Democratic caucuses and primaries

Right, it is no longer a competitive race.

I think Sanders needs to do the decent thing and concede. It wouldn't be responsible for him to tell everyone to get out the vote while there was a coronavirus pandemic going around. It would be different if this was a close race, but it isn't.

And before anyone says, "Come on, we are supposed to praise soldiers for risking their lives to install democracy!" well, there is a reason why they are soldiers and get the praise and everyone else doesn't.
 
"But Biden and Trump both represent the same.... *pause for dramatic effect* establishment OMG!!!" - Every Bernie Bro starting any second now.

The only True Bernie Bro we had around here last time turned into a Trump supporter as soon as Bernie was out. The folks here now are much more reasonable.
 
The only True Bernie Bro we had around here last time turned into a Trump supporter as soon as Bernie was out. The folks here now are much more reasonable.
Daddy issues, looking for an old man to tell them how smart and great they are. Hopefully, those types will let Biden fill that void in them this time around.
 
The only True Bernie Bro we had around here last time turned into a Trump supporter as soon as Bernie was out. The folks here now are much more reasonable.

I think we have had more then one Hardcore Bernie Bro, but they seem to have left.
And the guy we are talking about I suspect was always a Trump supporter who was pushing Bernie because he would be the easiest opponent for Donnie.
 
I think we have had more then one Hardcore Bernie Bro, but they seem to have left.
And the guy we are talking about I suspect was always a Trump supporter who was pushing Bernie because he would be the easiest opponent for Donnie.

That was the Large Canine, right? His claim to have supported Bernie was never credible.
 
That was the Large Canine, right? His claim to have supported Bernie was never credible.

I took him at his word as someone who was eager for massive upheaval of the two party dynamic. I got the feeling that he actually thought Bernie would show it to the liberal elites. Once Trump emerged to fill that void he jumped on that train pretty quickly. But I may be misremembering.
 
I wonder if this same reasoning will come in handy in November.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk
 
2 poll workers in Florida test positive for covid-19. Broward County Supervisor of Elections warning that anyone who voted at those two locations should take precautions.

Wonder how many people will die because of the decision to not delay the primary?

https://twitter.com/caitielee0917/status/1243279632184619010

Probably not many. I'm betting, not enough deaths for this particular decision to even come up as a significant factor in C19 deaths in Florida.
 
I wonder if this same reasoning will come in handy in November.

I like how we have one thread based on the premise that Trump might very well take the virus as an excuse to shut the country down and take it over. And then we have all these other discussions about how our very survival depends on the President getting his head out of his ass and shutting the country down.

Sooner or later, Team OMB is going to have to make up their minds: Do we suspend elections, or not?
 
I like how we have one thread based on the premise that Trump might very well take the virus as an excuse to shut the country down and take it over. And then we have all these other discussions about how our very survival depends on the President getting his head out of his ass and shutting the country down.

Sooner or later, Team OMB is going to have to make up their minds: Do we suspend elections, or not?


This is what I would call a straw man.

It ignores the details in order to pretend there are mutually contradicting positions, which there are not. For example, it is entirely consistent to claim we have a need to shut down and limit social interactions between people, while simultaneously claiming we need to have an alternative way to hold the election, such as mail in ballots.
 
This is what I would call a straw man.

It ignores the details in order to pretend there are mutually contradicting positions, which there are not. For example, it is entirely consistent to claim we have a need to shut down and limit social interactions between people, while simultaneously claiming we need to have an alternative way to hold the election, such as mail in ballots.
Elections are run by the states. Any state government that sees a need can move to mail in ballots at their discretion. They can even declare an emergency and request federal funds to help pay for the change.

These are the DNC's primaries (the GOP's primary situation is discussed elsewhere). I'm sure the DNC could pressure states to do the needful, if they're concerned about in-person primaries.

Are there any accounts of the DNC working with state governments to convert their primaries to mail-in ?
 
Elections are run by the states. Any state government that sees a need can move to mail in ballots at their discretion. They can even declare an emergency and request federal funds to help pay for the change.

These are the DNC's primaries (the GOP's primary situation is discussed elsewhere). I'm sure the DNC could pressure states to do the needful, if they're concerned about in-person primaries.

Are there any accounts of the DNC working with state governments to convert their primaries to mail-in ?


My point is that this specific question:

I like how we have one thread based on the premise that Trump might very well take the virus as an excuse to shut the country down and take it over. And then we have all these other discussions about how our very survival depends on the President getting his head out of his ass and shutting the country down.

Sooner or later, Team OMB is going to have to make up their minds: Do we suspend elections, or not?


is a straw man.

Do you have any examples of anyone against Trump suggesting we suspend the 2020 presidential election?
 
If the SARS-CoV-2 virus and and people having Covid-19 is still a problem in November, then the US is in deep, deep trouble.

It likely will be to some extent where the health issues of voting as we know it will still be unwise. The hot spots will hopefully be under control by then, but my guess is that the whack-a-mole state of trying to prevent hot spots is going to go on for quite some time

Nothing that can't be worked around with vote by mail and extensive early voting access, but the old-school idea of everyone waiting in line to cram into a small space to use the same machines will be bad. Unlike something like a sporting event, you can't screen access to the polls.
 
My point is that this specific question:




is a straw man.

Do you have any examples of anyone against Trump suggesting we suspend the 2020 presidential election?

Not yet. But the question could very well come up in a few months. What happens in September, when the contagion is still out there and states still haven't taken steps to convert to mail-in?

Even if we're not talking about it now, we're probably going to have to talk about it sometime. When we do, what are the OMB talking points going to be?

"The President must order all states to convert to mail-in or online voting, and must release federal funds to support this"?
 
Not yet. But the question could very well come up in a few months. What happens in September, when the contagion is still out there and states still haven't taken steps to convert to mail-in?

Even if we're not talking about it now, we're probably going to have to talk about it sometime. When we do, what are the OMB talking points going to be?

"The President must order all states to convert to mail-in or online voting, and must release federal funds to support this"?

We will see steps to fix this in states not currently in the business of voter suppression.

In other states, not so much.

What this would mean is that a Trump win in November would be more likely than it already is to include a staggering loss in the popular vote.
 
Not yet. But the question could very well come up in a few months. What happens in September, when the contagion is still out there and states still haven't taken steps to convert to mail-in?

Even if we're not talking about it now, we're probably going to have to talk about it sometime. When we do, what are the OMB talking points going to be?

"The President must order all states to convert to mail-in or online voting, and must release federal funds to support this"?


Now that is a good question, but it is irrelevant to my original point, which was pointing out your original comment was a straw man, which I see you now concede with your above highlighted comment. There's a huge distinction between saying "Trump must put the country on lockdown" and "Trump must therefore put the election on hold", and you presenting the OMB people as being inconsistent between the two was merely you using a disingenuous straw man, as I said.

However, I don't want to simply dismiss your question with that comment. Yes, I think most OMB people would be fine if the president ordered all states to convert to mail-in or online voting and released federal funds to support this.

I now have a question for you: Do you think Trump will actually do this?
 

Back
Top Bottom