-
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.
Democratic Presidential Primary |February OT| It Can't be Worse than Iowa, Right? (Discussion Guidelines in OP)
- Thread starter Poodlestrike
- Start date
- Status
He IS the front runner. Everyone on stage has to get ahead of him in polling if they want to win.
It's not a particularly bad take
we live in a reality where people say awful stuff in public, to media on a regular basis and it only seems to help them (this isn't just a T U R M P issue). I got that kind of paranoia about Bloom, thankfully it looks like it might have all worked out in the end!
I feel like that was the concern until Bloomberg showed up and took the heat off him, I think they would all be much happier with a President Sanders than a President Bloomberg
it's still a terrible look from the DNC and sends an awful signal especially to supporters of campaigns like Kamala, Beto, Castro, Booker, etc. it's a giant middle finger that says your support is worth less than a rich asshole with money. we all know they aren't changing the rules to preserve some diversity on the debate stage but the bloomin billionaire comes along with a leaky purse and he is accommodated. nothing will change that. shit, the DNC looks even worse because they really did just provide a platform for mini me Trump to get his bullshit off.
we also don't know that it hurt him yet! voters will ultimately decide that and ask me how much faith I have in voters to deny the bigoted billionaire
There were certainly a number of people complaining about the prospect of him being on stage.
Beaides that, common sense dictated changing the rules. The rules were written assuming everyone would be accepting donations. It is unheard of for someone to run a race refusing donations. It's never been done. So naturally when originally conceived just months ago, no provision was included in the event someone just didn't accept donations.
Him being able to run nonstop ads nationally in a general election format without having to answer anything was a disaster.
They amended the rules because they didn't account for a self funded campaign. It was an oversight that they fixed once it became apparent it was a problem
There's no conspiracy that the DNC is propping up Blooomberg or anything like that.
Those candidates aren't here due to their own failures running a campaign on this stage. That's not the DNC's fault.
I just can't imagine anyone after last night still upset he was on stage. Obviously we won't know polling for a bit, but he was surging without having to be confronted at all. He had to get on stage at some point to see how he would perform when directly confronted and couldn't develop carefully curated ads that plenty of people were falling for.
His polling indicated he would have easily smashed through any donation requirements. This is such a minor thing to be bent out of shape over. Just nobody ever thought that someone would run a race of this magnitude while refusing to accept any donations.
of course it's not some conspiracy, they literally just changed the rules to prop him up something we know wouldn't happen for other candidates
It would have been weird for Bloomberg to not be in the debate due to a technicality with the rules.
My take on Warren and her path:
Last night's Warren is the Warren I was expecting to see all primary. This is the one I learned to follow, watching her do this very thing in Senate hearings and Committee hearings to heads of Corporations or Banks or members of the GOP. 'Fluffy Warren', as some Twitter pundits wanna label this period of Warren as, is simply not interesting, even though I have felt for awhile now that in terms of messaging and pure execution plans of her policies, she was the one best suited for the job of President.
I honestly don't know if she has a path to the nomination though. I'm hoping she gets a huge bump off of last night, but thats not gonna change the situation she is in going into Super Tuesday, NV this weekend, or SC.
Bloomberg qualified for debates in caucuses/primaries he isn't even on the ballot for. We are hearing from people connected to the millionaire/billionaire of the democratic party that their big horses were Biden, and when he started looking like a dud, Bloomberg stepped in, and now they are panicking cause both of them are falling apart.
In fact, the thing that troubles me the most about Bloomberg and how the democratic media and establishment reacted to him is that Bloomberg, a "former" republican, only debated entering the race last year whenever Warren or Bernie would do well in polls, and when Bernie started leading in polls, he finally stepped in. Bloomberg could easily spend his vast wealth buying anti-Trump ads all over the country all year long, but he didn't - he is convinced he needed to step in and stop the candidates who wanted to stop the status quo of the rich getting all the benefits/tax cuts of government.
