Democratic Presidential Primary |February OT| It Can't be Worse than Iowa, Right? (Discussion Guidelines in OP)

[xenocide]

obviously, Bernie has been the scapegoat for the missteps of every other campaign

remember when Beto's campaign rollout got some pushback when he was heralded as the next Obama? Bernie

remember when Kamala was getting criticized on her record? Bernie

there's going to be some seriously toxic stuff coming at Bernie if/when Warren drops, doubly so because she seems to be one of the candidates with significant Hillary 2016 support and that pettiness has proved to be eternal

Click to shrink...

Yes. Bernie is the real victim of the 2020 Election Cycle. Nevermind that nobody seriously blames Bernie for Beto or Kamala falling apart. Beto ran a bad campaign and couldn't make a single good argument for why he was running during the few debates he was in, and Kamala had a disorganized mess of a campaign that failed to capitalize on a strong initial debate performance.

Maybe Warren supporters--like myself--would be more likely to back Sanders if/when she drops, if we didn't have to read dumpster takes like this 10 times a day. For a block of voters you guys really need, you sure love to shit all over Warren supporters at every turn.

 

[jviggy43]

Superdelegates don't even vote on the first ballot. Just win a majority of delegates and you never have to worry about them.

Click to shrink...

I mean yes, but the conversation is on a hypothetical bloomberg win. That only happens with a brokered convention. And in which case those 10-15% of delegates would be incredibly important and he would need them in order to get the nom. Thus when people say, if he did get the nom the DNC would have failed the people, theyre right to make that claim. Hell they could make that claim now by the fact they allowed him on the ticket at all in addition to changing their rules for him.

 

[Deleted member 24052]

Yes. Bernie is the real victim of the 2020 Election Cycle. Nevermind that nobody seriously blames Bernie for Beto or Kamala falling apart. Beto ran a bad campaign and couldn't make a single good argument for why he was running during the few debates he was in, and Kamala had a disorganized mess of a campaign that failed to capitalize on a strong initial debate performance.

Maybe Warren supporters--like myself--would be more likely to back Sanders if/when she drops, if we didn't have to read dumpster takes like this 10 times a day. For a block of voters you guys really need, you sure love to shit all over Warren supporters at every turn.

Click to shrink...

As a Sanders supporter (Warren as second choice, as well), I welcome you with open arms. Straight up, as the pool gets lesser and lesser we need to rally and support one another.

 

[Vector]

Yes. Bernie is the real victim of the 2020 Election Cycle. Nevermind that nobody seriously blames Bernie for Beto or Kamala falling apart. Beto ran a bad campaign and couldn't make a single good argument for why he was running during the few debates he was in, and Kamala had a disorganized mess of a campaign that failed to capitalize on a strong initial debate performance.

Maybe Warren supporters--like myself--would be more likely to back Sanders if/when she drops, if we didn't have to read dumpster takes like this 10 times a day. For a block of voters you guys really need, you sure love to shit all over Warren supporters at every turn.

Click to shrink...

CNN was running stories on how Bernie supporters were calling Warren a snake and Pete a rat. That's gonna make some people think they're to blame for those candidates' misfortunes, and it's much worse on the internet where Bernie supporters are vilified on the daily.

 

[Soul Skater]

I'd also like it if the media could point out Bloomberg is just as much as a Putin apologist as Trump to where we should be questioning his loyalities and financial interests

has he released his tax returns?

 

[Deleted member 24052]

I'd also like it if the media could point out Bloomberg is just as much as a Putin apologist as Trump to where we should be questioning his loyalities and financial interests just as much

has he released his tax returns?

Click to shrink...

We really need him on the debate stage so other candidates can point things like this out.

 

[Deleted member 2145]

Yes. Bernie is the real victim of the 2020 Election Cycle. Nevermind that nobody seriously blames Bernie for Beto or Kamala falling apart. Beto ran a bad campaign and couldn't make a single good argument for why he was running during the few debates he was in, and Kamala had a disorganized mess of a campaign that failed to capitalize on a strong initial debate performance.

