Mega-Thread: Democratic 2020 Primaries

[Wyrt]

Bloomberg is getting into the race...
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...mpression=true

So, basically, he wants to draw away just enough of Biden's voters to help Warren secure the nomination.

[Gestopft]

Kinda meaningless except to underscore that the establishment takes Warren as a credible threat, really.

And that they are likely losing faith in Biden

[Blur4stuff]

All I can picture from Bloomberg is a worse version of the Obama presidency. But, I'd still be willing to hear him out.

My two biggest issues are healthcare and climate change. He'd have to really knock it out of the fucking park to top Sanders/Warren.

[Elegiac]

And that they are likely losing faith in Biden

And that is not an enviable position in the slightest. Biden's big draw was his name recognition and tenure as Obama's VP, both of which are being weighed against the fact that the energy in the party is clearly in the progressive camp. Bloomberg has far less to offer and a lot more baggage due to his wealth.

Honestly, at this point I think the Biden camp is losing faith in Biden - which might help explain how combative they've become.

[Wyrt]

I'm not really sure who he expects to support him at this point.

Biden voters who got turned off by Trump's propaganda.

[Fugus]

So, basically, he wants to draw away just enough of Biden's voters to help Warren secure the nomination.

Or he is planning on running 3rd party if she wins to secure the win for Trump. They might hate Trump and fear what he does to our nation, but the question is, do they fear what Warren/Sanders offer even worse.

Basically are they willing to succeed in a world where they aren't the ones calling the shots or would they rather burn it down just so long as they are still the shot callers.

[Draco-Onis]

Not that I like either of them but Trump has various form of a presidential campaign for 15-20 years. Pays off eventually I guess.

Well Trump won in spite of his campaign not because of it if the formula worked they wouldn't be changing it entirely for 2020. He got really lucky with things that were beyond his control like Hillary and James Comey.

- - - Updated - - -

Or he is planning on running 3rd party if she wins to secure the win for Trump. They might hate Trump and fear what he does to our nation, but the question is, do they fear what Warren/Sanders offer even worse.

Basically are they willing to succeed in a world where they aren't the ones calling the shots or would they rather burn it down just so long as they are still the shot callers.

Considering the amount of bitching and moaning I see on financial programs they fear Warren/Sanders a lot worse because Trump put money in their pockets and that's all they care about. They are even threatening funding for senators if Warren or Sanders win, these selfish pricks don't give a flying fuck about the country.

[Fugus]

Considering the amount of bitching and moaning I see on financial programs they fear Warren/Sanders a lot worse because Trump put money in their pockets and that's all they care about. They are even threatening funding for senators if Warren or Sanders win, these selfish pricks don't give a flying fuck about the country.

What I was thinking. While Trump is bad for business, they hope they can recover after him, even if it fucks us for decades so long as they are largely insulated from it. With Warren/Sanders, once they pass a few of these things that they know will be popular, they aren't going to be able to remove it.

I would honestly suggest that if Warren/Sanders makes it into office, they need to campaign HARD on getting money out of politics and push for it publicly to the point they actually go into the offices if need be during the votes making sure they are live and on camera to shame them into voting for it since both parties voters support it.

Once THOSE laws are passed, then things can really start to improve.

[JohnBrown1917]

Dude, it's a twitter post by someone running for President. Give me a break.

Secondly, we're a capitalist country. There is nothing wrong with great wealth.

And that is exactly the problem. Capitalists/conservatives/liberals would rather have millions of people starve than to take to even think about how maybe billionares are not a great thing.


- - - Updated - - -

Wait, you think a US president has the power to stop billionaires from existing? I mean, as a long term goal I'm pretty much there with you but we're a long, long way off.

Ignoring a blandly popular figure's criticism of her ideas would be a massive failure. Gates handed her an opportunity and she's capitalizing on it. Hope she continues to do so.

Handled by showing she is not against them, yeah, that'll really show the rest of the country she is with them.


How niave.

- - - Updated - - -

Ignoring criticism is SUCH a positive quality in a candidate.

If you don't want to say anything negative about the richest men in the world it really shows.

[kaelleria]

And that they are likely losing faith in Biden

The donor class (Bloomberg is apart of this) have no faith in the front runners... this is ignoring the data that shows the voting populace is actually very satisfied with the field.