And Bloomberg is so obsessed with preventing the outcome of a Bernie or Warren presidency, that he'll likely run 3rd party just as a spoiler campaign.
Last night's Warren is the Warren I was expecting to see all primary. This is the one I learned to follow, watching her do this very thing in Senate hearings and Committee hearings to heads of Corporations or Banks or members of the GOP. 'Fluffy Warren', as some Twitter pundits wanna label this period of Warren as, is simply not interesting, even though I have felt for awhile now that in terms of messaging and pure execution plans of her policies, she was the one best suited for the job of President.
I honestly don't know if she has a path to the nomination though. I'm hoping she gets a huge bump off of last night, but thats not gonna change the situation she is in going into Super Tuesday, NV this weekend, or SC.
Bloomberg qualified for debates in caucuses/primaries he isn't even on the ballot for. We are hearing from people connected to the millionaire/billionaire of the democratic party that their big horses were Biden, and when he started looking like a dud, Bloomberg stepped in, and now they are panicking cause both of them are falling apart.
In fact, the thing that troubles me the most about Bloomberg and how the democratic media and establishment reacted to him is that Bloomberg, a "former" republican, only debated entering the race last year whenever Warren or Bernie would do well in polls, and when Bernie started leading in polls, he finally stepped in. Bloomberg could easily spend his vast wealth buying anti-Trump ads all over the country all year long, but he didn't - he is convinced he needed to step in and stop the candidates who wanted to stop the status quo of the rich getting all the benefits/tax cuts of government.
And Bloomberg is so obsessed with preventing the outcome of a Bernie or Warren presidency, that he'll likely run 3rd party just as a spoiler campaign.
And everyone knew this actually wasn't going to help him and surprise it didn't. You know every candidate wanted him there regardless of what they said publicly.
Last edited:
If other candidates were surging as strongly and quickly as he was without needing donor money, the rules would likely be changed too. Bloomberg was threatening 2nd place within weeks being able to run his own primary race.
I just don't get how people are willfully refusing to see that and still seriously think it was better he not be on stage. Especially after last night.
If say Kamala, Booker, Yang or others dropped half a bill on ads via whatever method, they absolutely would still be in the race and on the debate stage through sheer force of money.
Bloomberg even being allowed in the race, or any purely self-funded billionaire run is the purest form of money equaling free speech which nobody, especially not the DNC should be endorsing.
But I guess dollars just make it alright!
Bloomberg even being allowed in the race, or any purely self-funded billionaire run is the purest form of money equaling free speech which nobody, especially not the DNC should be endorsing.
But I guess dollars just make it alright!
The DNC can't prevent anyone from filing paperwork as a Democrat to run for President.
I mean, you're absolutely right about the other campaigns but that was when everything was going as originally planned
for instance we know Kamala's campaign suddenly stalled because of funding issues but that's no problem for the bigot billionaire
hell, it's a disgrace to the candidates still in the race. Warren had just recently signaled that she was going to need more money to make it through super Tuesday. meanwhile this rich asshole can literally ignore the first four states and buy his way into contention.
even the Sanders campaign who is the frontrunner and has a grass roots support network the likes of which we've never seen. did you watch that video about visualizing Bloomberg's wealth? makes Sanders historic level of support look a grain of sand in the Sahara
don't be foolish, providing Bloomberg with a platform and further legitimizing his campaign was a mistake. nothing will make it less than such, not the schadenfreude yall got from watching him get clobbered and not him hopefully getting his ass handed to him by voters
It's not really a DNC problem, it's a problem with American democracy as a whole. But that's not something anyone is ever going to do anything about, probably.
Words that mainstream media uses too often:
-Electability
-Socialism
Words they should instead be using:
-Charisma
-Integrity
-Popularity
-Ideological
And if Warren can get ahead on those fronts, all the more reason to stand behind her in the face of fascism. But I don't think the mainstream media 'gets' why Sanders is popular, but also why this new wave of fascism has been able to gain power in the first place.
