Jump to content
cyanobacteria

2020 Democratic Presidential Primary

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, auxien said:

i saw. you obviously didn't understand either the question or the answers they all gave.

illuminate me then on the wisdom of the losing candidates' explanations for why the frontrunner should not be awarded the nomination

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HOT!

ywo1xxnvy9e41.jpg

  • Burger 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Bernie needs party powder then he can count on me to get him some

Edited by Brisbot
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Zeffolia said:

illuminate me then on the wisdom of the losing candidates' explanations for why the frontrunner should not be awarded the nomination

listen to what they actually said, the words that came out of their mouth, not your biased spin on those words, and read for yourself how these things are handled:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brokered_convention

if you wanna be the nominee for the Democratic Party then you have to play by their rules. if you don't like those rules, go to another party, or make your own. this is very, very simple.

Edited by auxien

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, auxien said:

listen to what they actually said, the words that came out of their mouth, not your biased spin on those words, and read for yourself how these things are handled:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brokered_convention

if you wanna be the nominee for the Democratic Party then you have to play by their rules. if you don't like those rules, go to another party, or make your own. this is very, very simple.

You think this refutes anything I said, how? I don't give a fuck about the Democratic Party's rules.  There is no other party, you are aware the US has an effective two-party system?

  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

zeff + aux = ❤️ 

  • Haha 1
  • Facepalm 1
  • Burger 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

just noticed how similar they sound in a clip from the debate last night. exact same inflection at times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

good debate last night. i was cracking up the whole time. the knives were out.

 

what i've liked about warren for years is how she will viciously call people out, when appropriate, impressively well. she also has, overall, been trying to focus on running a positive campaign. that makes sense, strategically, but last night she knew that it was time to show people what she could do to an opponent, because voters want to nominate someone who will beat trump. and that is one of the reasons why warren is the best candidate, she will give you a mental breakdown on stage. she lit into bloomberg effectively and was landing strikes on the others as well. 

 

pete looked good. biden, too. bernie had good moments. klobuchar took damage. bloomberg looked bad.

 

full debate:

 

 

Edited by very honest
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloomberg sounded like caze

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, darreichungsform said:

zeff + aux = ❤️ 

zux

 

???

  • Burger 2
  • Farnsworth 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which of Bernie's cabins did Bloomberg poop in? I can spot a cabin pooper

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Zeffolia said:

You think this refutes anything I said, how? I don't give a fuck about the Democratic Party's rules.  There is no other party, you are aware the US has an effective two-party system?

if you read the Dem Party rules (fucking hell just the sentence in the Wiki article referencing that) you'll understand why you claiming they said they want superdelegates to decide is false. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, auxien said:

debate tonight's been interesting, actually. Warren ripped into Bloomberg's shittiness right away, and kept at it all night tearing into others on their records as well. Sanders looked pretty good, but he was getting some heat from every angle. Buttigieg and Klobuchar did alright but idk that they have a path forward. will be curious what happens with Bloomberg after tonight, he seemed like he was in over his head for a good chunk of it all...almost like he's a rich asshole who's been a rich asshole for so long that he's forgotten what it's like when people attack him and he can't just fire them or walk away (wouldn't surprise me if he ran away and quit the race relatively soon tbh)

watched the debate again before work.

bloomberg was massacred. warren genuinely dislikes the guy. i think she's great when putting people to task, but she seems to be easily overwhelmed by multiple voices and i just cannot see her as president. bloomberg obviously doesn't have the experience or confidence to counter her attacks. but trump does. why she cannot temper her ambitions to being secretary of state under someone else is beyond me , but all these candidates make this race seem like a free for all with america's fickle endorsement riding on who left the best lasting impression-

and this is where pete slyly sneaks in. i watched an interview with some hispanic voters in nevada and their consensus is this: we have medical from our union. medicare for all with eliminate that medical insurance and we're not sure it will be as good as what we have. 

one thing i've noticed bernie doesn't do much is expound on his key points. how his medicare for all plans affects these unions with health care plans. the right makes so much noise about medicare for all being bad that it confuses a lot of people on exactly what it means for their own insurance they begin to translate it as something that will affect them negatively.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sanders must make clear that Medicare For All puts workers unions into a better negotiating position because their medical insurance isn't part of workers' rights negotiations anymore. I'm sure he says this already but it's such a strong argument that it can't be highlighted enough.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the entirety of the debate, but caught some of the highlights. The fact that most of the Democratic candidates have managed to form an impromptu firing squad against another aspiring plutocrat gives me more faith in humanity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, auxien said:

if you read the Dem Party rules (fucking hell just the sentence in the Wiki article referencing that) you'll understand why you claiming they said they want superdelegates to decide is false. 

Under the Democratic National Convention rules, "A majority vote of the Convention's delegates shall be required to nominate the presidential candidate" and "Balloting will continue until a nominee is selected".[7] Superdelegates are party leaders who participate as delegates if no winner emerges after the first round. Prior to 2018, they were allowed to participate in the first round as well.[8]

Oh, sounds all good then!  It's not like they're going to willingly rig it to get to the second round on purpose or anything.  Why do you listen to the DNC?

  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_primary#History

https://www.vox.com/2016/4/5/18089408/brokered-convention-contested-explained

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brokered_convention

 

 

the dnc can't "rig" anything. they do whatever they want. primaries aren't in the constitution, they are constructs the parties decided to begin doing in 1968, in their current form. the party chooses the nominee. they always have and they still reserve the right to, in certain circumstances, like in the case of no one getting half the pledged delegates. i think the established system leaves the party with a ton of leeway, then. pod save america or fivethirtyeight podcast were saying the party can even bring in an outsider, a non-candidate, at that point.