[Beefhammer]

What I was thinking. While Trump is bad for business, they hope they can recover after him, even if it fucks us for decades so long as they are largely insulated from it. With Warren/Sanders, once they pass a few of these things that they know will be popular, they aren't going to be able to remove it.

I would honestly suggest that if Warren/Sanders makes it into office, they need to campaign HARD on getting money out of politics and push for it publicly to the point they actually go into the offices if need be during the votes making sure they are live and on camera to shame them into voting for it since both parties voters support it.

Once THOSE laws are passed, then things can really start to improve.

Well considering money in politics is considered free speech and we know free speech is not without consequence, all political donors should be known. No more hiding behind PACs because you ornyourncomoany is afraid of being targeted for donating to shitty candidates or funding hate filled adds. I think if these secret big donors were known they wouldn't donate.

[jeezusisacasual]

I see nothing wrong with capitalism to a point, its when the wealth grows to such a point it undermines the entire political restraints is when i believe a check should be in place to remove that sort of power. I make it clear that i work in finance and asset management but unlike my libertarian peers i feel that monetary means moves to much of horrendous actions of our governments. Currently we are living in a world in which socialism works wonderfully for the rich and business aligned but brutal capitalism for the remaining populace, i am a rising tide raises all boats and that the only trickle down will be the piss from our betters upon us, i say this as a Republican mind you.

Capitalism's rough edges have to be smoothed out or you end up in the current state of political mess that we are seeing right now, this is what brings the rise of the Duterte's, Marianne Le Pen, Trumps and other right wing populists along with more extreme left wing ideologies spreading. Things like Healthcare and housing should not be predatory markets with more focus on the comforts being the real monetary movers in our economy. People only have Reagan / Thatcher / Friedman for our current mess and dismantling their world view would go along way in restoring order.

Want to fix populism? Fix the current economic mess that plagues the underbelly of the western world.

[Fugus]

Well considering money in politics is considered free speech and we know free speech is not without consequence, all political donors should be known. No more hiding behind PACs because you ornyourncomoany is afraid of being targeted for donating to shitty candidates or funding hate filled adds. I think if these secret big donors were known they wouldn't donate.

That isn't fixing the problem though, that is putting it more in the open hoping to shame the shameless into doing right.

They fear more along the lines of them moving to public funding of elections where no one can donate and PACs aren't even allowed and they lose all that power. THAT is what they fear.

If the big donors are known, it isn't that they won't donate, they will just donate under a subsidiary name or a shell company or who knows what else. Or they will outright donate to a PAC and not care because that technically isn't donating to the candidate.

[Zaktar]

And that is exactly the problem. Capitalists/conservatives/liberals would rather have millions of people starve than to take to even think about how maybe billionares are not a great thing.


- - - Updated - - -



Handled by showing she is not against them, yeah, that'll really show the rest of the country she is with them.


How niave.

- - - Updated - - -



If you don't want to say anything negative about the richest men in the world it really shows.

So a progressive isn't progressive enough until they make themselves unelectable? And I'm the naive one, how cute.

[Endus]

And that is not an enviable position in the slightest. Biden's big draw was his name recognition and tenure as Obama's VP, both of which are being weighed against the fact that the energy in the party is clearly in the progressive camp. Bloomberg has far less to offer and a lot more baggage due to his wealth.

Honestly, at this point I think the Biden camp is losing faith in Biden - which might help explain how combative they've become.

Biden's campaign is the same as Hillary Clinton's. It's "his turn". He's put in the time, just shut up and let him have it.

That's the campaign strategy.

That's why it loses, because it doesn't push a strong ideological point forward, to a voting public who are desperate for an ideological North Star. That's why Obama was so popular (even if he failed to deliver, in the end). It's what Clinton never provided, and what Biden is currently not providing. The difference in 2020 from 2016 is that I think the Democrat electorate subconsciously knows this, which is why they're drifting away from Biden as their candidate, in favor of those willing to provide a bold path forward.

[Theodarzna]

Bloomberg is getting into the race...
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...mpression=true

Why?

/10chars

- - - Updated - - -

Or he is planning on running 3rd party if she wins to secure the win for Trump. They might hate Trump and fear what he does to our nation, but the question is, do they fear what Warren/Sanders offer even worse.