Maybe Warren supporters--like myself--would be more likely to back Sanders if/when she drops, if we didn't have to read dumpster takes like this 10 times a day. For a block of voters you guys really need, you sure love to shit all over Warren supporters at every turn.

Click to shrink...

of course it wasn't serious, it was purely petty ass bullshit lol

but it was quite rampant on here so it's not at all surprising that he would be blamed again for another campaign's failure

 

[Deleted member 43]

Alright, let me rephrase: The Democratic Establishment instead of the DNC. The DNC can pull some bullshit if they really want to as well, and a brokered convention could be the perfect lane for them to exert their power around pushing for Bloomberg. The DNC has influence and very clear candidates that they favor over others in regards to policy. To deny their influence on the greater situation is just foolish. They can't outright pick Bloomberg without causing massive issues in the base, but they do have influence and power to this day.

Click to shrink...

Every day people just show they don't understand what the DNC is, what it does, or what powers it has.

The DNC as an organization had no control over the votes of Convention delegates, or really much power, ability, or reason to influence individual votes.

Whoever goes into the convention with a delegate plurality will win the nomination. Deals will be struck over who is Vice, cabinet posts, etc., but the top of the ticket won't change.

 

[Bronx-Man]

Replacing a racist authoritarian with a richer racist authoritarian would be peak #Resistance

Click to shrink...

In hindsight, this was the path we were always on.

 

[xenocide]

CNN was running stories on how Bernie supporters were calling Warren a snake and Pete a rat. That's gonna make some people think they're to blame for those candidates' misfortunes, and it's much worse on the internet where Bernie supporters are vilified on the daily.

Click to shrink...

Because they were doing that lol. There were trending hashtags for both of those events, for DAYS. People spent 3-4 days talking about Pete "ratfucking" the Iowa Caucus, and regularly call him a rat. Are you just glossing over these facts? How many Warren supporters are in here taking shots at other candidates? Exactly. Bernie supporters are vilified because they consistently behave the worst. When SNL is blasting a subset of them as "an army of internet trolls" on Network Television, you have an image problem.

 

[KingK]

Yeah, count me among the people who will leave the top of the ticket blank/write-in if Bloomberg is the nominee.

If our only options are a Trump Republican or a Bush Republican, I choose not to lend credence to that sham democracy. They're both fascists/wanna-be fascists.

Eh, I'm not even certain if that's the case. Warren will endorse Sanders almost certainly imo.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I've gone back and forth between the two, with Warren being my top pick for most of the race (again, because Bernie's age and health really, really concern me).

But yeah, she made a couple bad decisions and had some shitty luck, and things just didn't come together how they could have. It sucks, but I've accepted her campaign has 2 feet in the grave already. I'm here for the policy, not the personality, so I've got no problem going 100% Bernie from here on out.

I can't imagine her endorsing anyone else in the primary.

 

[Deleted member 1476]

Got an email from Morning Consult with new post N.H. numbers:

https://morningconsult.com/2020/02/13/sanders-cements-front-runner-status-after-new-hampshire-win/

Click to shrink...

I bet Bloomberg is feeling good to close on second place while skipping every caucus/primary so far.

For fuck's sake.

 

[Captjohnboyd]

Look, let's not pretend that warren supporters are the big bads on Era. We're out numbered like 10-1. I'll concede that there are a couple of posters who love to give y'all a hard time but please don't act like it's not reciprocated ten fold towards virtually every "rat", "snake", "Republican", "ghoul" candidate that isn't liked here

 

[Eeyore]

CNN was running stories on how Bernie supporters were calling Warren a snake and Pete a rat. That's gonna make some people think they're to blame for those candidates' misfortunes, and it's much worse on the internet where Bernie supporters are vilified on the daily.

Click to shrink...

I watch some leftists on Twitch and any of the big names on the platform like Hasan encourage this behavior. I think Warren has run a poor campaign and I don't agree with Pete on his milquetoast healthcare plans but man oh man, I feel like the infighting isn't constructive at all. I'm not one of those that thinks that conflict is unhealthy but a lot of these bigger leftists seem to lean in hard on the populism side. Calling Warren a snake and Pete a rat is some Trumpian level silliness.