-Electability
-Socialism
Words they should instead be using:
-Charisma
-Integrity
-Popularity
-Ideological
And if Warren can get ahead on those fronts, all the more reason to stand behind her in the face of fascism. But I don't think the mainstream media 'gets' why Sanders is popular, but also why this new wave of fascism has been able to gain power in the first place.
This thread is weird because it wants the DNC to change their rules to benefit Bernie and hurt every other candidate.
He was already a very legitimate candidate that was able to spam a carefully curated false message of himself to voters on a national level with zero push back.
I'm aware he's disgustingly rich and yeah I saw the video. That's why he's not taking donations. And that's why it's unheard of to do so. I mean would you rather he have taken them, spammed his ads, then just met the threshold anyway? Because it was more than obvious he would have easily beaten those targets.
The above post is an example of when someone is presented information that contradicts their view and simply double down.
My politically apathetic brother who never votes just asked me how he can vote for Bernie in the primary. It's a proud feeling.
While people are complaining about Bernie Bros and wagging their fingers, I hope they take the time to appreciate the political energy he has injected into the youth.
While people are complaining about Bernie Bros and wagging their fingers, I hope they take the time to appreciate the political energy he has injected into the youth.
He's made a conscious decision to stay on policy. We'll see if it ultimately works, but I think it could. Trump wins when his opponents get into a battle with him over image. Sanders would avoid that. We know Trump is just going to yell "SOCIALISM" at Sanders over and over. And Sanders will respond by bringing up every policy he can. He'd be the only candidate answering the actual debate questions. I think that's how you beat Trump.
It benefits Bernie because he's the one who cares about democracy.
He was already legitimized in the minds of voters by his massive ad buys. There's nothing you can do about that. There's nothing the other candidates could do about that. He was already an option on the ballots.
Summary of attacks on Bernie:
Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.
Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.
probably his best bit of the night was when they brought up the poll about support for socialism and he was like "and who won that poll?"
c'mon and SLAM
Yep. Loved that bit, they were trying to be sneaky but Bernie had to remind them that he's top dog.
2016 was closest we ever got to the 2008 youth voting #'s. Don't think youth political energy has died down during Trump era either. All that matters is what states are these youth voters going to come from, because it can be another Hilary all over again with popular vote win but loss of electoral
Wasn't familiar with Klobuchar prior to this, but she seemed the most sensible and rational candidate on the stage after Bernie and Warren. (Low bar, but still)
Economy Economy Economy.
It's why Bernie will have a tough time. He's essentially going to argue that we need to blow up the economy when for most people they are doing well.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/286280/trump-job-approval-steady.aspx
Last edited:
You know for as much as Warren claims to be an attack dog when it comes to taking down billionaires it sure puts into question a lot of things when she so gladly embraces capitalism the very framework that allows these Billionaires to thrive and prosper in the first place.
More like I'd rather drive/own/operate my own shit than sit in the back of someone else's ride regardless of how nice and comfortable they promise me it'll be. I'll take the risk on building my own.
The real insult is that the other candidates have had to go on stage and be scrutinized while he got to ignore the process up until now. Whatever definition of legitimacy you have is meaningless when he was already registered, polling well, and capable of getting votes and being nominated. What would you have the DNC do, ignore the will of the people if he won or stop him from registering as a Democrat in the first place?
The debate proved that he stands for nothing and can't even hide it well like Pete. You were wrong about what would happen by letting Bloomberg on the stage before and you're wrong now.
You don't understand the power of the status quo especially when individuals think things are going well. Per Gallup, 45% of people are satisfied with the state of the nation (highest since Feb 2005). Arguing that everything is terrible and we need to change everything in the face of that is a really tall order.
People want change when things are down.
Last edited:
Warren is very much a consumer advocate, it isn't some act. What launched her into public life for me was during 2008 and her constant highlighting of the crooks on wall-street that caused everything.
Bernie wanted to subvert the will of the people by having Superdelegates push him past Hillary
- Status