Basically are they willing to succeed in a world where they aren't the ones calling the shots or would they rather burn it down just so long as they are still the shot callers.

Given some of Warrens statements and increasing ties, I am skeptical she represents much of a significant change. She still largely aims for that policy wonk "The system is fine just badly managed" appeal of the centrist. Even if at times she alludes to something more radical. Bernie wants to turn the system upside down, which it needs in my opinion. Warren thinks the system is fine, it's just being used improperly. Ultimately she runs a "turns some knobs and dials" campaign built on faith in technocracy just as long as its the right people. This is seen in her "green military", her non-commitment to ideas like M4A, her foreign policy, and her pedaling the "crony capitalism" which is untrue as adding Crony assumes that Capitalism now is just an aberration and not a logical accretions from previous eras.

Plus given the media treats her incredibly well and many outlets paint her as their preferred person to Bernie and the previously mentioned policy differences; I doubt the Dems have an opposition to Warren. Bloombergs entrance if anything helps her.

- - - Updated - - -

Well considering money in politics is considered free speech and we know free speech is not without consequence, all political donors should be known. No more hiding behind PACs because you ornyourncomoany is afraid of being targeted for donating to shitty candidates or funding hate filled adds. I think if these secret big donors were known they wouldn't donate.

"Cancel Culture" really only has power over the powerless. It only works on the vulnerable and those who can be harassed and subject to crowd sourced bullying. It's why despite endless efforts, Noch doesn't give a damn what people says.

[Skroe]

The donor class (Bloomberg is apart of this) have no faith in the front runners... this is ignoring the data that shows the voting populace is actually very satisfied with the field.

But entirely consistent with the fact that only Joe Biden, as it stands right now, has a realistic chance of beating Trump in the states that matter.

[Draco-Onis]

But entirely consistent with the fact that only Joe Biden, as it stands right now, has a realistic chance of beating Trump in the states that matter.

Does he though? Are we really putting stock in polls this far out from the actual election? even in these polls Biden is struggling like most democrats. Joe Biden has a Joe Biden problem he says he will beat Trump like a drum but Trump spent weeks attacking him and his family and his reaction was weak and pathetic. He seems scared to hold rallies and is more comfortable with donors than anything else he just seems like a male version of Hillary.

Now don't get me wrong I can see why people like you would want a Joe Biden but I would trade him for a Bloomberg or a straight mayor Pete who I think are better at the whole you know campaigning thing. Joe Biden is not a very good on the trail or stage or at giving speeches the MSM keep saying how personable he is but that's not showing.

[kaelleria]

So...

I don't think these two things can be accurate...

Trump down by double digits to all 4 frontrunners and trump edging out everyone in battleground states.

I think the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

[Skroe]

Does he though? Are we really putting stock in polls this far out from the actual election? even in these polls Biden is struggling like most democrats. Joe Biden has a Joe Biden problem he says he will beat Trump like a drum but Trump spent weeks attacking him and his family and his reaction was weak and pathetic. He seems scared to hold rallies and is more comfortable with donors than anything else he just seems like a male version of Hillary.

Now don't get me wrong I can see why people like you would want a Joe Biden but I would trade him for a Bloomberg or a straight mayor Pete who I think are better at the whole you know campaigning thing. Joe Biden is not a very good on the trail or stage or at giving speeches the MSM keep saying how personable he is but that's not showing.

Yes. And polls to this day are quite clear showing it.

Honestly it's getting to be a bit like a broken record at this point. Looking over this thread, the super srs discussion about all the democrats policy proposals is like some kind of spill over from a parallel universe where this was a policy election.

Biden has offered almost no policies. Yet leads Warren and Biden in most states, and leads them both against Trump in the swing states. He does not lead in Iowa or New Hampshire. The myth of Elizabeth Warren primacy was shot in the face by the swing state poll against Trump this week, which then ran up against the fact her M4A funding proposal was... how shall we say... a work of some interesting math.

This is not a policy election. It it ireelvant how many progressives want to talk about all the wonderful things they want. It doesn't matter. It will continue to not matter. Trying to make it matter is not going to change the fact that the forces arrayed against it being a policy election are so immovable, there is nothing that will change that.

The only relevant question this election - and the one that voters keep coming back to which is why electability and name recognition are STILL carrying Biden - is if you want 4 more years of the Donald Trump show or not.

