Mega-Thread: Democratic 2020 Primaries

[eschatological]

-snip-

The Constitution doesn't work literal word for word, despite what strict constructionalists would like to have you believe. This isn't the four corner doctrine applied to a contract. I'm firmly of the opinion that any court would look at the strictures of Presidential succession, and apply them here. The implication being that the 22nd is worded poorly (and not even worded by the Founders), and any court would see that. The limitations set out in the 12th seem to reasonably imply they apply to the 22nd, as the 12th deal with qualifications for holding the seat, and it isn't reasonable to suggest they don't apply to the election to the seat. Plus, the 12th has the benefit of being passed and ratified by the Founders (or at least many of them) in 1804.

[Grapemask]

Man, I was mostly "about time"y about these dropouts until I read that both Klobuchar and Buttigieg will be rallying with Biden tonight to endorse him. That is not a good look. Worse, both of them spoke to Obama, after Obama reportedly told Biden he would not endorse him because he felt it would backfire to visibly put his thumb on the scale. It only makes Klobuchar and Buttigieg appear to be the gloves on the DNC's thumb on the scale.

And while I disagree with all the conspiracy nonsense, optics are important when going into this race considering the optics of 2016. If this dramatically changes the race and progressives feel slighted, it's going to be this moment that they point to when they scream that they won't support the candidate going into the convention and then the general election.

I think the DNC - and moderates - seem to still have trouble grasping that the progressive supporters are real people with real issues. They don't just put those issues in a drawer when a candidate with different ideas wins. They don't just disappear when they lose. In 2016, Skroe was the loudest of the hollering authoritarians, insisting that the Bernie Bros would be brought to heel and vote with the party like good dogs... and then returned with a surprisedpikachu.jpg the day after the election when Clinton's turnout was underwhelming and we were left in this mess.

They maybe need to start giving the optics some more consideration or 2020 is going to turn into another shitshow like 2016.

[Draco-Onis]

i don't like biden myself, but that's for my own reason(i think he's probably a pedo, all those pics of him sniffing little girls).

it's just weird to me you'd draw a line at biden when most of y'all don't believe he's a bad person.

I don't like Biden but until there's credible accusations or damming words from his past I give him the benefit of the doubt. I am more inclined to think Clinton and Trump are pedos since they partied with Epstein and Trump is on the record talking about sneaking in little girl's dressing rooms among other disturbing quotes.

- - - Updated - - -

Man, I was mostly "about time"y about these dropouts until I read that both Klobuchar and Buttigieg will be rallying with Biden tonight to endorse him. That is not a good look. Worse, both of them spoke to Obama, after Obama reportedly told Biden he would not endorse him because he felt it would backfire to visibly put his thumb on the scale. It only makes Klobuchar and Buttigieg appear to be the gloves on the DNC's thumb on the scale.

And while I disagree with all the conspiracy nonsense, optics are important when going into this race considering the optics of 2016. If this dramatically changes the race and progressives feel slighted, it's going to be this moment that they point to when they scream that they won't support the candidate going into the convention and then the general election.

I think the DNC - and moderates - seem to still have trouble grasping that the progressive supporters are real people with real issues. They don't just put those issues in a drawer when a candidate with different ideas wins. They don't just disappear when they lose. In 2016, Skroe was the loudest of the hollering authoritarians, insisting that the Bernie Bros would be brought to heel and vote with the party like good dogs... and then returned with a surprisedpikachu.jpg the day after the election when Clinton's turnout was underwhelming and we were left in this mess.

They maybe need to start giving the optics some more consideration or 2020 is going to turn into another shitshow like 2016.

I think we should be ready for four more years of Trump there's no way the progressive wing of the party will vote for anyone but Bernie. CNN, MSNBC have turned into Fox News floating conspiracy theories and attacking Bernie, it's obvious the entire establishment is at defcon5. I can't believe democrats are fucking this up once again guess they rather have Trump than Bernie.

