Mega-Thread: Democratic 2020 Primaries

[JohnBrown1917]

What an obnoxiously arrogant statement. Don't think all "educated people" think alike or support the same candidates as you.

Its worse when they feel like educated people are somehow superior.

[eschatological]

The key question in that demographic is, will she vote for them, even if she "doesn't like" them. Because you have to understand, that to educated people, like for instance your mother, those that you "like" make others (us) gag. Which is fine - so long as we all come out and vote (D) in November.

I mean, I have a law degree and am well off, and I'd vote for Bernie over Biden. But I'm also 25 years younger than her.

And FWIW, she said she'd vote for whoever the nominee is. Same as me.

[cubby]

What an obnoxiously arrogant statement. Don't think all "educated people" think alike or support the same candidates as you.

What an obnoxiously poor reading comprehension. Next time read something through, twice, before you "unload" on an opinion that wasn't there to begin with. NO WHERE do I say that all educated people support the same candidate.

My point, since you asked so nicely, was that regardless of who anyone wants in the Primary, it's key that we all support whomever gets the nomination in November.

We'll all wait for your apology.

[Gestopft]

Never understood why the media doesn't just call that shit out whenever Presidents pretend like they can pass their agenda

Because the presidential election is the only national election, and as such the presidential campaign is kind of like our way of having a national conversation every four years about what we want to do as a country. Pretty much every presidential candidate ever has had plans for (x) which in reality require Congress to enact; this whole "but Congress is the one that actually has to do it" is only a 'critique' that I've seen applied to the candidacy/plans of Sanders (or Warren).

[cubby]

I mean, I have a law degree and am well off, and I'd vote for Bernie over Biden. But I'm also 25 years younger than her.

And FWIW, she said she'd vote for whoever the nominee is. Same as me.

And that's my entire point. I have a law degree as well, and I'd vote for Warren and then Biden before Sanders. To each their own in the primary, so long as we're all there in November regardless of who's candidate gets the nod.

[TheramoreIsTheBomb]

so who are you guys voting for on tuesday* [Meaning whatever Tuesday you vote whether it is this week or another tuesday]

[cubby]

Its worse when they feel like educated people are somehow superior.

It's even worse when people utterly fail at reading comprehension.

[draynay]

What a obnoxiously poor reading comprehension. Next time read something through, twice, before you "unload" on an opinion that wasn't there to begin with. NO WHERE do I say that all educated people support the same candidate.

My point, since you asked so nicely, was that regardless of who anyone wants in the Primary, it's key that we all support whomever gets the nomination in November.

We'll all wait for your apology.

Man, its on your end, your post makes it look like you think educated people support Biden and support of someone else is for the uneducated. I believe you when you say that wasn't your meaning, but perhaps you should re-read it and we will all get on the same page.

[cubby]

Another one of your posts where you preach unity but have a giant "Fuck You!" to everyone you disagree with.

Where are you seeing the "fuck you"? My point, which has been fantastically consistent this entire time, has been vote for whom you want in the Primary, and then come out in November and vote for whomever gets the nod.

Please, show me the "fuck you" in that post you quote, or apologize. I'm sick of you people misreading what I say.

[JohnBrown1917]

It's even worse when people utterly fail at reading comprehension.

As usual, you keep missing the point.

[cubby]

Man, its on your end, your post makes it look like you think educated people support Biden and support of someone else is for the uneducated. I believe you when you say that wasn't your meaning, but perhaps you should re-read it and we will all get on the same page.

Holy fuck you screwed up. You have to read what is put down in context. Did you see the post I responded to? No, right? Because you would rather jump to conclusions then spend an extra 15 seconds and get the full picture.

Go back and read what I responded to, which is where the "gag" comes from.

I'll wait for your apology.

[draynay]

I definitely read what you responded to, you quoted it, I am literate and only seeking clarity. I'm not trying to "win" or demanding apologies. The troubling parts will be bolded.

The key question in that demographic is, will she vote for them, even if she "doesn't like" them. Because you have to understand, that to educated people, like for instance your mother, those that you "like" make others (us) gag. Which is fine - so long as we all come out and vote (D) in November.

You make a clear, though unintentional, equivalence between "educated people" and support for Biden and in so doing create a reciprocal relation between the non-educated and non-Biden candidates.

