Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Some interesting numbers here. (grabbed from 538)

Quote

Sanders carried 63 percent of his own 2016 supporters — but they didn’t turn out in as large numbers as last time. In contrast, Klobuchar and Buttigieg did well both among 2016 Clinton supporters and among those who supported neither candidate four years ago. Also notable: Gabbard’s (relatively) strong finish among those who supported neither Clinton nor Sanders in 2016.

Candidate preference by previous vote

Chosen candidate in the 2020 New Hampshire Democratic primary by their 2016 vote, according to preliminary exit poll data

CANDIDATE HILLARY CLINTON (49% OF VOTERS) BERNIE SANDERS (30%) NEITHER OF THESE CANDIDATES (19%)
Klobuchar 26% 8% 25%
Buttigieg 24 15 26
Biden 15 2 2
Sanders 14 63 12
Warren 13 4 4
Steyer 3 2 6
Yang 3 4 7
Gabbard 0 2 13

Sample size is 2,935. Not all candidates are listed on the exit poll.

SOURCE: ABC NEWS/EDISON RESEARCH

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Brisbot said:

Well I just think of that as "American Liberalism". But are centrists/borderline conservative in other first world countries. TBH it's probably not helpful to use all these labels since they mean very different things to different people. I think of them as conservatives because to me they are to the right of me by a decent amount. But Republicans in Texas think CNN pushes socialism, which is laughable.

Yeah it's taken Trump to realize just how American liberals / mainstream Dems are complicit centrists. Last 40 years has been Dems slipping into center-right Neo-Liberalism and Reagan onward the GOP has become a far right populist party, something Trump overtly took the mask off. 

7 hours ago, Zeffolia said:

cnn has been trashing bernard all day

MSNBC too. NPR's been very soft on Trump for years now as well and really embraced the whole "we must hear both sides" ethos that's normalizing right-wing misinformation. It's starting to backfire...

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, marf said:

If Bernie wins he better do a damn good job or we are going to end up with a Carter thing and maybe an even more extreme republican swing the other way. It would be great if Bernie won but he won't get much done with the gridlock we have

It's going to be grueling. It won't be Carter again. Carter was similar to Obama - inherited a mess from GOP predecessors and leaned heavily on insiders and establishment policies despite being an earnest person and running as a progressive outsider. Obama's was much more of an overt turn - the bailouts, the continuation of the fundamental hegemony and endless realpolitik of the War On Terror.

There's a very real chance Sanders will break the Democratic party by breaking their de facto centrist strategy that's been in place for over 40 years.  If he doesn't get the nomination they will implode and become the Whig equivalent of the 21st century, with him leading DSA and breakaway left Dems and the rest existing as a centrist rump party. If he does win and when he beats Trump he will for the first time since FDR (and lesser degree LBJ) present a truly hardline left-progressive populist agenda. It will force moderate leaning Dems to comply and flush out the ones who are centrists or Republican lite. 

The Republicans are already extreme. They lie and actively enact policies that harm their own base. They had normalized dog-whistling to fascists and white supremacists. They have openly embrace anti-conservative policies of high deficient spending, reckless and exhaustive government corruption, and overtly embracing social conservative and discriminatory rhetoric via judicial appointments, gutting existing laws, etc. They will relentlessly and shamelessly try to stop every single act of Sanders and the Democratic party but unlike Obama or Clinton or Carter they will not be getting away with it easily. Sanders won't come in with already compromised, watered-down policies that are easy to deride and defeat. Instead the GOP will be called out for openly opposing truly popular efforts like medicare for all, tax reform, anti-corruption, etc. Efforts like green energy and anti-war policies can be touted without all of the usual veneer of corporate synergy or private industry involvement. Obama caved in on so much, was roadblocked post-2010 elections and STILL got some key things accomplished. I'm hopeful. It can't get much worst but if it does at least it'll feel worthwhile to have someone like Bernie leading a movement you can feel solidarity with, not just another lesser of two evils.

33 minutes ago, ambergonk said:

It's already obvious which candidate I support the most, but I'm still saddened by Andrew Yang suspending his campaign. But it's understandable.

The time was right but I will miss his earnestness and sincerity. A lot of his policy ideas and overall ideology was actually looking in the right directions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The next non-trump president will have his or her hands full with getting the various government branches to function again (to get positions filled, for instance) and to get rid of some or all of the nastier Trump policies. That's about as much as you could realistically expect in the first term, imo. All these new policies are nice and all, but ...euh... there are other priorities

Medicare for all? I think we're currently back to justice for all. And getting the current system back on its feet. Even with political support for M4all, it's going to take years to implement. And until then, there needs to be something which keeps the world turning, so to speak. And that requires plenty work, regardless of the political mega performance of getting a m4all bill worked out and through congress.