You're right, it doesn't help with all the stories about "Bernie bros" and "Bernie's troll army" etc.

 

[ned_ballad]

How would the DNC even go about blocking Bloomberg from running without making some arbitrary rule just to stop Bloomberg?

 

[Vector]

How would the DNC even go about blocking Bloomberg from running without making some arbitrary rule just to stop Bloomberg?

Click to shrink...

Not changing the debate qualification rules to accomodate Bloomberg would be a great start.

 

[Deleted member 43]

How would the DNC even go about blocking Bloomberg from running without making some arbitrary rule just to stop Bloomberg?

Click to shrink...

They can't.

 

[ned_ballad]

Not changing the debate qualification rules to accomodate Bloomberg would be a great start.

Click to shrink...

Anyone who hates Bloomberg should be demanding he appear in a debate

Him not being in the debate helps him...

 

[Deleted member 43]

Not changing the debate qualification rules to accomodate Bloomberg would be a great start.

Click to shrink...

This I don't get.

He's like the third or fourth highest polling candidate. He SHOULD be in the debates, primary voters deserve to hear from him in person.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

Not changing the debate qualification rules to accomodate Bloomberg would be a great start.

Click to shrink...

lmao.... him not debating has been a disaster. He's able to run a general election campaign unopposed while not having his shit directly called out by the Dem field - which you see what that's doing to his polling and viability. He needs to debate.

Insane that people don't want him to...

 

[gutter_trash]

Got an email from Morning Consult with new post N.H. numbers:

https://morningconsult.com/2020/02/13/sanders-cements-front-runner-status-after-new-hampshire-win/

Click to shrink...

this is why Joe must stay.
Joe is the Bloomberg Blocker

 

[xenocide]

This I don't get.

He's like the third or fourth highest polling candidate. He SHOULD be in the debates, primary voters deserve to hear from him in person.

Click to shrink...

The arguments against it are silly. The polling requirement is what people struggle with, and he's currently polling better than most candidates nationally. If he were taking donations he would have cleared the donation requirement within a weekend.

 

[Captjohnboyd]

Yeah I don't get trying to tie the debate issue with not wanting him to be the nominee. It seems to me if you don't want him elected getting him on stage is a good way to achieve that goal

 

[Zasa]

So pretty much confirmed it's going to be Bernie vs everyone else, including Warren at the debate. Considering how critical debates have been in the lead-up to Iowa & NH, I'm really curious to see how Bernie handles the incoming. No doubt Chuck Todd will set-up endless gotcha's for him as well.

 

[Deleted member 24149]

Look, let's not pretend that warren supporters are the big bads on Era. We're out numbered like 10-1. I'll concede that there are a couple of posters who love to give y'all a hard time but please don't act like it's not reciprocated ten fold towards virtually every "rat", "snake", "Republican", "ghoul" candidate that isn't liked here

Click to shrink...

The nonstop threads about the Warren/Bernie feud is up there in the worst week/two weeks of being on this website tbh

 

[sphagnum]

You guys give way more headspace to Bloomberg than I do. It seems nobody outside those he paid off support him

Click to shrink...

Bloomberg is currently in third place on the RCP average.

 

[Soul Skater]

How would the DNC even go about blocking Bloomberg from running without making some arbitrary rule just to stop Bloomberg?

Click to shrink...

They arbitrarily changed the rules to accommodate him to get on the debate stage so even if they can't just make a "let's stop mike" rule they can also not make a "let's make this easier for mike" rule

but it goes beyond him personally going forward they could make some sort of cap about what candidates can spend on their own campaigns. To get on the ballots in states is actually done locally but they could implement some loophole about how if you spend more than X Amount of money on your campaign then the delegates you receive aren't binding and will go to someone else at the Convention

there's no reason why they couldn't implement something like that and they probably should. It's just not fair to other candidates that billionaires can outspend them if they get in.

