US PoliEra 2020 |OT 3| "I think he's learned his lesson" says The Concerned Immoderate Darling Collins.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kaitos

Tens across the board!
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
13,208
The interesting thing about CA is the way polls have been showing broadly similar results and yet would imply vastly different delegate distributions based on candidates landing either just above or below the threshold. It would be kinda hilarious if Warren staying in the race actually helps Bernie get a huge delegate haul from CA by keeping several other candidates below the threshold.

My expectation for Florida is that the post-ST shakeout should allow him to consolidate enough of the vote to be above threshold, but I can't imagine a scenario in which he doesn't lose by a lot.
I agree with all of this.
 

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
2008 was the perfect fucking primary for me. I preferred Hillary, but I didn't dislike Obama. I didn't think he would be a bad president. I just liked Hillary more. There was no animosity when he won because he won fair and square. Hillary worked her ass off to unify the party, and there was never a moment where I was like "Obama won so I'm not voting." And, this may shock no one, but I was in the fucking paint for Hillary. I worked for the campaign. I did everything I could, even when I knew it was over, because I wanted to supporter her and Obama didn't need my help.

And, this may not be popular, but I genuinely think people are fed up with one thing: and that's Trump. Most things in people's day to day lives, even major events, don't really elicit this BURN IT DOWN mentality. The reason people are fed up with Trump, and I really believe this, is they are tired of the drama. They're tired of the embarrassment. They're tired about hearing about the shit he does, not what he actually does. They're literally just exhausted with this whole thing. And, while I certainly understand a subset of folks of all walks of life wanting this revolution...I don't think it's coming. Because, like it or not, most people are totally apathetic to things that don't affect their own personal lives. People are good at sympathy, they're bad at empathy. And, I mean no disrespect, but Bernie cannot sell empathy. He sells anger.

Ironically I think the Declaration of Independence said it best.... and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
 

aspiegamer

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,674
ZzzzzzZzzzZzz...
The 2008 was just the right level of exciting, tense, and dramatic. I'm not sure there will ever be another quite like it, where basically the entire voter base liked both candidates and it was down to really specific quirks or outright feels for a lot of people on choice of candidate. History was going to be made either way, and it was abundantly clear by spring 2008 already that the dem nominee was almost a lock for the presidency. Neither was particularly divisive and I can't recall any toxicity beyond friendly jeering even though campaigning got extremely heated. The debating was legendary. When are you ever going to see 2 charismatic intellectuals duke it out on policy in a GOP debate? Hah.

Hillary even went onto the convention floor herself to personally release her delegates in the end, and Obama was a bro offering her SoS.
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,939
I don't think most people went in to the voting booth with the phrase "post partisan centrist" in mind when it came to voting for Obama.

They had stuff like "Hope" and "Change" in their mind as they were the slogans of Obama's campaign. A lot of people thought Obama would be more progressive than he ended up being and that's what got a lot of people out of their houses to vote for him along with his excellent use of digital platforms and godlike charisma.

I also bet if you polled most people on the leanings of Buttiegeg they would think he is a progressive too. And Buttiegeg is straight up aping Obama's playbook. And to be honest Buttiegeg has a lot of progressive agenda but it's his framing that is more moderate. This whole talk about lanes and ideologies is more for the pundit class, voters pick candidates over lanes. A good candidate can sell or frame anything.
This is the complete truth. Talk about how centrist you think Obama was but his voters saw him as a progressive avatar for hope and change. Period.

It's actually crazy how much more issues focused politics has become since then.

The 2008 was just the right level of exciting, tense, and dramatic. I'm not sure there will ever be another quite like it, where basically the entire voter base liked both candidates and it was down to really specific quirks or outright feels for a lot of people on choice of candidate. History was going to be made either way, and it was abundantly clear by spring 2008 already that the dem nominee was almost a lock for the presidency. Neither was particularly divisive and I can't recall any toxicity beyond friendly jeering even though campaigning got extremely heated. The debating was legendary. When are you ever going to see 2 charismatic intellectuals duke it out on policy in a GOP debate? Hah.

Hillary even went onto the convention floor herself to personally release her delegates in the end, and Obama was a bro offering her SoS.
Lmao. I wouldn't call this friendly jeering.


I wonder what would happen in 2020 if a man told a woman "I can't tell who i'm running against" about the woman candidate's husband. And then the white candidate tells the black candidate that he was friends with drug slum lords in south side Chicago.