You might as well read this as me saying it's not relevant which candidate wins the dem ticket. The 1st 4 years in the office will be about dealing with a severe political crisis and getting back to a "normal" situation.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if only there were a younger, sharper, savvier, more accomplished, more energetic version of bernie running for president, who isn't trying to redeem socialism, the exact ideology of public spending that makes republican voters be republican voters.

Edited by very honest
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, goDel said:

The next non-trump president will have his or her hands full with getting the various government branches to function again (to get positions filled, for instance) and to get rid of some or all of the nastier Trump policies. That's about as much as you could realistically expect in the first term, imo. All these new policies are nice and all, but ...euh... there are other priorities

i agree with this, and also it's something i've heard from some people reluctant to vote for bernie.

for them, a lot of his policies (such as medicare for all) are unrealistic because they require senate approval. they also seem too radical (or progressive) for those that either see them as causing a further divide between the two parties (eg. eliminating student debt). a lot of pete's core support is coming from moderate progressives who want to bridge the gap between republican and democrat as they see this as not just a strategy in beating trump and winning the country back- but as a realistic approach i.e. let's get trump out of office and get some policies reversed. and while doing that, let's win some right leaning support and unify the country

 bernie's current ideology seems more exclusive rather than inclusive because not only has he said he will undo everything trump did, he's even going further and replacing it with more radically progressive ideas than obama promised. that's why a lot of his most fervent support comes from a younger crowd; not the most reliable when it comes time to actually vote, but also this is the audience with nothing to loose. 

another thing that's making me temper my own perspective of this whole thing is, i'd prefer if there was a clear lead for the democratic party. right now the right can comfortably say that trump has about 80% approval. the dems are so fractured you wonder why or how they're even all in the same party

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, very honest said:

if only there were a younger, sharper, savvier, more accomplished, more energetic version of bernie running for president, who isn't trying to redeem the word socialist, the exact ideology of public spending that makes republican voters be republican voters.

I think those two criteria are fundamentally opposed to each other. I'm not sure if you are referring to Buttigieg (who is certainly not more accomplished than Sanders, but is younger) or Warren (who may be more accomplished - though that is up for debate, but is hardly much younger) - regardless, I wouldn't say either of them are much sharper. And if you're living in a world of "if only", if only Americans weren't so scared of the word socialism, you guys wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. But here you are.

Thought this was an interesting article on the "leftist" critique of Buttigeig: https://www.vox.com/2020/2/11/21129665/pete-buttigieg-2020-democratic-primary-millennials

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

I think those two criteria are fundamentally opposed to each other. I'm not sure if you are referring to Buttigieg (who is certainly not more accomplished than Sanders, but is younger) or Warren (who may be more accomplished - though that is up for debate, but is hardly much younger) - regardless, I wouldn't say either of them are much sharper. And if you're living in a world of "if only", if only Americans weren't so scared of the word socialism, you guys wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. But here you are.

Thought this was an interesting article on the "leftist" critique of Buttigeig: https://www.vox.com/2020/2/11/21129665/pete-buttigieg-2020-democratic-primary-millennials

warren. she is more accomplished and she is younger.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

I think those two criteria are fundamentally opposed to each other. I'm not sure if you are referring to Buttigieg (who is certainly not more accomplished than Sanders, but is younger) or Warren (who may be more accomplished - though that is up for debate, but is hardly much younger) - regardless, I wouldn't say either of them are much sharper. And if you're living in a world of "if only", if only Americans weren't so scared of the word socialism, you guys wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. But here you are.

Thought this was an interesting article on the "leftist" critique of Buttigeig: https://www.vox.com/2020/2/11/21129665/pete-buttigieg-2020-democratic-primary-millennials

buttigieg is a fucking cia shill, a corporate neolib who hates black people and bulldozes their houses, if he wins the democratic party is doomed, electoralism is doomed, and democracy is proven bullshit, on top of that he's also a fucking loser who's been planning to be president since he was 8

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/03/all-about-pete

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/02/more-about-pete

  • Like 1
  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, very honest said:
11 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

I think those two criteria are fundamentally opposed to each other. I'm not sure if you are referring to Buttigieg (who is certainly not more accomplished than Sanders, but is younger) or Warren (who may be more accomplished - though that is up for debate, but is hardly much younger) - regardless, I wouldn't say either of them are much sharper. And if you're living in a world of "if only", if only Americans weren't so scared of the word socialism, you guys wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. But here you are.

Thought this was an interesting article on the "leftist" critique of Buttigeig: https://www.vox.com/2020/2/11/21129665/pete-buttigieg-2020-democratic-primary-millennials

warren. she is more accomplished and she is younger.