 

[deepFlaw]

Not changing the debate qualification rules to accomodate Bloomberg would be a great start.

Click to shrink...

Just to agree with the others- the rules changes wouldn't be to "accommodate" him, it's so they can call him on his shit during a debate. Or at least point to him avoiding participating when eligible as being bad.

 

[Skatterd]

So pretty much confirmed it's going to be Bernie vs everyone else, including Warren at the debate. Considering how critical debates have been in the lead-up to Iowa & NH, I'm really curious to see how Bernie handles the incoming. No doubt Chuck Todd will set-up endless gotcha's for him as well.

Click to shrink...

I feel like if they focus all their energy on him it'll just make him stronger and pull further away. So let's see what happens.

 

[Vector]

This I don't get.

He's like the third or fourth highest polling candidate. He SHOULD be in the debates, primary voters deserve to hear from him in person.

Click to shrink...

He is not getting any individual contributions from voters. A few weeks ago, that was a qualifying criterion. The DNC changing the rules to let him in is incredibly bad optics, even if it ultimately doesn't help Bloomberg.

So pretty much confirmed it's going to be Bernie vs everyone else, including Warren at the debate. Considering how critical debates have been in the lead-up to Iowa & NH, I'm really curious to see how Bernie handles the incoming. No doubt Chuck Todd will set-up endless gotcha's for him as well.

Click to shrink...

Bernie does great when he's put on the spot. If it's everyone, including the moderators, vs. him I think he can come out on top.

 

[MechanicalWall]

Got an email from Morning Consult with new post N.H. numbers:

https://morningconsult.com/2020/02/13/sanders-cements-front-runner-status-after-new-hampshire-win/

Click to shrink...

Bernie - 29%

Muh ceiling though

Really, y'all need to chill on fucking Bloomberg. As Bernie wins more and more he's going to continue to peel off the Biden and Warren voters who have him as their second choice but are worried about 'electability'. Don't be surprised if he goes into Super Tuesday with more than 30% in the national polling average

 

[ned_ballad]

They arbitrarily changed the rules to accommodate him to get on the debate stage so even if they can't just make a "let's stop mike" rule they can also not make a "let's make this easier for mike" rule

but it goes beyond him personally going forward they could make some sort of cap about what candidates can spend on their own campaigns. To get on the ballots in states is actually done locally but they could implement some loophole about how if you spend more than X Amount of money on your campaign thenthe delegates you receive aren't binding and will go to someone else as the Convention

there's no reason why they couldn't implement something like that and they probably should. It's just not fair to other candidates that billionaires can outspend them if they get in.

Click to shrink...

Bloomberg has the same right to run as any other candidate...

Why wouldn't he?

Yea, he's terrible, but terrible people are already taken into account by the system. There's an entire primary process to weed out terrible people from being the candidate.

It seems like you don't trust Democratic voters and want the DNC to step in. Would you be okay with the DNC stopping other candidates from running?

 

[Deleted member 2145]

So pretty much confirmed it's going to be Bernie vs everyone else, including Warren at the debate. Considering how critical debates have been in the lead-up to Iowa & NH, I'm really curious to see how Bernie handles the incoming. No doubt Chuck Todd will set-up endless gotcha's for him as well.

Click to shrink...

if Bernie tanks the hits and doesn't go negative it'll probably help him a lot

 

[Deleted member 43]

He is not getting any individual contributions from voters. A few weeks ago, that was a qualifying criterion. The DNC changing the rules to let him in is incredibly bad optics, even if it ultimately doesn't help Bloomberg.

Bernie does great when he's put on the spot. If it's everyone, including the moderators, vs. him I think he can come out on top.

Click to shrink...

It's only bad optics if you think providing voters with more information and more exposure to viable candidates for the party nomination is somehow a bad thing.

It's not.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

So pretty much confirmed it's going to be Bernie vs everyone else, including Warren at the debate. Considering how critical debates have been in the lead-up to Iowa & NH, I'm really curious to see how Bernie handles the incoming. No doubt Chuck Todd will set-up endless gotcha's for him as well.