[eschatological]

Man, I was mostly "about time"y about these dropouts until I read that both Klobuchar and Buttigieg will be rallying with Biden tonight to endorse him. That is not a good look. Worse, both of them spoke to Obama, after Obama reportedly told Biden he would not endorse him because he felt it would backfire to visibly put his thumb on the scale. It only makes Klobuchar and Buttigieg appear to be the gloves on the DNC's thumb on the scale.

And while I disagree with all the conspiracy nonsense, optics are important when going into this race considering the optics of 2016. If this dramatically changes the race and progressives feel slighted, it's going to be this moment that they point to when they scream that they won't support the candidate going into the convention and then the general election.

I think the DNC - and moderates - seem to still have trouble grasping that the progressive supporters are real people with real issues. They don't just put those issues in a drawer when a candidate with different ideas wins. They don't just disappear when they lose. In 2016, Skroe was the loudest of the hollering authoritarians, insisting that the Bernie Bros would be brought to heel and vote with the party like good dogs... and then returned with a surprisedpikachu.jpg the day after the election when Clinton's turnout was underwhelming and we were left in this mess.

They maybe need to start giving the optics some more consideration or 2020 is going to turn into another shitshow like 2016.

I disagree that the DNC has anything to do with this. I think this is three moderates (two of them still young) that met, and the two younger ones decided to drop out and endorse the older one because it serves their political futures to do so if he can get them the title of Secretary of Whatever-the-Fuck.

I think it's kind of inane nonsense to suggest the DNC told these candidates to drop out and toe the line to consolidate support against Bernie. This is, for what it's worth, a political calculation by both Pete and Amy.

It's that sort of paranoid thinking that led to the childish outrage of 2016.

[Blur4stuff]

Biden will give Trump a better chance to win, but he does more long term damage than even that. With him as president nothing will fundamentally change. Healthcare will still be too expensive and costs will continue going out of control. Insurance/Drug companies will continue leeching and price gouging. Wealth inequality will continue getting bigger. Student debt will keep exploding and eventually crash the economy.

Basically the lives of middle class and poor either won't significantly change or just continue getting worse as they did under Obama. Biden has went out of his way to earn the status quo nick name.

4-8 years of that will see us right back where we are now with a Trump type candidate at the end of the decade.

Honestly, the only benefit is judge appointments. Everything else points to a worse version of an Obama presidency.

[PACOX]

Man, I was mostly "about time"y about these dropouts until I read that both Klobuchar and Buttigieg will be rallying with Biden tonight to endorse him. That is not a good look. Worse, both of them spoke to Obama, after Obama reportedly told Biden he would not endorse him because he felt it would backfire to visibly put his thumb on the scale. It only makes Klobuchar and Buttigieg appear to be the gloves on the DNC's thumb on the scale.

And while I disagree with all the conspiracy nonsense, optics are important when going into this race considering the optics of 2016. If this dramatically changes the race and progressives feel slighted, it's going to be this moment that they point to when they scream that they won't support the candidate going into the convention and then the general election.

I think the DNC - and moderates - seem to still have trouble grasping that the progressive supporters are real people with real issues. They don't just put those issues in a drawer when a candidate with different ideas wins. They don't just disappear when they lose. In 2016, Skroe was the loudest of the hollering authoritarians, insisting that the Bernie Bros would be brought to heel and vote with the party like good dogs... and then returned with a surprisedpikachu.jpg the day after the election when Clinton's turnout was underwhelming and we were left in this mess.

They maybe need to start giving the optics some more consideration or 2020 is going to turn into another shitshow like 2016.

They are playing the establishment card again. The same one that got Obama voters to vote for Trump in 2016. Ever one who throws caution is a "sore BernieBro".

Listen to what people said why they switched or did not vote for Clinton in 2016. That that and double down on it. The DNC strat 2020.

[Grapemask]

I disagree that the DNC has anything to do with this. I think this is three moderates (two of them still young) that met, and the two younger ones decided to drop out and endorse the older one because it serves their political futures to do so if he can get them the title of Secretary of Whatever-the-Fuck.

I think it's kind of inane nonsense to suggest the DNC told these candidates to drop out and toe the line to consolidate support against Bernie. This is, for what it's worth, a political calculation by both Pete and Amy.