 

btw fivethirtyeight's "model" is seeing a brokered convention as the most likely scenario, now

 

image.thumb.png.de184d65fb9d9dd4394003a34bbf6229.png

 

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo

 

 

 

 

Edited by very honest
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

liz warren seems to have had a fire lit under her ass since she found out she's polling right next to biden

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Zeffolia said:

Oh, sounds all good then!  It's not like they're going to willingly rig it to get to the second round on purpose or anything.  Why do you listen to the DNC?

huh? oh, everything is a conspiracy, right. rampant cumtheiving females and so forth. k bro.

1 hour ago, Nebraska said:

watched the debate again before work.

bloomberg was massacred. warren genuinely dislikes the guy. i think she's great when putting people to task, but she seems to be easily overwhelmed by multiple voices and i just cannot see her as president. bloomberg obviously doesn't have the experience or confidence to counter her attacks. but trump does. why she cannot temper her ambitions to being secretary of state under someone else is beyond me , but all these candidates make this race seem like a free for all with america's fickle endorsement riding on who left the best lasting impression-

and this is where pete slyly sneaks in. i watched an interview with some hispanic voters in nevada and their consensus is this: we have medical from our union. medicare for all with eliminate that medical insurance and we're not sure it will be as good as what we have. 

one thing i've noticed bernie doesn't do much is expound on his key points. how his medicare for all plans affects these unions with health care plans. the right makes so much noise about medicare for all being bad that it confuses a lot of people on exactly what it means for their own insurance they begin to translate it as something that will affect them negatively.

 

 

saw/heard someone mention that Warren and Bloomberg were chatting for a bit during one of the breaks, would be curious to hear what that was. he’s a good punching bag for her and the rest, obviously. the tempering her ambitions thing sounds sexist tho Nebraska, to be blunt about it. dunno that you are or meant it that way, but it sounds it from here: not accusing just stating how it came across to me. not sure where that even comes from tho, she was breaking through the cacophony of shitty moderation as often as anyone on that stage. I think she’s got a better temperament for a leader than anyone else up there tbh, but that’s not to say any of them would necessarily be bad. the big field really is an issue, and was seemingly a big part of why Trump got the nomination for the Rs in ‘16, which scares me that it could work out in someone like Bloomberg’s favor this time here too. 
 

yeah Pete and all them not pushing Medicare for all are on the side of many many real people out there. people want it to be better and cheaper but they don’t want to risk the chance it could be worse, so we end up with a lot of the electorate afraid of it (Obamacare was gonna be the literal apocalypse until it was the law. people are stupid and believe what they’re told of course)

yeah Bernie’s big issue is his messaging/delivery and stubbornness to compromise and work from within to enact the changes necessary...he’s a loudass who just has to speak his mind on the big ideas constantly instead of actually doing the work and playing the game to fix things. yelling about how and why a thing is wrong almost never fixes a fucking thing.... but even after he loses his ideas will carry on in others as the party largely moves leftward, so hopefully it’s not all a waste. 

44 minutes ago, very honest said:

the dnc can't "rig" anything. they do whatever they want. primaries aren't in the constitution, they are constructs the parties decided to begin doing in 1968, in their current form. the party chooses the nominee. they always have and they still reserve the right to, in certain circumstances, like in the case of no one getting half the pledged delegates. i think the established system leaves the party with a ton of leeway, then. pod save america or fivethirtyeight podcast were saying the party can even bring in an outsider, a non-candidate, at that point.

yup. it’s their party, they can do literally anything they want within it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they will steal it from bernie, who has by far the greatest support across the country, alienating a huge number of would-be voters and literally hand the next four years to trump and apocalypse. this is a 50/50 chance with bernie winning. the silver lining of this is that it will destroy the democratic party. and i will be in line to beat it to death. a party run by coastal, feckless liberal elites smelling each others farts will never win in this country that is a giant quilt of diversity, in race, in culture, in class. A workers party will rise.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Facepalm 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

auxien's facepalms are known to be among the most toxic here on the forum

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

‘cause there’s weight behind them. i’m basically an assassin with them. they’ve taken down kings. :catsalute:

  • Burger 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for pointing that out auxien: i agree it does sound sexist, although i meant it more as "i think she should endorse someone else, and gun for a seat in a high position of government, rather than the actual seat of presidency". i say this because i see her as hillary 2.0 mainly because:

she plays the female card A LOT from claiming bernie told her in private he never believed a woman could run for office to alleging to being terminated from a teaching position because of her pregnancy. while it worked well against bloomberg when questioned about the numerous NDA's he's had women sign, i really don't see it doing anything against trump whole (like his legion of followers) will simply brush it aside as an evidence of his alpha male prowess. sexist? maybe- and liz should know considering she once identified as republican, having cherokee heritage and claiming that her father was a janitor

warren works well behind the scenes- like when she championed the consumer financial protection bureau and has shown to unravel and bungle when thrust in front of them- like when she couldn't become it's director and ran for senate instead. and then there was the moment when ayanna pressley had to step in and save her from a crowd of (mostly female) parent power protestors interrupted her speech about discrimination. as always, warren came in with a plan, and when things turned left, her brain checked out. if this happens against trump, there won't be anyone to step in and save her then.

btw: guess who ayanna pressley endorsed last time? i'll give you a hint: hillary clinton. and roger lau, her campaign manager, was a former clinton aid.

 

.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...