Click to shrink...

I mean... while Bernie doesn't need to get into the weeds, he's going to have to have an answer regarding unions. I'm not sure why people would be upset he would be getting called out over that given a quite important union in NV is sounding the alarm over a lack of information and concern over what his plan may do to their setup.

This is healthcare - a critically important things for many people. Again, while some massively detailed thing like what Warren did isn't necessary, he has to be able to at least address basics like these and calm those concerns/fears. Not an unreasonable thing to expect in a primary. And this is a race where only one person can win - so it would be obvious he will get called on it by others.

 

[jviggy43]

Yeah I don't get trying to tie the debate issue with not wanting him to be the nominee. It seems to me if you don't want him elected getting him on stage is a good way to achieve that goal

Click to shrink...

Giving him legitimacy by boosting him up on stage isn't going to help I'm sorry. His spending isn't going to win him the race by itself, its going to cap at some point eventually. If he wants to spend that much money for second or third places fine. But I think putting on a debate stage is only going to signal hes legitimate when he shouldnt be viewed as such.

 

[PMS341]

Medicare For All is still cheaper than any union healthcare, and he will almost certainly bring that up. It also supports everyone, and not just those with a job or union that happens to also provide insurance options.

 

[Sixfortyfive]

I'm still really worried about his health and age (if he was 10 years younger I probably wouldn't even have considered other options), but with Warren's campaign in its death throes (which is sad to see), there's not really any other progressive choice.

Click to shrink...

I really, really wish that so much of the field wasn't 70+.

Morbid or not, I've long felt that either Sanders or Warren would be better off nominating a young VP than each other, if it came down to one of them.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

Giving him legitimacy by boosting him up on stage isn't going to help I'm sorry. His spending isn't going to win him the race by itself, its going to cap at some point eventually. If he wants to spend that much money for second or third places fine. But I think putting on a debate stage is only going to signal hes legitimate when he shouldnt be viewed as such.

Click to shrink...

He already has legitimacy. Just ignoring him isn't going to make him go away. He needs to be able to get called out on directly in a debate format at the very least. Right now, he's just able to drown everyone out with ads and outspend everyone.

 

[Deleted member 43]

Giving him legitimacy by boosting him up on stage isn't going to help I'm sorry. His spending isn't going to win him the race by itself, its going to cap at some point eventually. If he wants to spend that much money for second or third places fine. But I think putting on a debate stage is only going to signal hes legitimate when he shouldnt be viewed as such.

Click to shrink...

He is a legitimate candidate. He's also legitimately terrible, but primary voters should make that determination, not the party apparatus.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

Maybe Warren supporters--like myself--would be more likely to back Sanders if/when she drops, if we didn't have to read dumpster takes like this 10 times a day. For a block of voters you guys really need, you sure love to shit all over Warren supporters at every turn.

Click to shrink...

Not voting for a progressive candidate cause people were mean online

 

[Deleted member 2145]

Not voting for a progressive candidate cause people were mean online

Click to shrink...

it's always evergreen to point out that if meanies on twitter or reddit got you to make a spite vote against what you claim to be for then you were never actually for what you were claiming

 

[jviggy43]

He already has legitimacy. Just ignoring him isn't going to make him go away. He needs to be able to get called out on directly in a debate format at the very least. Right now, he's just able to drown everyone out with ads and outspend everyone.

Click to shrink...

I didn't say it would make him go away. I said it would stay capped at 2nd and 3rd in states. And if thats what hes going for fine. I dont see boosting him further by putting him up on a debate stage as anything other than helping to further his position as a serious contender in the eyes of voters. And given that so far weve only had one good debate with moderators I highly doubt the likes of Chuck Todd are going to press Mike on why hes a racist fascist republican running on the Dem platform.

He is a legitimate candidate. He's also legitimately terrible, but primary voters should make that determination, not the party apparatus.

Click to shrink...

