Mega-Thread: Democratic 2020 Primaries

[mvaliz]

All the more reason for them to come together. Especially because their followers must therefore disagree, and it bring more out of the woodwork to vote and support. If Biden picked another "Biden" for his running mate, he wouldn't get anything out of it, just more of "him". But by picking someone who vocally disagrees with him, and therefore represents a different faction of the Democrats, he gains ethos and support.

What you say is absolutely strategically sound and I wholeheartedly agree.

However, I think what Draco is more asking is, "What makes you think Biden sees this strategy the same way that you do?"

Again, Hillary had the same chance you outlined above via selecting Bernie (or another progressive), but chose not to. instead, they went the classic "Safe" route in simply choosing a person who is - as you say - another "Hillary"?

Again, sound strategy and I totally see the logic in your view and would LOVE that to happen! I just haven't seen Biden give any indication he would ever do something that "radical". As the one person showcased above, Biden would chose a Republican more than a Progressive.

Biden's comeback has set him up with the "Something to prove" momentum. He's confident his moderate way is the right way... and chances are he believes his faith in that moderate stance has led him to where he is now.

- - - Updated - - -

'Give Us an Hour on MSNBC': Sanders Says He Would Love to Debate Medicare for All vs. For-Profit System With Joe Biden
https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...-profit-system

Oh yes, please!
I would love to see a debate only for healthcare

That's one thing that's nice with being paired down to two candidates now. No more of this "talking over eachother" crap they're doing, and giving enough time for each candidate to express their entire viewpoints.

[starlord]

For what it's worth, I'd like to see him pick someone younger. Younger than 70 would be good, younger than 60 better, younger than 55 best. I'd really prefer someone in their 40s, but maybe that is too much to ask.

yes i think a good VP pick would do a lot for him, remains to be seen however.

[Draco-Onis]

All the more reason for them to come together. Especially because their followers must therefore disagree, and it bring more out of the woodwork to vote and support. If Biden picked another "Biden" for his running mate, he wouldn't get anything out of it, just more of "him". But by picking someone who vocally disagrees with him, and therefore represents a different faction of the Democrats, he gains ethos and support.

You still haven't learned the lessons from 2016, Bernie strongly came out for Hillary and she embraced a bit of his platform but no one bought it. The reason this won't fly now is the same reason then it's not believable given the record. Both Biden and Bernie have benefited from a crowded field none of them have really been through the fire of a primary.

If we do not acknowledge the obvious flaws in Biden we are bound to repeat the same mistakes of 2016. Biden doesn't have to pick Warren as VP he can pick another progressive but he has to sell himself to progressives as a genuine champion of some of their agenda. That's why I hated the blame Bernie bros for Hillary's lost bit she couldn't sell she was awful at campaigning Biden has the same issues.

If Biden loses in 2020 I am sure we will hear the same thing but hear my words Biden has a long sordid record filled with landmines, he is awful at campaigning and selling himself. If the DNC doesn't make up for his flaws Trump will easily win in 2020.

[cubby]

'Give Us an Hour on MSNBC': Sanders Says He Would Love to Debate Medicare for All vs. For-Profit System With Joe Biden
https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...-profit-system

Oh yes, please!
I would love to see a debate only for healthcare

It would be great.

Would it help the (D) win in November?

[zenkai]

For what it's worth, I'd like to see him pick someone younger. Younger than 70 would be good, younger than 60 better, younger than 55 best. I'd really prefer someone in their 40s, but maybe that is too much to ask.

Id like to see people young enough to understand technology in congress and as President. Have this jackasses making laws regarding our internet and most of them couldn't tell you the difference between an iphone and a brick. (hint the brick has better value for it's money)

[mvaliz]

It would be great.

Would it help the (D) win in November?

Democratic Healthcare's 2 viable options vs Dump's Non-Existent healthcare? You figure it out.

[Omega10]

Warren is out, and is not endorsing anyone.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elect...gXm?li=BBnb7Kz

Title is: Elizabeth Warren Drops Out of 2020 Race and Says She Won’t Endorse Immediately

[Thepersona]

It would be great.

Would it help the (D) win in November?

If Biden takes the M4A from Bernie, and Warren as VP, And takes Bernie as the Health deputy with the sole mission of enacting M4A, be prepared for a total annihilation to the GOP.

[Shadowferal]

obama didn't initially support gay marriage, but in the end he did. candidates are capable of evolving positions.

Ya...But Obama supported gay marriage..kind of accidentally. (Obama wasn't happy about it)

[cubby]

You still haven't learned the lessons from 2016, Bernie strongly came out for Hillary and she embraced a bit of his platform but no one bought it. The reason this won't fly now is the same reason then it's not believable given the record. Both Biden and Bernie have benefited from a crowded field none of them have really been through the fire of a primary.

But we have learned from 2016. And it wasn't from any one factor. And Sanders wasn't Clinton's running mate. If she'd chosen him he would have been front and center during the entire election. You can't claim one action as a deciding factor and then say something similar will have the same result. Everything is different this time around

If we do not acknowledge the obvious flaws in Biden we are bound to repeat the same mistakes of 2016. Biden doesn't have to pick Warren as VP he can pick another progressive but he has to sell himself to progressives as a genuine champion of some of their agenda. That's why I hated the blame Bernie bros for Hillary's lost bit she couldn't sell she was awful at campaigning Biden has the same issues.