More accomplished in what way? Real question - no snark.

She's also only 8 years younger, not a huge difference at that age.

To me I see Sanders as pres, with Warren maintaining her excellent role in the Senate as the dream team. Their policies are very similar (I think Sanders' Estate Tax is better than Warren's Wealth Tax, but prefer Warren's approach to regulating the banking sector rather than Sanders' approach to breaking up the top 6 banks in the country), and I think together they could drive significant change for the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

More accomplished in what way? Real question - no snark.

She's also only 8 years younger, not a huge difference at that age.

To me I see Sanders as pres, with Warren maintaining her excellent role in the Senate as the dream team. Their policies are very similar (I think Sanders' Estate Tax is better than Warren's Wealth Tax, but prefer Warren's approach to regulating the banking sector rather than Sanders' approach to breaking up the top 6 banks in the country), and I think together they could drive significant change for the better.

medical professionals express concern about bernie's age. mental decline with sudden onset in the 80s is common, so the difference of early 70s vs late 70s actually is significant. medical professionals also say that the recent heart attack is not good. furthermore, his own staff had remarked that he seemed to be slowing. and, my own perception is that bernie appears to have slowed a bit in the last few years.

if you compare warren's govtrack to bernie's govtrack you will see that she has 9 enacted bills, where bernie has 7 and she's only been in the congress for a quarter of the time. furthermore, she has accomplishments from before her time in the senate, such as building an entire government agency, the CFPB, and teaching at harvard.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Zeffolia said:

theyre not

TBH, I prefer 538's analysis: odds of no majority are increasing.

Quote

Still, Sanders’s 38 percent chance of a pledged delegate majority is far better than any other Democrat. He also has a 52 percent chance of a pledged delegate plurality. Even if this isn’t the strongest possible version of Sanders, he’s come far closer to actualizing his potential than anyone else in the field. Furthermore, the tactical considerations of the race are setting up well for Sanders: The moderate “lane” still very crowded and perhaps even getting more crowded (no longer just Biden and Buttigieg but also Amy Klobuchar and Michael Bloombeg!), and Sanders has pulled well ahead of Elizabeth Warren in the progressive lane.

But New Hampshire is also good news if you’re rooting for chaos. Our forecast has the chance of no pledged delegate majority up to 33 percent, its highest figure yet, and roughly double what it was before Iowa.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/sanders-is-the-front-runner-after-new-hampshire-and-a-contested-convention-has-become-more-likely/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, goDel said:

Indeed. I'm afraid Bloomberg might become a next Perot. One of those third party candidates which help keep Trump firm in his seat. Ironically.

On a tangent, I'm becoming a fan of this guy here. A "looks like and sounds like white trash, but got a mind of his own"-guy. He used to be a journalist covering international affairs, btw. In case you were wondering. He's no slouch. ?

 

Beau of the Fifth Column! Great channel, found via r/breadtube awhile back. I think I've mentioned this before but it's refreshing to hear content from leftists in the deep south or other deep red pockets of the U.S. There's the group Redneck Revolt and the SRA as leftist counters to all the right-wing gun groups. The Podcast Trillbillies Worker's Party is good too. Here's a feature on them:

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, very honest said:

if only there were a younger, sharper, savvier, more accomplished, more energetic version of bernie running for president, who isn't trying to redeem socialism, the exact ideology of public spending that makes republican voters be republican voters.

Is that another Obama?

Frankly, I haven't got a clue about what kind of candidate would be ideal at this point. My more naive self tends to go for someone who can restore US politics. If that's even possible. That should imply someone with the ability and savviness to reach across the isle. If that's even possible, that would imply - i'm afraid to say - an old white male. As I don't expect the GOP to play politics with anything else really. So the female candidates fall off. The GOP won't play ball. Bernie is the socialist the GOP can stonewall and ignore his entire time in the office. Doing so will score them bonus points with their supporters. Buttigieg doesn't have the gravitas and wouldn't be taken seriously. And that's ignoring the gay vs. evangelical issue. Biden is considered Obama's appendix. So, that leaves Bloomberg?