You know its funny then that they would have any stipulations for who gets to be on the debate stage at all so long as theyre getting a decent % in polls, given people like booker dropped before they changed the rules to accommodate Bloomberg. But they only changed it in order to support Bloomberg. Lets not pretend the party is neutral here and didn't change the rules for one particular person while barring the rest of the people in their party running for the nom drop out.

 

[Deleted member 20630]

Bernie supporters are vilified because they consistently behave the worst.

Click to shrink...

I'm gonna need to see those receipts

 

[Zeroro]

I'd support Medicare for All, but snake emojis

Spoiler

Should add that I think that snake emoji stuff is still dumb bullshit, but come on.

 

[PMS341]

He is a legitimate candidate. He's also legitimately terrible, but primary voters should make that determination, not the party apparatus.

Click to shrink...

The "party apparatus" also decided to change rules to accommodate a Republican billionaire, so there is that. Buying your way into an election is probably the biggest example of a candidate being illegitimate that I can think of.

 

[Deleted member 28564]

Got an email from Morning Consult with new post N.H. numbers:

https://morningconsult.com/2020/02/13/sanders-cements-front-runner-status-after-new-hampshire-win/

Click to shrink...

I want everyone to notice that Bernie gained 4 points, while Warren only lost 1. Bernie isn't just taking votes from progressive candidates; he's siphoning voters from pretty much everywhere. So it would be fantastic if everyone remembers this, before they go on another tirade about the progressive vs moderate base. It's more complex than that. Bernie taking votes from Biden should give you a clue.

So pretty much confirmed it's going to be Bernie vs everyone else, including Warren at the debate. Considering how critical debates have been in the lead-up to Iowa & NH, I'm really curious to see how Bernie handles the incoming. No doubt Chuck Todd will set-up endless gotcha's for him as well.

Click to shrink...

Unrequited crush on Bernie is over.

 

[Soul Skater]

Bloomberg has the same right to run as any other candidate...

Why wouldn't he?

Yea, he's terrible, but terrible people are already taken into account by the system. There's an entire primary process to weed out terrible people from being the candidate.

It seems like you don't trust Democratic voters and want the DNC to step in. Would you be okay with the DNC stopping other candidates from running?

Click to shrink...

Um what

no it has nothing to do with "trusting democratic voters".

campaigning is hard and costs a lot of money and the fact is in some states a lot of people don't even know who the fuck is running but all the see is ads of Bloomberg being plastered everywhere

It has nothing to do with him personally. Even if I loved him and thought he was great how is billionaires dumping billions of dollars to buy elections a good thing going forward.

why do people so easily get that these sorts of advantages are bad in every other aspect of life but when it comes to politics it's like think any sort of system to balance out the advantages of oligarchs suddenly it's not fair to them to change it and it's like we're struggling to put two and two together here

it would be good for democracy if oligarchs and the extremely wealthy were not able to dump a fuck ton of money into their own elections.

Bloomberg by law wouldn't be able to spend the amount of money he currently is spending on anyone else. What sense does it make that average people can only donate a few thousand dollars to candidates they like but a billionaire has no restrictions. Why are we restricted to our own assets and resources to donate to someone else but they arent? All this does is encourage the incredibly wealthy to cut out the middle man and run themselves and with Trump and Bloomberg that's exactly what's happening now and with no changes there's zero reason to expect it will get better

The scotus didn't know what they were enabling when they ruled on this in the 70s and needs to be talked about and fixed just as much as citizens united

 

[julian]

Fun fact: Bloom is also a literal monster

Click to shrink...

I've been baffled by a few posters saying they wouldn't vote for Klobuchar over Bloomberg cause of her abuse. I'm assuming they didn't know about all this shit?
....and no, I'm not defending or minimizing her issues. Don't vote for either of them.

 

[Deleted member 43]

The "party apparatus" also decided to change rules to accommodate a Republican billionaire, so there is that. Buying your way into an election is probably the biggest example of a candidate being illegitimate that I can think of.

Click to shrink...

Change the rules to allow the third highest polling person to participate in a debate.

Again, he should be in the debate. The voters deserve to hear from him in person, to better make an informed decision. That's the point of the debates.