This all seems more personal and far worse than anything Warren has said to cause all of Bernie Twitter to meltdown for the past month.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
3,510
This is the complete truth. Talk about how centrist you think Obama was but his voters saw him as a progressive avatar for hope and change. Period.

It's actually crazy how much more issues focused politics has become since then.


Lmao. I wouldn't call this friendly jeering.


I wonder what would happen in 2020 if a man told a woman "I can't tell who i'm running against" about the woman candidate's husband. And then the white candidate tells the black candidate that he was friends with drug slum lords in south side Chicago.

This all seems more personal and far worse than anything Warren has said to cause all of Bernie Twitter to meltdown for the past month.
Jesus, I just aged 60 years and turned to dust
 

Vector

Member
Feb 28, 2018
5,089
This is the complete truth. Talk about how centrist you think Obama was but his voters saw him as a progressive avatar for hope and change. Period.

It's actually crazy how much more issues focused politics has become since then.
This is a good thing as voters now want to know who's funding the candidates and how serious they are when they put on a progressive facade.

It's no longer enough to just be a smooth talker, otherwise Buttigieg would be the runaway winner.
 

konka

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,856
This is the complete truth. Talk about how centrist you think Obama was but his voters saw him as a progressive avatar for hope and change. Period.

It's actually crazy how much more issues focused politics has become since then.


Lmao. I wouldn't call this friendly jeering.


I wonder what would happen in 2020 if a man told a woman "I can't tell who i'm running against" about the woman candidate's husband. And then the white candidate tells the black candidate that he was friends with drug slum lords in south side Chicago.

This all seems more personal and far worse than anything Warren has said to cause all of Bernie Twitter to meltdown for the past month.
That isn’t a fair criticism of what Obama said. He wasn’t just running against a woman. He was running against a woman married to a former president who at that point hadn’t even been out of office for 8 years. Bill was just as visible as Hillary and he was out there offering up what sounded like his own policy plans on the campaign trail that often contradicted Hillary’s.
 

kess

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,104
2008 was a lot more racially tinged than Clinton supporters let on. My canvas group was trolled in Pennsylvania, and Clinton campaigned like she was the Great White Hope past any mathematical hope in places like Kentucky, all while trying to get full delegates from Florida's illegitimate primary.

We were all lucky that it came together so perfectly before the convention, because the blogosphere was on fire.
 

Dr. Feel Good

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,581
Not at all, but still very obtainable. In the rust belt the order of difficulty from easiest to hardest goes IL>PA>MI>WI>IA>OH>IN.

Wisconsin will probably just become our new Ohio. MN, MI and PA went Democrat six times in a row before they flipped against Hillary. WI went Democrat SEVEN times by comparison. Only MN has a better record (nine times). It may not have a super educated population or large cities, but it's definitely a state that wants to be blue.
what? Minnesota is one of the highest educated states. And Minneapolis heavily offsets the rural communities and is growing due to influx of transplants.

Minnesota is an anomaly Of the the Midwest and will stay blue.
 

The Namekian

Member
Nov 5, 2017
3,339
New York City
2008 was a lot more racially tinged than Clinton supporters let on. My canvas group was trolled in Pennsylvania, and Clinton campaigned like she was the Great White Hope past any mathematical hope in places like Kentucky, all while trying to get full delegates from Florida's illegitimate primary.

We were all lucky that it came together so perfectly before the convention, because the blogosphere was on fire.
So many people forget that this happened. It’s like it was whitewashed (parson the pun) away. It’s one of the reasons I give credit to Obama with how he built his coalition. He knew he had to win those assholes over those he bit his tongue and did it.
 

plagiarize

Trifecta Secured. Let's get to work.
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
18,124
Cape Cod, MA
I guess arguing over the 2008 primaries is better than arguing over the 2016 primaries. I wonder how long people will argue over the 2020 primaries for?
 

SolarPowered

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,872
I wish I had your optimism. The modern parties are trending towards much higher polarization with the Republican party moving towards voter suppression and minority rule rather than democracy. They are more scared of primaries than they are of losing their seats in general elections. This has made the GOP more radical but still able to govern with a shrinking base.
Whatever the GOP does now is hardly called governing. It's kicking down all checks and balances to prepare for minority rule, especially through the court system. In any decent first world country Trump would not have lasted two months and I don't know what particular processes would kick in, but I can't imagine McConnell would have been allowed to get away with half the shit he does.
what? Minnesota is one of the highest educated states. And Minneapolis heavily offsets the rural communities and is growing due to influx of transplants.