It's that sort of paranoid thinking that led to the childish outrage of 2016.

I doubt that the "DNC establishment" had much to do with it, but it's certainly coordination between the three (well, four, because I feel Obama definitely has a vested interest in this). But it's also a very poor move on their part if they want to unify the party later. The moderate wing of democrats seem to have the same idea about unification that Republicans do: that unity isn't about bringing the other side to the table, it's about consolidating their own position at the table such that the people not at it don't matter.

[GreenJesus]

You are fucking accusing the MEDIA of having a bias and pushing false narratives to benefit one candidate over another. How in the hairy fuck is that not what Trump says??!??!?!?!?

Except how is it not true that the corporate media that gets ad revenue from pharmaceuticals and health care industry and big banks like Chase / Bank of Amerca wants a political candidate that protects the status quo? It's easy to see why they don't want Bernie to win.

[DarkTZeratul]

Except how is it not true that the corporate media that gets ad revenue from pharmaceuticals and health care industry wants a political candidate that protects the status quo? It's easy to see why they don't want Bernie to win.

It's not untrue, but it's GROSSLY misleading. Corporate media gets ad revenue from literally everyone. It's about as accurate as saying McDonald's is biased for Trump because they get food revenue from his campaign.

[GreenJesus]

It's not untrue, but it's GROSSLY misleading. Corporate media gets ad revenue from literally everyone.

By "literally everyone" do you mean big corporations that wouldn't like Bernie's proposals to increase taxes?

[Edge-]

It's not untrue, but it's GROSSLY misleading. Corporate media gets ad revenue from literally everyone.

Primarily from...corporations that would stand to be in Sanders crosshairs if he wins.

This isn't a political ideology thing, it's at best an economic ideology thing. They're self-interested, not political activists. They're not getting money from big unions or workers groups.

[PACOX]

Basically the lives of middle class and poor either won't significantly change or just continue getting worse as they did under Obama. Biden has went out of his way to earn the status quo nick name.

4-8 years of that will see us right back where we are now with a Trump type candidate at the end of the decade.

Honestly, the only benefit is judge appointments. Everything else points to a worse version of an Obama presidency.

Two candidates have actual stuff to bring to the table for the two issues you mentioned. Two issues that WILL have to be addressed next term. And it doesn't matter if their proposals get changed, they have a plan and room to bargain. Those candidates are Sanders and Warren

Biden has jack shit except 'I know Obama' and a history of giving Republicans what they want so he can say "I did that". And you know what? Obama hasn't came to his aide this season and most of what 'Joe got done' is stuff Dems want to get rid of.

But if establishment Dems think putting up another 'it's my turn' establishment candidate up after 2016 will work...we're going to have to make a Trump Shitshow Part 2.

[DarkTZeratul]

By "literally everyone" do you mean big corporations that wouldn't like Bernie's proposals to increase taxes?

I mean literally everyone who pays for airtime to run their ads. Which - and this might shock you - includes Bernie Sanders' campaign.

This isn't a political ideology thing, it's at best an economic ideology thing. They're self-interested, not political activists. They're not getting money from big unions or workers groups.

They're getting money from anyone who has money and things they want to advertise. I guarantee you they give less than a shit about who that is or what they're advertising so long as they can fill all the available ad slots.

[Edge-]

I mean literally everyone who pays for airtime to run their ads. Which - and this might shock you - includes Bernie Sanders' campaign.

Yes, but who buys the majority of those ad blocks, especially outside of election season?

Because it ain't political campaigns. And it ain't workers groups.

[cubby]

I doubt that the "DNC establishment" had much to do with it, but it's certainly coordination between the three (well, four, because I feel Obama definitely has a vested interest in this). But it's also a very poor move on their part if they want to unify the party later. The moderate wing of democrats seem to have the same idea about unification that Republicans do: that unity isn't about bringing the other side to the table, it's about consolidating their own position at the table such that the people not at it don't matter.

