• 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.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Who's Going to Win South Carolina?

  • Joe Biden

    Votes: 585 39.2%
  • Bernie Sanders

    Votes: 853 57.2%
  • Elizabeth Warren

    Votes: 24 1.6%
  • Pete Buttigieg

    Votes: 7 0.5%
  • THE KLOBBERER

    Votes: 16 1.1%
  • Tom Steyer

    Votes: 6 0.4%

  • Total voters
    1,491
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

gutter_trash

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
17,124
Montreal
The actual path to victory is Warren's huge issue. The problem with Warren's campaign is that she sort of tried to split it down the middle but people aren't really looking for that right now. Exit polls are exit polls but like 90% said shes either too left wing or too right wing. She has Pete/Klobb to the right and Sanders to the left, it doesn't leave a lot of people left to suck up in this really large pile of candidates.

She doesn't even have Biden's credentials of being Obama's VP to hopefully jump start her campaign, its not an envious position to be in. I guess she could stay in and pray to God that Sanders gets a heart attack. That's not really a great thing to bet on honestly and its not really guaranteed for her to net all of Sanders' supporters especially considering that spat they had.


Warren's campaign woes are 100% her own doing, she is a good policy wonk but an awful campaigner
 
Oct 28, 2017
4,970
Warren's campaign woes are 100% her own doing, she is a good policy wonk but an awful campaigner

The poster before me literally proposed that Warren stay as a "progressive safety valve". I am not suggesting that as a reason to keep a poorly performing campaign afloat, if you read the sentences afterwards.

It is a super dumb thing to bet on, especially since it doesn't even guarantee netting the supporters you need.
 

mescalineeyes

Banned
May 12, 2018
4,444
Vienna
Warren staying in the race, unlike Bernie in 2016, serves no purpose. She has no agenda that Bernie isn't more left or progressive on, she has no signature issue that other candidates aren't already covering.
 

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,114
The poster before me literally proposed that Warren stay as a "progressive safety valve". I am not suggesting that as a reason to keep a poorly performing campaign afloat, if you read the sentences afterwards.

It is a super dumb thing to bet on, especially since it doesn't even guarantee netting the supporters you need.
I'm not saying she should bet on it. I'm saying we as progressive voters should want that safety valve. What she should bet on is similar to what Klob bet on when she didn't get out of the race earlier. Bet on the fact that this is a long race, nothing is set in stone, and narratives and publicity can change fairly easily and quickly.
 

Bradbatross

Member
Mar 17, 2018
14,250
I'm sorry but can we stop pretending like Pete and Klobes didn't perform really really really well? Even and especially as Sanders supporters we have to examine this result very closely. And make sure it never happens again.
What's happening right now is best case scenario for Bernie. His most formidable opponent, Biden, has collapsed, and the two moderates with no PoC support are splitting the moderate vote.
 

jelly

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
33,841
Is there any chance states swing to Bernie because actually life is shit under Trump, Republicans so give him a go or is it very much teams, scary socialism? Could Bernie actually win enough states or is it so unlikely?
 

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,114
Is there any chance states swing to Bernie because actually life is shit under Trump, Republicans so give him a go or is it very much teams, scary socialism? Could Bernie actually win enough states or is it so unlikely?
Scary socialism could be a big thing so he isn't flipping any die hard Republican states, but swing states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are in play and possible. No one in this race is realistically going to run up the score and flip a ton of Republican states anyway. It's all about the margins with presidential elections.
 

Vector

Member
Feb 28, 2018
6,666
It shouldn't be that mind blowing that minorities have to compromise quite a bit when voting. It's white privileged to get candidates that pander to you and have a long history of support of your group.

Voting as a minority is always between suffering or more suffering.
Literally every single candidate in the Democratic Primary is better on minority issues than Bloomberg, who is a racist monster. There's no compromise to be made here.
 

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,114
Literally every single candidate in the Democratic Primary is better on minority issues than Bloomberg, who is a racist monster. There's no compromise to be made here.
The compromise isn't on that question though, it's on the question of who can beat Trump, who is more of a racist monster than even Bloomberg.

Again, I don't personally disagree with you. Bloomberg's a red line for me, but I'm a white guy. I cannot in good faith judge or assess the compromise a PoC has to make with their vote.
 

Kusagari

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,542
You know how people always talk about the "smarter Trump" that could come after him?

If you look at Bloomberg's history, he in many ways IS the smarter Trump.
 

Vector

Member
Feb 28, 2018
6,666
The compromise isn't on that question though, it's on the question of who can beat Trump, who is more of a racist monster than even Bloomberg.