[cubby]

When did Biden start leading in national polls? Have only seen polls with Sanders ahead. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...tion-6730.html

Yeah...the last polls I saw had Sanders really crushing it for Super Tuesday. I guess those are separate of course - winning state primaries vs leading in national polls.

[draynay]

Go back and read what I responded to, which is where the "gag" comes from.

The problem isn't the "gag" the problem is the "educated". I don't know how to explain it any clearer.

[cubby]

I definitely read what you responded to, you quoted it, I am literate and only seeking clarity. I'm not trying to "win" or demanding apologies. The troubling parts will be bolded.

So we'll just pretend that you didn't just lash out with this bullshit:

Another one of your posts where you preach unity but have a giant "Fuck You!" to everyone you disagree with.

And are not trying to "win" or [anything], and we'll just move forward with clarity.

Because you're right, I didn't include a pretty fucking clarifying word in my post (not being sarcastic). Whoops on my part. Here's the missing, clarifying word.

The key question in that demographic is, will she vote for them, even if she "doesn't like" them. Because you have to understand, that to other educated people, like for instance your mother, those that you "like" make others (us) gag. Which is fine - so long as we all come out and vote (D) in November.

You make a clear, though unintentional, equivalence between "educated people" and support for Biden and in so doing create a reciprocal relation between the non-educated and non-Biden candidates.

Which now makes sense when responding to the original post. I'll edit it now.

- - - Updated - - -

What an obnoxiously arrogant statement. Don't think all "educated people" think alike or support the same candidates as you.

Yep, my bad, not yours. Read in a word that I didn't include (I did that). Edited for clarity.

- - - Updated - - -

The problem isn't the "gag" the problem is the "educated". I don't know how to explain it any clearer.

Yep, we're on the same page now. See above.

[draynay]

So we'll just pretend that you didn't just lash out with this bullshit

If you want to put yourself in my shoes, and read a post that apparently calls you uneducated based on your political leanings, are you going to react well? Its why I've been trying to be civil since your clarified that you did not intend to do that, for which I immediately took you at your word. Misunderstandings happen.

[cubby]

If you want to put yourself in my shoes, and read a post that apparently calls you uneducated based on your political leanings, are you going to react well? Its why I've been trying to be civil since your clarified that you did not intend to do that, for which I immediately took you at your word. Misunderstandings happen.

But don't you think initially being civil would be a better goal?

I mean, I applaud that you scaled back when you saw that I might not have said what I meant - I sincerely do, truly. But at the same time, your initial reaction was to lash out. I have never, ever, said anything remotely like you initially claimed - and yet you just shit all over it, immediately, instead of asking for clarification.

Do you really think my posts consist of giant "fuck you"'s to everyone that disagrees with me?

[Rukh]

So as predicted, 538's model suddenly is swinging back again more towards Biden after SC. Sanders has still made significant gains and I think still is predicted to end up with more overall delegates, however I think it's vindicated that their model is overly reactive to things that should already have been accounted for.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post52112315

I think 538's model is a bit too reactive. We'll see after South Carolina. If Suddenly Biden's chances get boosted their model is questionable because Biden doing well in SC was supposed to have already been accounted for. If it's not that's a problem.

[cubby]

So as predicted, 538's model suddenly is swinging back again more towards Biden after SC. Sanders has still made significant gains and I think still is predicted to end up with more overall delegates, however I think it's vindicated that their model is overly reactive to things that should already have been accounted for.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post52112315

Interesting. You're saying that the bump in Biden's numbers from 538 we're seeing now is reactive in an inaccurate way, because 538 should have already taken those factors into account? I'm not disagreeing or zinging you, just seeking clarification.

I think the primary numbers for Super Tuesday might need to be taken with a LARGE grain of salt - Biden did much better in SC than the polls account for, IIRC, so the ones coming up might (or might not) be just as inaccurate.

[Rukh]

Interesting. You're saying that the bump in Biden's numbers from 538 we're seeing now is reactive in an inaccurate way, because 538 should have already taken those factors into account? I'm not disagreeing or zinging you, just seeking clarification.

I think the primary numbers for Super Tuesday might need to be taken with a LARGE grain of salt - Biden did much better in SC than the polls account for, IIRC, so the ones coming up might (or might not) be just as inaccurate.

Yeah, the results were expected. They swung too far towards Sanders after states he was expected to win and too far towards Biden after a state that was his strongest state. Seeing through their wild swings, Sanders is progressively doing better, but not to the degree they were giving him, and probably better than they are currently giving him.