And I (as well as many others) disagree. Biden is a great candidate for the plethora of reasons listed in this thread. Picking a progressive, female, running mate will bolster his campaign and the party's chance of defeating Trump.

If Biden loses in 2020 I am sure we will hear the same thing but hear my words Biden has a long sordid record filled with landmines, he is awful at campaigning and selling himself. If the DNC doesn't make up for his flaws Trump will easily win in 2020.

This is flat out wrong. Biden has never lost a general election in his life. And every politician has land mines. The only one out of the (D) primary candidates who didn't have major land mines was Warren, and even she had a few small items.

We've been quipping back and forth for awhile, and I hope that this new discussion above is a path away from it. So please understand me when I say this, it's not meant to be read in "zinger interweb gotcha sarcasm" but is meant sincerely. I think you are too hung up on Sanders being the only solution to the (D) winning in November. You could be right. But lots of very smart people, on all sides (including progressives), disagree with you. I would ask that you be open to the idea that Sanders isn't the solution to everything you might seem to think he is.

Elizabeth Warren, to many, was a better progressive candidate that Sanders, in almost every category. I believe that myself. So consider what would happen if the middle-of-the-road, slightly right-of-center candidate took onboard a very visible, smart, intelligent, low-on-land-mines progressive woman for his running mate. That's a nice picture.

And it's nothing like what Clinton did. She fucked up in three major categories, at least (and remember I'm a fan of hers still). We're not going to make those mistakes this time around. Not of the top three had anything to do with Sanders' supporters.

- - - Updated - - -

If Biden takes the M4A from Bernie, and Warren as VP, And takes Bernie as the Health deputy with the sole mission of enacting M4A, be prepared for a total annihilation to the GOP.

Exactly! Bringing all the top contenders together as a ticket is the way to go. If Warren doesn't want the VP slot, bring her in as SecEd/SecTreas.

[Inuyaki]

It would be great.

Would it help the (D) win in November?

Yes, because of Corona... as morbid as it sounds...

At least if the government will report cases accurately. I bet the official number will already pretty high, but there will be a lot of deaths that are not counted because they never got tested.

[cubby]

Yes, because of Corona... as morbid as it sounds...

At least if the government will report cases accurately. I bet the official number will already pretty high, but there will be a lot of deaths that are not counted because they never got tested.

Oh, I agree it would help with what you're saying.

But the debate won't help the (D) candidate win in November. It might actually make it worse.

Don't get me wrong, we need that national discussion, as well as so many more, but none of it will happen under the Deplorable Regime. Trump out first, then we advocate and advance social policies.

[mvaliz]

If Biden takes the M4A from Bernie, and Warren as VP, And takes Bernie as the Health deputy with the sole mission of enacting M4A, be prepared for a total annihilation to the GOP.

Where are you getting the notion that Biden would "Take M4A from Bernie"? He's gotten this far by campaigning against M4A in favor of a very limited public option. Why would he suddenly go back against his stance?

I mean, what you're saying is great and all and obviously I would love to happen for what you're saying - but you're literally saying "What if Biden suddenly does a 180 against his moderate policies and instead starts backing progressive agendas for Healthcare while also taking a progressive as a VP instead of a moderate?" o_O

[JohnBrown1917]

Where are you getting the notion that Biden would "Take M4A from Bernie"? He's gotten this far by campaigning against M4A in favor of a very limited public option. Why would he suddenly go back against his stance?

I mean, what you're saying is great and all and obviously I would love to happen for what you're saying - but you're literally saying "What if Biden suddenly does a 180 against his moderate policies and instead starts backing progressive agendas for Healthcare while also taking a progressive as a VP instead of a moderate?" o_O

I wish the people who want M4a would all get this, maybe all of them would actually vote for Sanders instead of some of them voting for Biden for some reason.

[Thepersona]

Where are you getting the notion that Biden would "Take M4A from Bernie"? He's gotten this far by campaigning against M4A in favor of a very limited public option. Why would he suddenly go back against his stance?

I mean, what you're saying is great and all and obviously I would love to happen for what you're saying - but you're literally saying "What if Biden suddenly does a 180 against his moderate policies and instead starts backing progressive agendas for Healthcare while also taking a progressive as a VP instead of a moderate?" o_O

Desperate times calls for desperate measures. He needs to unite the party and keep it from fracturing. Also, he could do what we do here, and have a public health system alongside a private one. The public healthcare is shit, but at least it wouldnt bankrupt you, and you still keep private insurers and all that crap.

[cubby]

Desperate times calls for desperate measures. He needs to unite the party and keep it from fracturing. Also, he could do what we do here, and have a public health system alongside a private one. The public healthcare is shit, but at least it wouldnt bankrupt you, and you still keep private insurers and all that crap.

Where is "here"?

[Thepersona]

Where is "here"?

