Remember how Trump claimed that Cruz' father killed JFK, etc. I don't know how Biden would respond in a general election if Trump attacked his family.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT2 | Warren's college tuition plan includes cancelling college debt
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
Going to need to add him to the white guy mashup, even though it probably won't change much. Dude already looks like Eric Swalwell's older brother, fuuuuuuck
"They go low, we go high," he says, to the hollow applause of a dozen soccer moms in the audience, all of whom are willfully ignoring that this shit didn't work the first time.
Please, you think Biden wouldn't bring up that Trump's dad was literally in the KKK if he brought his family up? Given the arrest was in the newspaper at the time I'm surprised he never got hit with it when he tried bringing up other people's families.
I've been arguing in good faith constantly, it hasn't gotten me anywhere. It's difficult to have dialogue when the opposition is only interested in lashing out. Not everyone, of course, but far too many.
Are you all college educated? I have to look up so many fucking words reading these threads. I thought for sure "gish gallop" was made up, but nope.
From Wikipedia: a technique used during debating that focuses on overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments.
From Wikipedia: a technique used during debating that focuses on overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments.
yep. statistics is weird. margins of error become very small at a shockingly small sample sizes if your polling methodology is solid.
Lol. I remember when Hillary responded with that stupid phrase during the debate when Donald Trump brought up Bill Clinton.
That probably was a good choice by Clinton. Speaking truthfully about her husband would probably be way worse.
(Daily reminder that the 2016 election involved choosing which rapist we wanted in the White House, Bill Clinton or Donald Trump. Repulsive.)
I am, but I think in general, most people participating in discussions on a sub-forum like this one are probably going to be well-read and have a decent vocabulary; it comes with the territory. A person going out of their way to pay attention to political discourse has passed a threshold of intellectual curiosity that would expose them to a wide range of vocabulary on a regular basis.
He's actually very well spoken and has been in the spotlight the past few months for some of his speeches in particular to the government shutdown. It's to bad he's entering in so late, he's never going to gain traction now.
Also let's get past the sensational anger that "another white guy is running". It's whoever's best for the job and just because someone is female or a person of color, doesn't mean they will be effective or capable of standing up for women or minorities any more than one of the dozen white guys.
Obama largely avoided race entirely during his presidency. Hillary when SoS ended up not being much better for women around the world either, and in some cases endangered them by pushing policies to help them again equal rights and opportunities only for us to wash our hands of those countries and leave them to fend for themselves.
Race and women's rights are more at the forefromt of politics than they have been in a long time, a white man who gets it is not a bad thing. Biden on the other hand...
Yeah, I dropped out of high school and I feel like one of the characters from Idiocracy fairly often. People like you and Ichty and Kirblar...I have no idea what you're talking about a fair amount of the time unless I read and then reread maybe a couple more times lol.
Anyway, good for you! Stay in school kids!
Aside from minority candidates having a more grounded perspective on issues concerning their own minority groups than non-minority candidates, I think the real frustration is in knowing that all of the white guys rising to the top of the polls is not because they coincidentally happen to be the best candidates for the job, and I say this as a Bernie supporter but also a minority. It is disappointing to see the minority candidates having to cede the top of the field to a bunch of white guys, so no, I don't think people need to stop complaining about that, nor do we need to stop talking about identity politics because they do matter.
At the same time, you continuing to engage in these discussions can only help to improve your vocabulary and understanding of the topics being discussed. If we're all being honest without ourselves, we're all learning from each other (college educated or not) and there's nothing wrong with admitting and accepting that.
Jesus.
At this point, Democrats should just announce if they're not running.
In other news, Warren continues to impress me. She's a smarter, younger Bernie Sanders who is disciplined in all aspects of campaigning. I think her actual chances are better than these early polls suggest.
At this point, Democrats should just announce if they're not running.
In other news, Warren continues to impress me. She's a smarter, younger Bernie Sanders who is disciplined in all aspects of campaigning. I think her actual chances are better than these early polls suggest.
That's what happens when you entrench yourself in political and social discussions. You kinda pick up terms by osmosis.
Also woot! We're flunk buddies! I someday hope to go back to academia, but I'm scared and cry a lot! 😱
That reads more like a personal observation than anything. If you have the ability to read the room, then you should have a general idea of what to reply and when.
This is a forum full of gamers. Not a strategic democratic meeting. The idea that you consistently need to be "pragmatic" or "realistic" when replying to people can at times limit and/or hamper discussion. It's certainly not going to endear people to you.
Because people aren't just logic and arguments. You need to engage with their emotions and feelings as well. If you do that, they'll usually try and be nice/agreeable/open to you.
Your word choice itself is peculiar in that it sounds like you're convinced the majority of people are "opposition" just want to "lash out". I'd argue that people "lash out" at you, BECAUSE you come off as patronizing to them.
And obvi, that's just my observation as well. But I'd like to think I'm not so divorced from reality, lol.