Again, I don't personally disagree with you. Bloomberg's a red line for me, but I'm a white guy. I cannot in good faith judge or assess the compromise a PoC has to make with their vote.
That's a wrong assumption to make if you look at any national GE polls - Trump loses to Biden and Sanders consistently in those and they're much better than Bloomberg.
 

jph139

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,419
Bloomberg at the very least would have a Dem VP who would tiebreak in our favor. And if he's legitimately popular would help with down ticket voting.

But I don't think I'd hold it against anyone just abstaining from voting for president in that case. As long as they show up for the House/Senate.
 

smisk

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,013
Well I was hoping Bernie would do a couple points better but things mostly went as expected (other than Klobuchar) and it's still hard to know much about the future of the primary until we see voting in more diverse states. Bernie has an advantage now and the fact that the moderates are so split is definitely helping him.
 

Finale Fireworker

Love each other or die trying.
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,716
United States
Well I was hoping Bernie would do a couple points better but things mostly went as expected (other than Klobuchar) and it's still hard to know much about the future of the primary until we see voting in more diverse states. Bernie has an advantage now and the fact that the moderates are so split is definitely helping him.
I feel like the stressful likelihood for Sanders fans at this point is a moderate (or even Warren) dropping out before Super Tuesday. These last two races have been so close. If anyone drops out and that base lines up behind anyone but Sanders, he isn't going to keep winning.
 

Kill3r7

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,513
My candidate, Warren, is adrift with no real path to victory. Biden might be toast but we won't know until SC. Pete and Amy have virtually zero minority support, especially Pete. So it's basically Bernie vs. Mike, if Biden doesn't turn this around.
 

Violet

Alt account
Banned
Feb 7, 2019
3,263
dc
I feel like the stressful likelihood for Sanders fans at this point is a moderate (or even Warren) dropping out before Super Tuesday. These last two races have been so close. If anyone drops out and that base lines up behind anyone but Sanders, he isn't going to keep winning.

Warren's team put out a post yesterday on Medium more or less implying they would be in until after Super Tuesday.
 

dots

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,898
Warren staying in the race, unlike Bernie in 2016, serves no purpose. She has no agenda that Bernie isn't more left or progressive on, she has no signature issue that other candidates aren't already covering.
This isn't accurate. She's more progressive than Bernie on guns, and she is the candidate going hardest against corruption.
 

Xx 720

Member
Nov 3, 2017
3,920
if that's the case then she should use the clout she has to make other candidates adopt those stances. I know I'd welcome that.
In order to win the general election - to kick Trump out - we absolutely have to carry every state Hillary won plus flip the rust belt states. A more progressive stand on guns would go over like a lead balloon there, Trump would win, so it's not worth the risk. This is also what makes Bloomberg a ptoblem, the Midwest would never vote for him, he needs to fuck off.
 

KingK

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,869
I'm sure having Sanders supporters consistently shit talk Warren and every other Democrat has probably soured many of them on the idea of backing Sanders.
Yeah, it doesn't help.

I voted Bernie enthusiastically in 2016 and I'll do so again this year (because my primary isn't until May and Warren will be out by then), but Warren was my first choice this time. The two main factors were age/health concerns, and Bernie stupidly supporting the filibuster and electoral college (both of which kneecap progressive priorities in the long term).

However, the way Bernie supporters got so fucking vicious and turned the knives out on Warren, by all accounts their closest ideological ally, over stupid bullshit just as she was rising left a very bad taste in my mouth. Hope your all happy now that Pete, Amy, and fucking Bloomberg are the other possibilities.

That's not to say I let online dipshits affect my vote. I still like Bernie and he's closest to my ideals so I'll probably even volunteer again for him. But that level of hostility to who should be your future allies does not help.

Also, while I'm glad Bernie is winning for now, his margins are not high enough. If Pete, Amy, and Bloom consolidate support in time, that's big trouble for Bernie.

I still maintain that Warren would be cruising to the nomination as the clear frontrunner right now if Bernie had dropped out and endorsed her after he had a heart attack at 79 years old. His decision to stay in after that really lowered my opinion of him. Assuming he doesn't drop dead as an October surprise this year, he'd only serve one term, and voluntarily surrendering incumbency advantage for 2024 is fucking dumb.
 

KingK

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,869
In order to win the general election - to kick Trump out - we absolutely have to carry every state Hillary won plus flip the rust belt states. A more progressive stand on guns would go over like a lead balloon there, Trump would win, so it's not worth the risk. This is also what makes Bloomberg a ptoblem, the Midwest would never vote for him, he needs to fuck off.
Yeah, I really don't get people thinking Bloomberg is electable. The billionaire New Yorker only really known for banning guns and Big Gulps is not going to fucking play in the Rust Belt. I've lived in this region my whole life.

Edit: and yeah, I don't think I could vote for Bloomberg. I'd vote downballot, but probably just write in Warren or Sanders for president.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.