How many times have we seen in this damn thread "oh Elizabeth Warren is going to do so well against Donald in the debate". Oh my god.... jump off a goddamn bridge people who think that. Donald Trump went 0-3 against Hillary Clinton. Your ridiculous mano-a-mano showdown is a feel good moment and nothing more.

Debates don't matter.

Rallies. Rallies don't fucking matter either Donald Trump just illustrated that in Bevin's loss. A bunch of like minded people getting together to cheer a bunch of lines they already agree with is an exercise in public masturbation. That's it.

What matters is ground game / get out the vote and fundraising to finance that ground game. And they only matter in a handful of states. That will decide if Joe Biden wins or loses against Trump.

Which brings me to my entire point. The things Democrats consider most important in a candidate are not the things that will structure the defeat of Trump in 2020. Ideas. Enthusasiasm. Oratory. Irrelevancies. Quaint irrelevancies.

If you wanna beat Trump, you focus on a handful of states and scare to death the people living in them about what Trump is going to do in a second term to their healthcare, jobs and security. And tie all of it into Trump's corruption and self dealing. Tell them what they want to hear.

Biden will do that. I hope Warren would do that. I know Bernie won't. And that's why Biden is the best choice.

- - - Updated - - -

So...

I don't think these two things can be accurate...

Trump down by double digits to all 4 frontrunners and trump edging out everyone in battleground states.

I think the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Because national polls don't matter.
Because national polls don't matter.
Because national polls don't matter.
Because national polls don't matter.

The only polls that matter are:

Wisconsin
Pennsylvania
Michigan
Arizona
Minnesota
New Hampshire
Virginia
Colorado
North Carolina
Florida


Everyone else can fucking stay home on election day for all it matters. I'm from Massachusetts. I could vote for Optimus Prime for President if I wanted to. There is no risk of my electoral vote going for anyone but the Democrat. These national polls need to be completely ignored because the ONLY thing that matters is the electoral college and the list above is the path. National popularity is irrelevant. That is the truth. No ifs and or buts about it. And anyone who tells you otherwise is lying.

The candidate you go with is the one who can:

Reliably win in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan. Losing any one of these means Trump gets re-elected.
Not have an unexpected loss of New Hampshire, Colorado Virginia or Minnesota, all of which Trump could ninja if they aren't careful in 2020.
Do the best job in trying to ninja Arizona, North Carolina, Florida from Trump.

Really. This is not complicated. And that's why I say once again that if any of these fucking candidates spend so much as five minutes after the month of May in New York City, they should be goddamn crucified by everyone who wants to Trump gone.

There is no "truth in between it". Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan get to choose the next President. More accurately, suburban women and college educated men in those states get to choose the next President.

The rest of us get to go fuck ourselves on election day.

- - - Updated - - -

Here I'll even make this easy for you.

These are the supposed battle grounds:


This is how Trump land from the above will probably go:




Donald Trump wins:


Donald Trump wins:


Donald Trump wins:



Democrats win:




Donald Trump is already spending $1.5 million PER WEEK in Wisconsin. While Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders take turns in finding out who can make the loudest wet fart when it comes to actually winning that state.

- - - Updated - - -

Really. My PAC is working its ass off trying to get these fucking knuckledragging cheese eating yokels in Wisconsin voting blue.

And how are Democrats helping the effort? With another sideshow debate where Tulsi "Assad's my man" Gabbard and a bunch of nobodies gets on stage.

And I just can't wait for the sequel: where both Biden and Elizabeth Warren do well on Super Tuesday and Bernie Sanders drags his impotent campaign out until June just to make sure Elizabeth Warren doesn't swing to the center.

When Trump wins his second term, remember when the seeds were laid: they were laid because (as usual) Democrats wanted to have some great philosophical debate rather than figuring out the most efficient and effective route to bludgeoning the other side at their weak spots. House Democrats are setting this up PERFECTLY for those running for President.... and those running for President have no fucking clue how to capitalize on the gift that is Donald Trump's corruption.

No.

They want to keep talking about their insane spending schemes that will never pass because Mitch McConnell is a thing, and a 60 vote threshold in the Senate is a thing.

Really. They might as well be arguing WoW Lore. It's *literally* as serious a conversation.