Good numbers all around, though I'm wondering why Warren dropped a point.
Jesus Beto. But that is one of the reasons I supported him early, I felt he would fare well against Trump. Not that I think he's going to win anymore. Shrug.
beto +10 over trump is nice
surprised harris is only +4, I feel like she'd hand trump his ass
still far too early though
surprised harris is only +4, I feel like she'd hand trump his ass
still far too early though
I understand where you are coming from, but the post I quoted was more with the dismissal of someone rather than minority candidates having to cede the nomination to a bunch or particular white guy. That said, the 3 (or 4 if you count Mayor Pete) big name minority candidates have all made some pretty big strides with the exception of Booker. Harris, Buttigieg, Warren have all surged, where as most of the typical white candidates can't even be named, and rock stars like Beto have sunk like rocks.
The real disapointment I think is people like Biden and Bernie to an extent, who are old white men who just don't want to clear the field for new people, of minority status or not, to take office. I say this as someone who backed and volunteered with the Bernie campaign back in 16. I would honestly love if neither of them ran this time around. They bring nothing new to the table, and while I love what Bernie has done, what is he bringing up now that he didn't before. I understand the full frustration with people just scrambling to one of those 2 because they are "comfortable" to the general Democrats.
While I am in full agreement people of minority groups are the best people to tackle issues that effect said groups, what I was getting at wasn't that people need to stop complaining or ignore identity politics, but rather that the vitriol for another one of these white men is uncalled for. People can say their pieces about them with legit concerns, criticism and complaints without sneering while knowing nothing about them.
In the debate she would. I really liked her during the Kavanaugh hearings.
Where are those respondents from though? Seems pointless to ask anyone who can't vote in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and I guess Texas if you're real optimistic.
And that's my main reason for liking Beto, although state polls have him much closer.
I disagree with this, and i am also a black male. The issue is that the only candidate who is an actual minority outside of yang is Kamala, and her prosecutor record has been a matter of discussion for months now. She's not gaining traction because the group she was trying to make inroads in saw through her. You can't say black people inherently just care more about black issues, because that's a damn lie depending on who your talking about, just ask any black republican/conservative what they care about, and its almost certainly at the expense of me and my family.
Identity politics i feel is a ruse when it comes to centrists and right wingers attempting to appeal to minority groups because by definition, the nature of appealing to identity has to come with real policy oriented vision and a record when it comes to helping minority groups, which only leftists actually care about.
You can't claim to care about black issues, have a record of horrible incarceration of poor black and brown families and then say a bunch of platitudes and expect to get taken seriously just because you look like me.
That's the version of identity politics that leftists disparage, because its not appealing to anything. Biden attempting to secure Stacey Abrhams as VP(and securing Symone Sanders...as press secretary) just to deflect from his horrible record in regards to incarceration and blatant racism is the absolute worst type of politics imaginable.
If anyone feels bad about their preferred candidate keep in mind that at this point in 2015 Jeb led the polls with 22% and Scott Walker followed with 17%, where as Trump was at 1%. Food for thought.
That's fair and makes sense. But this conversation happened because someone didn't like another poster saying "yet another white guy".
But we know that when someone says a person is "so white", they're not just making a judgement on their skin color.
Or at least, we should know.
That's interesting. At which point did Trump start gaining more support?
Probably the day that the base figured out his racism wasn't just for show - when he stopped using dogwhistles and pulled out the bullhorn, the base jumped right in.
Did Trump really start at 1%?
I remember him becoming one of the consistent frontrunners early on in the polls, and all the pundits saying to ignore the polls because it's too early, there's no way he'd actually get the nomination, and his support would collapse any second now.
I remember him becoming one of the consistent frontrunners early on in the polls, and all the pundits saying to ignore the polls because it's too early, there's no way he'd actually get the nomination, and his support would collapse any second now.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e..._republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html
Here's some good data on Trump's climb, although he did not formally announce until June 16th, which is also something to keep in mind for various reasons.
https://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-gop-primary
He started at the bottom yes. You're probably thinking of the time frame between August and December which is when the pundits were in denial.
You're surprised a strong black woman isn't destroying the most publicly
racist misogynist in office right now?
Cmon yo
This is America.
User banned (permanent): History of inflammatory posting on identity issues, unconstructive private messages, and ignoring prior bans
Read the whole thread:
https://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-gop-primary
He started at the bottom yes. You're probably thinking of the time frame between August and December which is when the pundits were in denial.
So by August we'll have a good idea who the winner will be.
Oh right, I forgot he entered the race so late. But according to that data, he was #1 in the polls within a month of his actual announcement, so it's not like he was actually at the low tier for any real length. Going by that precedent, it's harder to imagine anyone outside of the top 6 right now breaking out if they haven't at this point.
https://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-gop-primary
He started at the bottom yes. You're probably thinking of the time frame between August and December which is when the pundits were in denial.
- Status