Minnesota is an anomaly Of the the Midwest and will stay blue.
I meant WI isn't particularly highly educated. It's been mentioned in the last couple of pages iirc. Only Minnesota has a longer blue streak than Wisconsin. Wisconsin definitely has a lot of people who want it to be a blue state. I look at Minnesota's stats regarding votes and education and I get a little jeajous as a New Yorker lol. Wisconsin is probably going to be far more friendly territory for democrats than Ohio in the future.
Keep in mind that the House passed a fairly good public option during Obama's first term and the party is further left now. Getting that done won't be too much of an issue so long as the Dems can take the Senate (and get past the filibuster).
Maybe in a less crowded session there might be time to hash out M4A, but 2020 is going to be a doozy. Voting/electoral reform, addition of new states, gun legislation, gigatons of executive reform, rebuilding the intelligence apparatus, rebuilding departments related to sciences, immigration reform, trying to obtain universal healthcare, rebuilding the state department, probably replacing a justice, killing the filibuster, etc. That is only the domestic stuff. I don't even want to think of the overseas stuff and the epic apology tour our next president will have to do.
 
Last edited:

GrapeApes

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
4,095

 

Sirhc

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,939

Bloomberg still eating the shit out of a chunk of Biden's support though it looks like, with Bloom blunting Biden's margins in some of these better states for him it's going to hurt hard if Bernie holds those huge leads in CA.
 

Tamanon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,057
So. This Afghanistan peace deal.... if it holds even through November, I think it changes the 2020 calculus.
 

Ac30

Member
Oct 30, 2017
14,528
London
So. This Afghanistan peace deal.... if it holds even through November, I think it changes the 2020 calculus.
It’s going to go as well as Obama’s Iraq pullout did, but I suppose the eventual complete domination of Afghanistan by the Taliban would prevent the formation of an ISIS equivalent.

That said, at least it’s some sort of development there. I just feel for the everyday Afghans that’ll suffer once the fundamentalists are back in.
 

Tamanon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,057
I don't think people care about foreign policy.
I agree. Which is why I think bringing troops home will be pretty powerful. They don’t care what happens in Afghanistan afterwards.

Honestly, there was never a way out without the Taliban. Another reason we shouldn’t have been in to begin with!

Especially if the opponent is Bernie, as they’ll basically neutralize each other on interventionism. Who knows, just spitballing.
 

Frankish

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,289
USA
If a Democratic president did this Afghanistan deal we would get crushed with narratives about how we are surrendering, looking weak, letting the Taliban win, etc.

But because a Republican did it, it will help them in November.

(Not commenting on substance of deal, just the politics)
 

ZeroRed

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,463
Man, this interview Bill Maher did last night sure is something. Did anyone else see it?


Starts off fine-ish and then ventures into old man, sketchy racist ramblings and then there's some clearly odd/biased Bernie questioning. Singling him out as more susceptible to COVID-19 just because he's had a heart attack and is in crowds. Like everyone who campaigns isn't doing that as well...? Talk about fear mongering and panic stoking out of thin air. Jesus. So fucking irresponsible and not what anyone needs right now.

Why the hell do people like this have a show?
 

Tiger Priest

Member
Oct 24, 2017
774
New York, NY
Anyone with any sense should be screaming about how awful Bernie's numbers are with older voters. Everyone seems fine betting the farm on some unproven turnout theory that feels like a smokescreen argument for getting elected that has had to date no merit and is HUGELY risky vs. just giving people a normal Democrat like they voted for in 2018.
There’s a case study for this: it’s called 1972. McGovern’s whole strategy was predicated on turning out a huge new youth vote which never materialized (the youth vote in 72 ended up voting more than 50% for Nixon). He was seen as too liberal (he proposed essentially UBI through the tax code) and also had shaky personnel choices.

I think Bernie would make it a lot closer than those blowout margins, of course, especially if/when a recession begins, but it’s extremely risky and could have disastrous downballot effects with rural/suburban dems needing to either defend democratic socialism to conservative voters or distance themselves from the candidate at the top of the ticket.
 
Oct 26, 2017
6,578
South Carolina
This peace thing will be forgotten, but man did the Iraq War horseshit mess up alot of stuff for decades.