In Chile. Sorry for not clarifying that

[Draco-Onis]

But we have learned from 2016. And it wasn't from any one factor. And Sanders wasn't Clinton's running mate. If she'd chosen him he would have been front and center during the entire election. You can't claim one action as a deciding factor and then say something similar will have the same result. Everything is different this time around

He hasn't done anything or even hinted that he would do anything you claim.

And I (as well as many others) disagree. Biden is a great candidate for the plethora of reasons listed in this thread. Picking a progressive, female, running mate will bolster his campaign and the party's chance of defeating Trump.
This is flat out wrong. Biden has never lost a general election in his life. And every politician has land mines. The only one out of the (D) primary candidates who didn't have major land mines was Warren, and even she had a few small items.

We've been quipping back and forth for awhile, and I hope that this new discussion above is a path away from it. So please understand me when I say this, it's not meant to be read in "zinger interweb gotcha sarcasm" but is meant sincerely. I think you are too hung up on Sanders being the only solution to the (D) winning in November. You could be right. But lots of very smart people, on all sides (including progressives), disagree with you. I would ask that you be open to the idea that Sanders isn't the solution to everything you might seem to think he is.

Elizabeth Warren, to many, was a better progressive candidate that Sanders, in almost every category. I believe that myself. So consider what would happen if the middle-of-the-road, slightly right-of-center candidate took onboard a very visible, smart, intelligent, low-on-land-mines progressive woman for his running mate. That's a nice picture.

And it's nothing like what Clinton did. She fucked up in three major categories, at least (and remember I'm a fan of hers still). We're not going to make those mistakes this time around. Not of the top three had anything to do with Sanders' supporters.


Exactly! Bringing all the top contenders together as a ticket is the way to go. If Warren doesn't want the VP slot, bring her in as SecEd/SecTreas.

Biden has run for president multiple times he has never won a primary until now running for congress is not the same as president. You are not dealing with reality you don't remember all the times we've facepalmed at things Joe Biden did campaigning (challenging someone to a push up, calling people liars, not confronting anything to do with his son in a coherent way, not addressing his voting record). Biden doesn't do well in rallies he avoids them for smaller venues, he has trouble sticking to the script. Do I also need to enumerate the number of times he just faded in the debates?

Stop with the rosy blinders if you want I can also list all the things that Biden votes that will come to bite him in the ass (Wall street reform, TPP, NAFTA, crime bill, bankruptcy bill, Iraq war etc). That's not even going into worse things like Anita Hill and other personal issues and gaffes, for the record my choices were Warren first then Bernie. The democratic party needs to be wide eyed and realistic about Biden otherwise people will be wondering how he lost when the reasons are obvious.

[mvaliz]

Desperate times calls for desperate measures. He needs to unite the party and keep it from fracturing. Also, he could do what we do here, and have a public health system alongside a private one. The public healthcare is shit, but at least it wouldnt bankrupt you, and you still keep private insurers and all that crap.

But that's my point, I don't believe Biden himself sees things right now as "Desperate times" in regards to the Democratic Party's "unification". I think he believes he's winning (and even possibly riding a high due to it being a comeback), and that's it. He's clearly just focusing on Moderates, believing the Moderates are the majority. Again, I'd love to be wrong on this - but I don't see any indication of him doing anything near what you're suggesting.

In regards to Healthcare: Biden's current plan is to continue our current shit public one (ACA). That's been his stance the whole time. Why would he (him... the person, mentally, himself) willingly change something he's been, so far, successfully campaigning on?

As for uniting the party, again - I obviously see that benefit, but I don't see/believe Biden sees any benefit to that at all - or at least benefit enough to completely go against his very own policies he's been successfully campaigning on - especially since the whole point of his campaign is "OMG, you don't want Socialism and you don't want your current healthcare plan to go away!!!"

If he went full M4A right now, he'd just be alienating the moderates he tried so hard to get while obtaining some progressives. It would, at best, end up a zero-sum cancellation of people, not to mention giving Dumbass Dump/Republicans their big dumb "SOCZIALZM!!!" sword back.

[Edge-]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/05/b...ers-media.html

It was a striking turnaround by the senator, whose allies often hold up MSNBC as Exhibit A of the “corporate media” that Mr. Sanders likes to condemn. His campaign agreed to the Maddow interview after digesting Tuesday’s results, prompting the anchor to rush to Burlington, Vt., in time for the 9 p.m. broadcast.

Now Mr. Sanders’s campaign is in final discussions with MSNBC to appear on the network for a prime-time town hall before the next round of primary voters go to the polls on Tuesday, according to a person briefed on the discussions.

It would be Mr. Sanders’s first MSNBC town hall in nearly four years. The network had a longstanding invitation, but the senator — whose campaign manager, Faiz Shakir, once dismissed the network’s coverage as “terrible” — had declined the offer until now.

Mr. Sanders’s sudden embrace of MSNBC seemed to signal a newfound need to engage with a broader swath of a Democratic electorate that is rapidly coalescing around his opponent.

Huh, so Sander's complaints about MSNBC not covering him were in part, because he voluntarily chose to avoid the station altogether...while I guess he was cool going on Fox during this time.

And now that he's struggling after Super Tuesday, he's hoping he can go back to them for a boost.