Apart from winning the 2020 election, I'm actually more worried about what happens next. After the dems taking back the white house. I'm afraid the current chaos will stay for a long while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nebraska said:

for them, a lot of his policies (such as medicare for all) are unrealistic because they require senate approval. they also seem too radical (or progressive) for those that either see them as causing a further divide between the two parties (eg. eliminating student debt). a lot of pete's core support is coming from moderate progressives who want to bridge the gap between republican and democrat as they see this as not just a strategy in beating trump and winning the country back- but as a realistic approach i.e. let's get trump out of office and get some policies reversed. and while doing that, let's win some right leaning support and unify the country

here's a great example of my above point in regards to pete. pete knows bernie's medicare for all is a radical policy- so he takes a more conservative alternative. how about medicare for all-that-want-it?

towards the end of that clip, buttigieg admits they have the same goals just different ways to approach them. he's right. bernie is trying to change the status quo; pete wants to work with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, very honest said:

medical professionals express concern about bernie's age. mental decline with sudden onset in the 80s is common, so the difference of early 70s vs late 70s actually is significant. medical professionals also say that the recent heart attack is not good. furthermore, his own staff had remarked that he seemed to be slowing. and, my own perception is that bernie appears to have slowed a bit in the last few years.

if you compare warren's govtrack to bernie's govtrack you will see that she has 9 enacted bills, where bernie has 7 and she's only been in the congress for a quarter of the time. furthermore, she has accomplishments from before her time in the senate, such as building an entire government agency, the CFPB, and teaching at harvard.

Sure, but other studies also show that stress impacts women two to three times more than men, especially as age increases (and being pres of the US is almost as stressful as being a moderator here). I don't think the difference is that significant.

Per the enacted bills - both of them have enacted no bills of real substance - but I'm impressed by Bernie's ability to get it done as an independent. The CFPB is a good initiative - but Warren didn't build it by herself, lets be clear.

I like these articles on the differences between the two.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/10/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-differences-2020-presidential-campaign

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/23/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-democratic-party-2020-differences

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/18/18678000/elizabeth-warren-bernie-sanders-2020-similarities-differences

Also, as many others have pointed out - Warren is, at heart, still a proponent of laissez faire capitalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

Sure, but other studies also show that stress impacts women two to three times more than men, especially as age increases (and being pres of the US is almost as stressful as being a moderator here). I don't think the difference is that significant.

Per the enacted bills - both of them have enacted no bills of real substance - but I'm impressed by Bernie's ability to get it done as an independent. The CFPB is a good initiative - but Warren didn't build it by herself, lets be clear.

I like these articles on the differences between the two.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2019/10/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-differences-2020-presidential-campaign

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/23/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-democratic-party-2020-differences

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/18/18678000/elizabeth-warren-bernie-sanders-2020-similarities-differences

Also, as many others have pointed out - Warren is, at heart, still a proponent of laissez faire capitalism.

tell some veteran victims of fraud that her veteran fraud prevention legislation is not substantial.

 

as for your comment about gender, not touching that with a stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, very honest said:

tell some veteran victims of fraud that her veteran fraud prevention legislation is not substantial.

 

as for your comment about gender, not touching that with a stick.

What comment about gender? Do you want the actual studies (they deal with biological sex, not gender)? I'll get them for you when I get home from work.

Her veteran fraud prevention legislation is not substantial. Look at the summary:
 

Quote

 

This bill requires the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to work with federal agencies, states, and experts to develop and implement federal and state standards that protect individuals who are eligible for increased pension for a non-service-connected disability or death or for service on the basis of need for regular aid and attendance from dishonest, predatory, or otherwise unlawful practices.

The Government Accountability Office must: (1) report standards that would be effective in protecting such individuals if the VA fails to submit such standards as required, and (2) complete a study on standards implemented under this bill.

 

So essentially, she's telling DVA to work with various bodies to create standards to prevent fraud. Fraud is already a criminal offence, all this act does is add a layer of bureaucracy. Then the GAO has to tell these bodies what standards are acceptable, and do a study. Wheeee such prevention!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, goDel said:

Frankly, I haven't got a clue about what kind of candidate would be ideal at this point. My more naive self tends to go for someone who can restore US politics. If that's even possible. That should imply someone with the ability and savviness to reach across the isle. If that's even possible, that would imply - i'm afraid to say - an old white male. As I don't expect the GOP to play politics with anything else really. So the female candidates fall off. The GOP won't play ball. Bernie is the socialist the GOP can stonewall and ignore his entire time in the office. Doing so will score them bonus points with their supporters. Buttigieg doesn't have the gravitas and wouldn't be taken seriously. And that's ignoring the gay vs. evangelical issue. Biden is considered Obama's appendix. So, that leaves Bloomberg?

I think the best shot at getting any remaining swing voters to vote dem is to have a candidate who's a white, middle aged male with an honorable military background. There's of course a ton of military support in trump country, and having an ex-marine go toe-to-toe with bonespurs donnie and out "man" the great orange deceiver, I think would make some in the maga base think twice. I guess Mayor Pete would be the closest fit for this, but unfortunately there's too many folks out there that also can't get past the fact that he's gay...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.