Republicans have grown too comfy with authoritarian and anti Democratic tactics to go back to playing fairly. They like keeping their power and will do whatever to keep it.
Its their only play, then they fell in letting the Dirty Tricksters run the show, giving the grunting Southern Strategy people the opportunity to be the acid test of policy, and those all-too-friendly foreign folks with their "no strings attached" cash and data services.

Now, it's all they know. Cartago Delenda Est.
 

Tamanon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,057
Anyone with any sense should be screaming about how awful Bernie's numbers are with older voters. Everyone seems fine betting the farm on some unproven turnout theory that feels like a smokescreen argument for getting elected that has had to date no merit and is HUGELY risky vs. just giving people a normal Democrat like they voted for in 2018.
Just waiting for the first Heritage foundation study about the hospital closures that would occur with M4A. It’s like a minefield.
 

IggyChooChoo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,451
Man, this interview Bill Maher did last night sure is something. Did anyone else see it?


Starts off fine-ish and then ventures into old man, sketchy racist ramblings and then there's some clearly odd/biased Bernie questioning. Singling him out as more susceptible to COVID-19 just because he's had a heart attack and is in crowds. Like everyone who campaigns isn't doing that as well...? Talk about fear mongering and panic stoking out of thin air. Jesus. So fucking irresponsible and not what anyone needs right now.

Why the hell do people like this have a show?
I haven’t watched the interview, and I think Maher sucks, but I’m quite worried about my parents because of their age and co-morbidities (like high blood pressure and diabetes). And they’re retired and younger than Bernie! If my dad was 80, had a heart history, and had an intensely stressful job that put him in direct contact with tens of thousands of people and big crowds, I’d be scared shitless. Male, 80+, heart history + stressful work + crowds is exactly the kind of scenario and demographic that the virus hits hardest. This virus is killing stressed, overworked doctors in their 20s and 30s, after all. And I worry about Biden, too, because cancer survivors are also at higher risk. I am also pretty worried about RBG, as a cancer survivor in her 80s.


I don’t know how you can talk about any of this without being accused of fearmongering, but I think the concern is legitimate and justified.
 
Last edited:

AndyD

Mambo Number PS5
Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,994
Nashville
I don't think people care about foreign policy.
They do if we ultimately "lost" by giving in to the Taliban. Freeing prisoners, no UN sanctions and funding them to govern in an islamic republic, even though realistically one of the ways out, is essentially saying the Taliban was right all along and we "wasted" American soldier lives and truckloads of money.
 

Sheepinator

Member
Jul 25, 2018
17,080
Man, this interview Bill Maher did last night sure is something. Did anyone else see it?


Starts off fine-ish and then ventures into old man, sketchy racist ramblings and then there's some clearly odd/biased Bernie questioning. Singling him out as more susceptible to COVID-19 just because he's had a heart attack and is in crowds. Like everyone who campaigns isn't doing that as well...? Talk about fear mongering and panic stoking out of thin air. Jesus. So fucking irresponsible and not what anyone needs right now.

Why the hell do people like this have a show?
I fast forwarded through parts of that interview because it didn't look very informative. I did see the Bernie bit and it was totally fair. The fact is, of all the candidates he is the most at risk. It's irresponsible of you to imply that Mayor Pete or Amy etc. have the same risk level.

 

Ac30

Member
Oct 30, 2017
14,528
London
Anyone with any sense should be screaming about how awful Bernie's numbers are with older voters. Everyone seems fine betting the farm on some unproven turnout theory that feels like a smokescreen argument for getting elected that has had to date no merit and is HUGELY risky vs. just giving people a normal Democrat like they voted for in 2018.
The Sanders strategy sure paid dividends in the UK.

If a Democratic president did this Afghanistan deal we would get crushed with narratives about how we are surrendering, looking weak, letting the Taliban win, etc.

But because a Republican did it, it will help them in November.

(Not commenting on substance of deal, just the politics)
I remember the media lambasting Trump for weeks after he turned tail and ran in Syria though?

Which is now a complete disaster which was entirely foreseeable, thanks to Erdogan and Trump
 

Dahbomb

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,166
That Trump Taliban deal is pure capitulation. Seems like he is getting nervous for re-election and wants that good headline.

And Taliban won. US surprisingly pretty bad at Wars post WW2.
 

