he has the time to actually have a real discussion of his positions. That is the best way to actually learn something about the candidates.

I'm not at all interested in who has nice sounding one liners or elevator speeches but no actual substance. That's how you end up with terrible people in government like Trump.

This is about format. Yeah, it sucked. I joked, but Chuck Todd is the worst person involved. The end.

Even so, Yang should have bullied in where he could. But instead, he's just some guy I don't even remember talking, a day or two later.

 

[Mumbles]

Biden is toast. "You shouldn't have said it wasn't so, Joe."

Democracy Now Interview: Jonathan Kozol: Joe Biden Didn’t Just Praise Segregationists. He Also Spent Years Fighting Busing
OMG! An anti-busing crusader, wrote legislation against busing, suggested a Constitutional Amendment because he believed that strongly against busing... And he now describes that as never being against busing, just being against a federal mandate?


Here's the article from The Nation: When Joe Biden Collaborated With Segregationists - The candidate’s years as an anti-busing crusader cannot be forgotten—or readily forgiven.

WA Post reporters unearthed the interview. It's behind a paywall for me but there's a link to it in The Nation article.

But oh no, he wasn't racist.

Apparently Biden's anti-bussing legislation was mentioned in the CNN letters but it seems the collaboration with the segregationists got the most attention.


I think Biden had a prepared answer to the collaborating with segregationists accusation but was caught off-guard by the bussing questions.

He's toast. It will just take a few days to go viral.

That'd be great, and I hope you're correct. I just don't think this is over. I may be overly pessimistic, granted, but, we're in the backlash to Obama being elected. The GOP is dashing towards neo-Nazi status, and yet people will vote for them.

You've put together a lot of good links. They may sink Biden.They *should* sink him. Except, he's still connected to Obama.

What I'm saying is, wait for the polls. Move based on them.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I'd wager Biden survives, only because I don't see a rational reason for why so many supported to begin with. Carly Fiorina beat Trump in the Republican debates for 2016, but popularity is popularity.