It's been common behavior for both parties to have candidates drop out early and throw their support behind someone else in the hopes of getting a Cabinet position (or a VP slot). This is nothing more than "working as intended".

[GreenJesus]

Yes, but who buys the majority of those ad blocks, especially outside of election season?

Because it ain't political campaigns. And it ain't workers groups.

Here is the sponsor list for Chris Matthews on MSNBC from an artcle I found from last year.

SPONSOR NAME ON HARDBALL
Advil LiqiGels
AllState Car Ins
***Ancestry.com
BMW
Boniva
Charles Schwab
Cool Whip
***DirecTV
GE
Gillette Fusion ProGlide
Hartford Insurance AARP Ins Program
Intel
***Kraft Mayo
LensCrafters
Merit Financial
Neutrogena
Nissan
Philips Norelco
Porche
Scotch Blue tape
Starbucks Via Ready-Brew
Superior Gold Group
Tide
Universal Theme Parks

In other words.. big corporations.

[DarkTZeratul]

Yes, but who buys the majority of those ad blocks, especially outside of election season?

Because it ain't political campaigns. And it ain't workers groups.

And so fucking what? Are you suggesting that corporations would stop buying ads? Or that other people or organizations wouldn't buy that ad space instead?

Again: this is like claiming that McDonald's must be biased in favor of Trump because his campaign spends so much money there. It's entirely non-sensical.

[Edge-]

And so fucking what? Are you suggesting that corporations would stop buying ads? Or that other people or organizations wouldn't buy that ad space instead?

No, I'm saying that their interests align with their advertisers interests to maintain their bottom line. That their opposition for Sanders isn't ideological, but financial. They're not a part of some "DNC conspiracy" to work against Sanders. Don't know if that was your view, but that's a view others hold.

Again: this is like claiming that McDonald's must be biased in favor of Trump because his campaign spends so much money there. It's entirely non-sensical.

Except that McDonald's isn't a news organization, but sure.

[PACOX]

What I did not expect was for Klobuchar to back off. I firgured she would have waited to win Minnesota first. There was definitely pressure for them to get their endorsements out before Super Tuesday.

[cubby]

Man, I was mostly "about time"y about these dropouts until I read that both Klobuchar and Buttigieg will be rallying with Biden tonight to endorse him. That is not a good look. Worse, both of them spoke to Obama, after Obama reportedly told Biden he would not endorse him because he felt it would backfire to visibly put his thumb on the scale. It only makes Klobuchar and Buttigieg appear to be the gloves on the DNC's thumb on the scale.

And while I disagree with all the conspiracy nonsense, optics are important when going into this race considering the optics of 2016. If this dramatically changes the race and progressives feel slighted, it's going to be this moment that they point to when they scream that they won't support the candidate going into the convention and then the general election.

I think the DNC - and moderates - seem to still have trouble grasping that the progressive supporters are real people with real issues. They don't just put those issues in a drawer when a candidate with different ideas wins. They don't just disappear when they lose. In 2016, Skroe was the loudest of the hollering authoritarians, insisting that the Bernie Bros would be brought to heel and vote with the party like good dogs... and then returned with a surprisedpikachu.jpg the day after the election when Clinton's turnout was underwhelming and we were left in this mess.

They maybe need to start giving the optics some more consideration or 2020 is going to turn into another shitshow like 2016.

I read this as "progressives are the only ones who will only vote for their candidate, and because of that, they caused poor turn-out and gave us Trump in 2016, and it looks like they are going to fuck this country over, again".

The rest of us are on board with voting for whomever gets the nod (I already had my Sanders signs getting printed up after his Nevada win). The rest of us want Trump defeated MORE than any other issue. Why don't "progressives" want the same thing?

- - - Updated - - -

What I did not expect was for Klobuchar to back off. I firgured she would have waited to win Minnesota first. There was definitely pressure for them to get their endorsements out before Super Tuesday.

Both were surprising, but tactically it makes sense. After Super Tuesday their endorsement won't matter as much, as either Biden or Sanders will win most/all states, and their profiles will sink lower. Now, they catch headlines and it makes more "noise".