Clowns

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,521
The 2008 was just the right level of exciting, tense, and dramatic. I'm not sure there will ever be another quite like it, where basically the entire voter base liked both candidates and it was down to really specific quirks or outright feels for a lot of people on choice of candidate. History was going to be made either way, and it was abundantly clear by spring 2008 already that the dem nominee was almost a lock for the presidency. Neither was particularly divisive and I can't recall any toxicity beyond friendly jeering even though campaigning got extremely heated. The debating was legendary. When are you ever going to see 2 charismatic intellectuals duke it out on policy in a GOP debate? Hah.

Hillary even went onto the convention floor herself to personally release her delegates in the end, and Obama was a bro offering her SoS.
Lol this "everyone just got along and liked each other" take is like an entire different world than my perception of 2008.
 

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
The Trump/Taliban peace thing is going to get buried in about 10 minutes. Coronavirus is too big a thing right now. The Dow crashing is too big a thing right now. It doesn't have enough pizzaz to divert attention from the other horrible shit going on right now, in my opinion. The killing of Soleimani was last month. I don't see it doing anything. It''s not even the lead story on MSNBC or CNN's site.
 

YaBish

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,363

I think it was pointed out in the primary thread, but this poll was in the field from February 3-23. So the day of the Iowa caucuses to the day after the Nevada caucus. Not gonna put a ton of stock in it personally.
 

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,395
Lol this "everyone just got along and liked each other" take is like an entire different world than my perception of 2008.
Yeah admittedly I wasn’t nearly as fully in tune with the primary as I am now but I definitely don’t remember it in all the peace and sunshine sort of way some do.
 

Linkura

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,943
The Trump/Taliban peace thing is going to get buried in about 10 minutes. Coronavirus is too big a thing right now. The Dow crashing is too big a thing right now. It doesn't have enough pizzaz to divert attention from the other horrible shit going on right now, in my opinion. The killing of Soleimani was last month. I don't see it doing anything. It''s not even the lead story on MSNBC or CNN's site.
Yup, he's an idiot.
 

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
HW the last good GOP President, don’t @ me
You're 100% correct though.

CNN did an interview with two brothers who were part of the Castro Reading Brigade thing. And they talked about how as 12 and 14 year olds they were teaching older folks to read. Then, at the end of the interview, the one brother was like this Bernie guy shouldn't have said that, and I doubt he has a future in American politics. And you gotta respect the fact that some random Cuban man has a better grasp of the American electorate than Bernie Sanders. lol

Honestly, we should just turn that into an ad and run it constantly. Just dumb pictures of Trump's dumb face and hair with someone going HE'S AN IDIOT.
 

Naijaboy

The Fallen
Mar 13, 2018
7,274

Take it with a grain of salt since there isn't a contested primary in the Republican side, but I'm pretty sure the gap is much closer than it has been in the past few elections.
 

Ac30

Member
Oct 30, 2017
14,528
London
I mean, H.W. also pardoned Reagan & co. for Iran-Contra and escalated the War on Drugs.
Lest you think otherwise I’m sure everyone thinks he ranks under like every Democrat in recent memory including Carter.

Didn’t he destroy some diaries/memos on Iran Contra and then pretend nothing happened? Amazing nobody even tried to impeach.
He also puked on the Prime Minister of Japan!
No one ever talks about that.
...I didn’t even know about this
 

konka

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,856
That Trump Taliban deal is pure capitulation. Seems like he is getting nervous for re-election and wants that good headline.

And Taliban won. US surprisingly pretty bad at Wars post WW2.
I mean. I'd argue you can't be good at wars post WW2. If the objective had been to pulverize Afghanistan then it wouldn't have been an issue. Post WW2 wars have attempted to be against regimes and not the citizenry of the country. Had we treated Baghdad like Dresden or Hiroshima we may have "won".
 

Ogodei

One Winged Slayer
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,256
Coruscant
I mean. I'd argue you can't be good at wars post WW2. If the objective had been to pulverize Afghanistan then it wouldn't have been an issue. Post WW2 wars have attempted to be against regimes and not the citizenry of the country. Had we treated Baghdad like Dresden or Hiroshima we may have "won".
Indeed, wars against non-state actors are very difficult to win without having a base in the country to build goodwill off of (and that assumes the country isn't riven by ethnic factions that put hard barriers on your ability to build pro-government coalitions), or without committing massive war crimes. Look at what it's taken for Syria to win back control of the country, for instance.

A good example, even Putin's Russia basically had to concede in Chechnya. They won "peace" by giving total control to a local strongman who's nominally loyal to Moscow, and that was with them being willing to do much more horrible things than we have been in the wars on terror.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.